- 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
re: Let's end a talking Point: Just WHO was on the CFIUS that approved uranium ONE
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:18 pm to CptBengal
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:18 pm to CptBengal
quote:
Let's end a talking Point: Just WHO was on the CFIUS that approved uranium ONE by Cpt
Literally the “ALL STARS” of Prog Flith! Solid up vote!
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:19 pm to CptBengal
Glad you brought this to the board.
So are you now alleging a 9-person conspiracy?
So are you now alleging a 9-person conspiracy?
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:20 pm to Cruiserhog
quote:
Every member of the CFIUS board COULD block the sale with veto power as well as the Pres
WRONG.
go read the CFIUS website.
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:21 pm to boosiebadazz
I'm alleging your talking point is bullsgit.
Hillary gets kickbacks and they ALL knew whose turn it was next.
I see I've touched a nerve. Is that why yesterday you kept saying "committee"? Didn't like these optics?
Hillary gets kickbacks and they ALL knew whose turn it was next.
I see I've touched a nerve. Is that why yesterday you kept saying "committee"? Didn't like these optics?
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:25 pm to Damone
quote:
Timmy "Whoops I forgot about all of those unpaid taxes, how about hundred of billions in bailout money" Geithner
Geithner, the architect of “too big to fail”, toss on some Bernanke for good measure. Lol!
WE HAVE TO GIVE’M (too big to fail) THE MONEY OR THE GLOBAL ECONOMY WILL COLLAPSE AND WE’LL ALL DIE!
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:25 pm to CptBengal
I used the word committee because it is literally called the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. However, I am glad you all are moving away from the lie that Hillary herself held unilateral control over whether the deal was approved or not. That's progress.
Do you want to talk about export licenses next?
Do you want to talk about export licenses next?
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:30 pm to CptBengal
quote:
WRONG.
go read the CFIUS website.
CFIUS can issue an order blocking the sale.
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:31 pm to boosiebadazz
(no message)
This post was edited on 2/14/18 at 11:51 pm
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:34 pm to culsutiger
Another burning question I've had, other than the CF getting millions, what did the Russians pay to buy the uranium from the Canadian company, did the USA get anything from this sale?
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:35 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
However, I am glad you all are moving away from the lie that Hillary herself held unilateral control over whether the deal was approved or not.
All Hillary had to do to cash in on the Russian/Clinton Crime Family Collusion uranium scheme was to get Obama to agree. She did! The rest just toed the line.
But of course everyone realizes this.
![](https://images.tigerdroppings.com/Images/Icons/Iconbooboo.gif)
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:35 pm to culsutiger
We will in a second, but I'd like to flesh out some more on CFIUS.
quote:
CFIUS is an interagency committee authorized by statute[1] to review investments that could result in foreign control of a U.S. business that impacts U.S. national security. Parties to a transaction potentially subject to CFIUS review generally file a voluntary Notice. CFIUS takes 30 days to review the Notice, then conducts an additional 45-day investigation if necessary. The parties to the transaction must cooperate with CFIUS to conclude the investigation and institute any mitigation measures necessary to protect U.S. national security. If the parties and CFIUS cannot agree or adequate mitigation measures cannot be instituted, the Notice may be withdrawn and the transaction reworked or abandoned, or CFIUS may recommend to the President that the transaction be blocked. Only four transactions have been blocked or unwound by Presidential fiat in the history of CFIUS – two of those within the last year by Presidents Obama and Trump.
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:38 pm to Gaspergou202
quote:
Based on what is currently in the public record, little, if anything about the allegation is plausible. In this post, I want to summarize the legal context and known facts regarding the transfer and put the allegations of impropriety in context. (I focus exclusively on the transfer and the U.S. government's approval of it. I am not, in this post, considering the evidence—such as it is—of donations to the Clinton Foundation. My reasoning is simple: if there is no "quo" to be given, the question of a "quid" is moot.)
LINK
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:40 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
To secure approval from CFIUS, Rosatom is reported to have promised to retain the Uranium One corporate management and corporate structure, not breaking up the company. In addition, the mining licenses would remain with U.S. subsidiaries controlled by U.S. persons. In addition, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission reviewed the transaction and gave its approval (emphasis added below):
NRC’s review of the transfer of control request determined that the U.S. subsidiaries will remain the licensees, will remain qualified to conduct the uranium recovery operations, and will continue to have the equipment, facilities, and procedures necessary to protect public health and safety and to minimize danger to life or property. The review also determined that the licensees will maintain adequate financial surety for eventual decommissioning of the sites. Neither Uranium One nor ARMZ holds an NRC export license, so no uranium produced at either facility may be exported.
By all reports, there was little controversy over the transaction (which occurred during President Obama's "reset" with Russia). Still, it is fair to say that the degree of scrutiny of this transaction seems less than the 2009 proposed purchase of a gold mine by Chinese interests—which was ultimately withdrawn in light of CFIUS objections.
Oh my, the Russians are buying off the Nuclear Regulatory Commission as well!
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:40 pm to lctiger
(no message)
This post was edited on 2/14/18 at 11:51 pm
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:40 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
The structure of CFIUS is such that no one agency can control the outcome of the consideration. Here it appears that the entire committee and the NRC were all satisfied with the mitigation put in place. It is a very far stretch to lay this result at State's doorstep—the vigorous objection of any of the security-minded agencies would likely have derailed the transaction, but none, evidently was forthcoming. I have no doubt that State favored the sale—but that is likely the position it would take today under Secretary Rex Tillerson and was surely the position it would have taken under Secretaries Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice and John Kerry. State has a strong institutional bias in favor of accommodating foreign investment in the United States. Here, it seems clear that the Pentagon and DHS did not object either.
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:42 pm to culsutiger
Here's your leg to stand on:
So it was Obama that acted foolishly in allowing the Russians to buy the rights to 20% of the uranium, but where does the Clinton cash come into play?
quote:
Uranium One's licenses are for mining and extraction, not for export. This makes the claim that we "gave away" 20% of America's uranium fairly hyperbolic. The expectation, in light of the NRC's assessment, would have been that the uranium mined would be marketed in America (with the profits going to Russia).
It is, however, true, that the mining rights to 20% of American uranium are now held by a Russian state agency. That is troubling (and had it been me, I would have tried to generate opposition to the sale). It isn't a "give away," but it is the case that Rusatom has de jure and de facto legal rights that can be exercised to limit production if it wishes to do so.
So it was Obama that acted foolishly in allowing the Russians to buy the rights to 20% of the uranium, but where does the Clinton cash come into play?
This post was edited on 10/31/17 at 3:43 pm
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:42 pm to boosiebadazz
(no message)
This post was edited on 2/14/18 at 11:50 pm
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:44 pm to culsutiger
How does Mr. Christensen know where it was going? And if that is the case, that seems like a failure on the enforcement end, not the regulatory end. Customs? DHS?
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:48 pm to boosiebadazz
(no message)
This post was edited on 2/14/18 at 11:50 pm
Posted on 10/31/17 at 3:52 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
WRONG.
go read the CFIUS website.
CFIUS can issue an order blocking the sale.
lol, WRONG again. Seriously, let's watch you boom yourself in 2 posts:
quote:LINK
CFIUS may recommend to the President that the transaction be blocked. Only four transactions have been blocked or unwound by Presidential fiat in the history of CFIUS – two of those within the last year by Presidents Obama and Trump.
fricking imbecile.
Defend your pr0g filth aristocrats. Defend their criminality! You're winning!
Popular
Back to top
![logo](https://images.tigerdroppings.com/images/layout/TDIcon.jpg)