Wikileaks accuses Mueller of handing over uranium to Russians … is this just a random attempt to drag down Mueller?



Considering the paper trail, this seems to have been an official, authorized handover. I don’t see why it would be illegal.

I think Assange is willing to publish anything that looks tangentially relevant (and in his circumstances, I don’t blame him).

The full cable is at:

https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09STATE85588_a.html#efmBbpBlP

Various Internet writers have claimed (without supporting their claims) that this means Mueller has a conflict of interest with Russia. I don’t see how anyone could argue for that. It looks like a routine bureaucratic transfer of uranium to me, but admittedly I don’t know much about uranium or the regulations on it.

In a more sober vein, the Gateway Pundit claims this is a double standard for the Democrats:

Why aren’t the Democrats up in arms over Mueller’s visit to Russia? After all, according to the deranged Democrats, any contact with the Russians creates a cloud of suspicion and must lead to an investigation.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/05/wikileaks-fbis-mueller-delivered-highly-enriched-stolen-uranium-russia-2009/

Consider the following Republican action against the Clinton crime mob:

SUBSTITUTE FOR THE AMENDMENT IN THE
NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE FOR H RES 446 OFFERED BY MR GAETZ OF FLORIDA
Strike all that follows after the resolving clause and insert the following:
That the President is requested, and the Attorney General of the United States is directed to transmit, respectively (in a manner appropriate to classified information, if the President or Attorney General determines appropriate), to the House of Representatives, not later than 14 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, copies of any document, record, audio recording, memo, correspondence, or other communication in their possessions, or any portion of any such communication, that refers or relates to the following:
1) Then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch directing James B. Comey to mislead the American people by stating that he should refer to the investigation into the mishandling of classified data and use of an unauthorized email server by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as a “matter, ” rather than a criminal “investigation.”
2) Leaks by James B. Comey to Columbia University law professor, Daniel Richman, regarding conversations had between President Trump and then-FBI Director James B. Comey, and how the leaked information was purposefully released to lead to the appointment of special counsel, Robert Mueller, a longtime friend of James B. Comey;
3) The propriety and consequence of immunity deals given to possible Hillary Clinton co-conspirators Sheryl Mills, Heather Samuelson, John Bentel, and potentially others, by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, during the criminal investigation James B. Comey led into Hillary Clinton’s misconduct;
4) The decision by James B. Comey to usurp the authority of then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch in his unusual announcement that criminal charges would not be brought against Hillary Clinton following her unlawful use of a private email server and mishandling of classified information.
5) James B. Comey’s knowledge and impressions of ex-parte conversation between then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton on June 27, 2016, at a Phoenix airport on a private jet;

6) James B. Comey’s knowledge of the company ‘Fusion GPS, ‘ including its creation of a “dossier” of information about Mr. Trump; that dossier’s commission and dissemination in the months before and after the 2016 Presidential Election; the intelligence sources of Fusion GPS or any person or company working for Fusion GPS or its affiliates;
7) Any and all potential leaks originated by James B. Comey and provided to author Michael Schmidt dating back to 1993;
8) James B. Comey’s knowledge of the purchase of a majority stake in the company Uranium One by the company Rosatom; whether the approval of the sale was connected to any donations made to the Clinton Foundation; what role then-Secretary of State, Ms. Hillary Clinton, played in the approval of that sale, and whether the sale could have affected the national security of the United States of America;
9) James B. Comey’s refusal to investigate then Secretary of State Hiliary Clinton:
a. Selling access to the U.S. State Department through Clinton Foundation donations
b. Huma Abedin’s duel employment at the State Department and the Clinton Foundation simultaneously
c. Utilization of the State Department to further paid speaking opportunities for her husband
10) Any collusion between Former FBI Director James B. Comey and special counsel Robert Mueller; including but not limited to:
a. The information Comey admitted to leaking to the Columbia University law professor, being intentional such that a special counsel, his longtime friend, Robert Mueller, would be appointed to lead the investigation against the Trump administration; and
b. Any communication between Muller and Comey in advance of the Senate Intelligence Committee hearing.

11) Whether James B. Comey had any knowledge of efforts made by any federal agency to monitor communications of then-candidate Donald Trump, and to assess any knowledge by Mr. James B. Comey about the “unmasking” of individuals on Donald Trump’s campaign team, transition team, or both; to assess the role that former National Security Adviser Ms. Susan Rice played in the unmasking of these individuals; to reveal the purpose served by unmasking any individual or individuals serving on the staff of then-candidate Donald Trump; the dissemination of unredacted information to various intelligence agencies, and any attempts by to use surveillance of then-candidate Trump for the purposes of damaging the credibility of his campaign, his presidency, or both.

Comment: Possibly Assange thinks that this uranium thing could be relevant to collusion.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in current events. Bookmark the permalink.