- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
CNBC with the SOROS fake news. This is what Trump is talking about
Posted on 2/18/17 at 9:14 am
Posted on 2/18/17 at 9:14 am
LINK
So the call the claim false.
"IT wasn't 20 of our uranium.... he lied"
quote:
CNBC cited the left-wing, George Soros-linked PolitiFact to condemn President Donald Trump’s claims Thursday that Hillary Clinton’s State Department presided over the sale of 20 percent of U.S. uranium to Russia.
quote:
“The claim isn’t true,” CNBC energy reporter Tom DiChristopher wrote. “PolitiFact pointed out that 20 percent of uranium capacity is different from 20 percent of existing uranium. Moreover, the State Department was one of nine government agencies that had to sign off on the deals. Other federal and state regulators also had to approve them.”
So the call the claim false.
"IT wasn't 20 of our uranium.... he lied"
13
Posted on 2/18/17 at 9:16 am to Jjdoc
Whether or not you support Trump, that's just pathetic.
Posted on 2/18/17 at 9:24 am to Jjdoc
Breitbart.
Posted on 2/18/17 at 9:26 am to TotesMcGotes
quote:
Breitbart.
Did the guy say it or not?
That's such a lame reply that does nothing to further the discussion.
Posted on 2/18/17 at 9:27 am to Jjdoc
No doubt the claim is true. Transactional records prove it.
Stuff like on CNBC is meant to misdirect, distract and confuse. Here is an article from the "failing" New York Times (NYT) that details and is heavily critical of the deal. Yes, that NYT and they go into great detail about the strategic assets involved in the deal, the money that flowed from the Russians to Canadians to the Clinton Foundation. Shameful and likely criminal.
Crooked Hillary
Stuff like on CNBC is meant to misdirect, distract and confuse. Here is an article from the "failing" New York Times (NYT) that details and is heavily critical of the deal. Yes, that NYT and they go into great detail about the strategic assets involved in the deal, the money that flowed from the Russians to Canadians to the Clinton Foundation. Shameful and likely criminal.
Crooked Hillary
quote:
Rosatom’s chief executive, Sergei Kiriyenko. “Few could have imagined in the past that we would own 20 percent of U.S. reserves,” Mr. Kiriyenko told Mr. Putin.
This post was edited on 2/18/17 at 9:32 am
Posted on 2/18/17 at 9:29 am to Jjdoc
quote:Who?
CNBC energy reporter Tom DiChristopher
I watch a lot of CNBC. I've never seen or heard of Tom DiChristopher. He's obviously affiliated with them, but I have literally never seen him on air. FWIW, Jackie DeAngelis is the CNBC reporter normally covering energy issues and related markets.
But regarding this DiChristopher fellow, when a person cites PolitiFact as a backing source, they are inevitably either ignorant, or (1) pushing leftist agenda and (2) using bullshite as a basis (because PolitiFact is pure BS)
This post was edited on 2/18/17 at 9:32 am
Posted on 2/18/17 at 9:32 am to Jjdoc
Every time a Trump supporter says Soros the average voter goes:
Note that the same goes every time a liberal says Koch Bothers
Note that the same goes every time a liberal says Koch Bothers
This post was edited on 2/18/17 at 9:33 am
Posted on 2/18/17 at 9:36 am to Jjdoc
Eight agencies signed off on a PRIVATE deal between PRIVATE interests for the exchange of PRIVATE property....not US Owned property but property to belonged to investors....had the Clinton state department no agreed to the sale y'all would have been screaming about regulators standing in the way of commerce....
Again...9 agenices including state agencies approved the sale of private property to private companies....there were no states involved in the buying and selling.
Again...9 agenices including state agencies approved the sale of private property to private companies....there were no states involved in the buying and selling.
Posted on 2/18/17 at 9:45 am to germandawg
germandog - Why does the Federal Government have jurisdiction over mergers of private companies? To prevent monopolies correct? I would think that would also apply to the realm of National Security....
Posted on 2/18/17 at 9:47 am to germandawg
quote:
Again...9 agenices including state agencies approved the sale of private property to private companies....there were no states involved in the buying and selling.
They agreed to sell to Russia 20% of the strategic uranium reserves to which the United States has access and you see no problem with it? Clearly, aside from the people involved and party involved, who you likely supported, I don't have that much trust in government to simply say "well, the government says it's okay."
There was a basic flow of money from the people involved in this deal to the Clinton Family Slush Fund. That is not in dispute, either.
The OPs thread has less to do with the details of the deal and more to do with the fake news and the CNBC mischaracterization of "uranium reserves" versus "uranium capacity".
