- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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

Ok So what about Uranium One fiasco ?
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:06 pm
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:06 pm
So who will be in charge of vetting the parties involved in the Uranium One deal ? ..Mueller ? and will there be any arrests in connection to that ?
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:19 pm to TigerDrive
quote:
So who will be in charge of vetting the parties involved in the Uranium One deal?
Someone with a time machine?
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:23 pm to TigerDrive
If we’re being realistic, no one. Everyone knows is crooked as hell but No one dares to go after it
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:27 pm to Pelican fan99
It will have to be a new SC.
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:28 pm to TigerDrive
Podesta Group drowning in Democrat fecal matter.
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:28 pm to TigerDrive
Walk me through the criminal wrongdoing again?
Thanks.
Thanks.
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:30 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Walk me through the criminal wrongdoing again? Thanks
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:32 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Walk me through the criminal wrongdoing again?
Hillary took money from Russia for rights to Uranium.
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:34 pm to Statestreet
Ah, ok. So where is the uranium now?
And was it just Clinton or were other people involved in the decision?
And was it just Clinton or were other people involved in the decision?
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:37 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:Rights to
Ah, ok. So where is the uranium now?
Podestas, Manafort, Obama and Clinton. It ain't good.
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:38 pm to Statestreet
quote:
Rights to
I assume this is uranium located here in the States? What would have to happen for it to physically leave this country?
quote:
Podestas, Manafort, Obama and Clinton. It ain't good.
Is that all? Is it an informal process or is there like a committee and a deliberative process studies done and all that?
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:39 pm to TigerDrive
So were all 9 people that all voted unanimously to approve the deal on the take as well, or are we just singling out Clinton?
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:48 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Walk me through the criminal wrongdoing again?
Hillary knew the Russians were seeking control of the Uranium One company. The state dept had the power to stop it, but
quote:
Ian Telfer, Chairman of U1 donated up to $5.6 million to the Clinton Foundation during and after the review process for the Russian deal.
And Bill Clinton, who hadn't held office in a decade, suddenly becomes friends with uranium mining company owner Guistra
quote:
Giustra makes a $31.3 million donation to the Clinton Foundation. The donation is kept secret until December 2007. (don't forget who was running for pres. in 2007)
Giustra denied it happened or that he arranged it. When it is pointed out that Moukhtar Dzhakishev, president of Kazatomprom, has a photo with Mr. Clinton taken inside his home during the meeting, Giustra does an about face. Similarly, a spokesman for Clinton initially denies the meeting took place, then issues a “correction” acknowledging it did.
quote:
Bill Clinton is paid $500,000 for a speech in Moscow by a Russian investment bank with ties to the Kremlin that assigned a buy rating to Uranium One stock.
quid pro quo
Clintons enriched themselves knowing this company was being sold to Russians, and then didn't stop it, all the while screaming that Russia was undermining our elections
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:50 pm to League Champs
Was it Hillary's unilateral decision to make?
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:57 pm to boosiebadazz
No, a 9-person panel had to vote unanimously on it, and they did. IIRC, they all say they would vote the same way today.
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:58 pm to TigerDrive
That’s just not very important. What Manafort is being charged with are national security issues.
Posted on 10/30/17 at 5:58 pm to thetigerman
Oh, almost as if there was a Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States?
Posted on 10/30/17 at 6:02 pm to League Champs
LINK
Wouldn't it undermine your argument if there were a formal process and multiple layers of review from different agencies?
quote:
Prior to filing a voluntary notice, parties may consult with CFIUS or submit a draft notice, as described in the Filing Instructions section of this website, to ensure that the review will proceed as efficiently as possible. The CFIUS process generally begins formally when parties to a proposed or pending transaction jointly file a voluntary notice with CFIUS containing information required by § 800.402 of the regulations. Upon receiving the notice, the Staff Chairperson will promptly determine whether the notice is complete and satisfies the requirements stated in the regulations. If the notice is complete, the Staff Chairperson will circulate the notice to all CFIUS members. A review period of up to 30 days begins on the next business day.
During the review period, CFIUS members examine the transaction in order to identify and address, as appropriate, any national security concerns that arise as a result of the transaction. During the review period, CFIUS members, through the Department of the Treasury as Committee Chair, may request additional information from the parties. Parties must respond to such follow-up requests within three business days of the request or within a longer time frame if the parties so request in writing and the Staff Chairperson grants that request in writing.
CFIUS concludes action on the preponderant majority of transactions during or at the end of the initial 30-day review period. In certain circumstances defined in section 721 and at § 800.503 of the regulations, CFIUS may initiate a subsequent investigation, which must be completed within 45 days. In certain circumstances described at section 6(c) of Executive Order 11858, as amended, and § 800.506 of the regulations, CFIUS may also refer a transaction to the President for decision. In such case, section 721 requires the President to announce a decision with respect to a transaction within 15 days of CFIUS’s completion of the investigation.
Parties to a transaction may request withdrawal of their notice at any time during the review or investigation stages. Such a request must be approved by CFIUS and may include conditions on the parties, such as requirements that they keep CFIUS informed of the status of the transaction or that they re-file the transaction at a later time. CFIUS tracks withdrawn transactions.
CFIUS may also reject voluntary notices in certain circumstances, such as when the voluntary notice is not complete, the parties do not respond to follow-up information requests within the required time frame, there is a material change in the transaction, or information comes to light that contradicts material information provided in the notice by the parties.
If CFIUS finds that the covered transaction does not present any national security risks or that other provisions of law provide adequate and appropriate authority to address the risks, then CFIUS will advise the parties in writing that CFIUS has concluded all action under section 721 with respect to such transaction.
If CFIUS finds that a covered transaction presents national security risks and that other provisions of law do not provide adequate authority to address the risks, then CFIUS may enter into an agreement with, or impose conditions on, parties to mitigate such risks or may refer the case to the President for action.
Where CFIUS has completed all action with respect to a covered transaction or the President has announced a decision not to exercise his authority under section 721 with respect to the covered transaction, then the parties receive a “safe harbor” with respect to that transaction, as described in § 800.601 of the regulations and section 7(f) of Executive Order 11858, as amended.
Parties to a transaction that choose to file notice of the transaction with CFIUS must do so in accordance with the procedures stated in the regulations at § 800.401 of the regulations. Such notice must include the information required in the regulations at § 800.402.
This website outlines the basic requirements for voluntary notices and other information that may be useful to parties, but does not create any rights for, or confer any rights on, any person, nor operate to bind the U.S. Government. Parties must consult the regulations to ensure that the notice meets all legal requirements for acceptance. Parties may also contact the Staff Chairperson with questions.
Wouldn't it undermine your argument if there were a formal process and multiple layers of review from different agencies?
This post was edited on 10/30/17 at 6:03 pm
Back to top

10