This post was edited on 2/18/17 at 9:49 am
Posted on 2/18/17 at 9:53 am to TN Bhoy
quote:
Every time a Trump supporter says Soros the average voter goes:
Note that the same goes every time a liberal says Koch Bothers
As they say on Sesame Street. "One of these things is not like the other"
Sure the Koch Brothers have supported Republican's (and Democrats) trying to influence policies that favor their business interests, But Soros actively seeks to cause chaos to further his. He tried to destroy confidence in the British pound and break the Bank of England because he was shorting their currency. Made over 2 billion in. a few days. Soros is pure evil.
Posted on 2/18/17 at 9:58 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
because PolitiFact is pure BS
Sure it is...../s
Posted on 2/18/17 at 9:58 am to Loserman
quote:
Soros is pure evil
Soros is one of the unsung heroes of the Cold War. He's one of the main reasons that non-communist ideas were able to get across the Iron Curtain. And he's been instrumental in turning Eastern Europe towards the West since the USSR fell.
Does he have some absolutely terrible ideas? Yes. Is he 'pure evil'? No.
Posted on 2/18/17 at 10:00 am to germandawg
quote:
Eight agencies signed off on a PRIVATE deal between PRIVATE interests for the exchange of PRIVATE property....not US Owned property but property to belonged to investors....had the Clinton state department no agreed to the sale y'all would have been screaming about regulators standing in the way of commerce....
This kind of foolish reasoning regarding uranium is freaking dangerous. On one hand you guys have been screaming about the Russians every chance you get, but the candidate you supported signs off on a deal to give those same Russians 20% of our uranium and your response is big fricking deal. This is why no one takes you seriously. There is no reasoning behind your line of thinking, just blind loyalty to one party and blind hatred for Donald Trump. You sir are a fool.
Posted on 2/18/17 at 10:10 am to Jjdoc
quote:
Our ruling
Trump said, "Hillary Clinton’s State Department approved the transfer of 20 percent of America’s uranium holdings to Russia, while nine investors in the deal funneled $145 million to the Clinton Foundation."
There’s a grain of truth in this claim. Clinton’s State Department was one of nine government agencies to approve Russia’s acquisition of a company with U.S. uranium assets. Nine people related the company at some point in time donated to the Clinton Foundation, but we only found evidence that one did so "while" the Russian deal was occurring. The bulk of the $145 million in donations came two years before the deal.
Trump is certainly within his right to question the indisputable links between Clinton Foundation donors and their ties to Uranium One, but Trump’s charge exaggerates the links. More importantly, his suggestion of a quid pro quo is unsubstantiated, as Schweizer the author of Clinton Cash himself has admitted.
On the most basic level, Trump’s timeline is off. Most of the donations occurred before Clinton was named secretary of state.
We rate Trump’s claim Mostly False.
This is what was said by politifact by the way. CNBC misrepresented them with their quote
This post was edited on 2/18/17 at 10:11 am
Posted on 2/18/17 at 10:12 am to TN Bhoy
quote:
Sure the Koch Brothers have supported Republican's (and Democrats) trying to influence policies that favor their business interests, But Soros actively seeks to cause chaos to further his.
That is exactly what the Koch Brothers do you moron. In fact, they are even worse, and Soros is pretty bad. Posted on 2/18/17 at 10:16 am to Jjdoc
Pretty sure the sale also went to a Russian with significant donations to the Clinton Foundation.
Posted on 2/18/17 at 10:16 am to HTDawg
quote:The Koch brothers try to create chaos in the US, pay protestors to induce riots resulting in deaths and millions in property loss? Could you link a source or two? I'd enjoy reading about that.
That is exactly what the Koch Brothers
Posted on 2/18/17 at 10:19 am to TotesMcGotes
quote:
Breitbart
Sweet deflection.
Posted on 2/18/17 at 10:19 am to weptiger
quote:
They agreed to sell to Russia 20% of the strategic uranium reserves to which the United States has access and you see no problem with it? Clearly, aside from the people involved and party involved, who you likely supported, I don't have that much trust in government to simply say "well, the government says it's okay."
There was a basic flow of money from the people involved in this deal to the Clinton Family Slush Fund. That is not in dispute, either.
The OPs thread has less to do with the details of the deal and more to do with the fake news and the CNBC mischaracterization of "uranium reserves" versus "uranium capacity".
20% of the strategic uranium reserves which have been developed...and 20% of those reserves which did not belong to the United States to begin with....it belonged to a private company, not the state. If it were such a bid deal that it not be sold to the anyone, let alone Russia, why wasn't it fricking nationalized years ago?
The reason is that the United States is awash in the stuff...it is, literally, everywhere and you can walk along in some parts of the country and pick you up a piece....google it...kid literally walking around picking up uranium for experiments in his home.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News