“Nobody seems to care because it’s Obama and Clinton.”

Steve Watson | – OCTOBER 20, 2017

While the fake news media continues to avoid going anywhere near the Uranium scandal, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson dived head first into it, taking to task a former State Department official who was on the inside of the Obama administration.

Carlson interviewed Obama advisor David Tafuri, and asked why the issue isn’t getting more coverage.

“You know exactly where it is going, to places that are dangerous to the United States, and that’s because the Obama Administration with Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State allowed this to happen,” Carlson said.

“Why isn’t that considered shameful?” he asked Tafuri.

Tafuri attempted to play down the scandal, saying it was a “bad policy decision” back in 2010, then claiming that Carlson was “overstating” the importance of the story because uranium doesn’t leave the U.S. without an export license being in place.

“They have no export license!” Carlson exclaimed, adding “That’s the whole point of this story!”

“This is a huge deal that threatens our national security, but nobody seems to care because it’s Obama and Clinton,” Carlson declared, pleading with his guest, “Let’s be real.”

Tafuri attempted to deflect the scandal away from the Clintons, and onto President Trump.

“If this is a scandal, then this is a scandal for the Trump administration,” Tafuri said. “‘Cause that means during the Trump administration, this uranium is leaving the country without having proper licenses.”

Carlson then brought up the reports that the Clinton Foundation profited by upwards of $100 million.

“How is that not quid pro quo?” Carlson asked, adding “Why is that not an actual scandal, not a nonsense D.C. scandal?”

Tafuri did not have an answer, instead claiming that “the Clinton’s did not take that money… the Clinton Foundation use that money for charitable purposes.”

Dobbs – Grassley To Investigate Clinton Uranium One – Can Sessions Handle It?

By Rick Wells

Lou Dobbs has a few thoughts on the four and a half hour appearance of Attorney General Jeff Sessions before the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday, his interactions with the Senators and his sometimes suspect responses and assertions.

He notes that Judiciary Committee Chairman, Senator Charles Grassley, “Has finally ordered the committee to investigate the Uranium One deal, a deal that transferred twenty percent of US uranium assets to the control of Russia.”

Dobbs points out that it “resulted in almost $150 million in donations, perhaps bribes is the better and more accurate word, to the Clinton Foundation, while Hillary was serving as Secretary of State in the Obama administration.”

He continues, “Involved in the administration’s investigation of Russian bribery were a lot of other well-known names now: Then-FBI Director Robert Mueller, now special counsel. Then US Attorney Rod Rosenstein, now the Deputy Attorney General, who appointed Mueller as special counsel. And the FBI Deputy Director, Andrew McCabe, who himself if under investigation as well.”

“Sessions defended Rosenstein,” notes Dobbs, “when asked whether he should recuse himself from any investigation in the so-called Russian bribery scandal.” He plays a clip of Sessions responding, effectively recusing himself once again from any involvement in yet another important issue, saying, “It would be his decision, he’s a man of integrity and ability. If he feels he has an inability to proceed with any investigation it would be his responsibility to make that determination.”

It’s absurd, given his obvious conflicts, that he’s being allowed to make that decision himself, if in fact he is. Sessions also fails to point out the greater risk posed by this supposed man of integrity, that of him continuing to operate in that capacity when he has a conflict of interest, or several, as in the case of the man he appointed, Robert Mueller. Clearly Sessions has an aversion to making tough, unpleasant decisions.

Dobbs comments, “All of this as pressure mounts for an investigation into the exoneration of Hillary Clinton by fired FBI Director Comey, who wrote a letter absolving her before interviewing her or other key witnesses.”

“The Department of Justice apparently hasn’t taken action,” says Dobbs, “on Comey, on Clinton or Clintons, or the highly suspicious and pernicious activities of Fusion GPS. The Department, along with the FBI, only stonewalling congressional investigators on the Trump dossier and Fusion GPS.”

“Sessions combative today,” said Dobbs, “in refusing to give the committee any account of his privileged White House conversations and frustrating even the members of the committee who are ostensibly on his side.”

“Whatever his reasons,” Dobbs says, “it’s well past time for Sessions now to demonstrate to the American people that he will bring high energy and purpose to the investigation of eight sordid years under ‘president’ Obama and, yes, the Clintons.”

‘Severe threat’: ISIS & Al-Qaeda planning 9/11-style ‘big explosion,’ US security chief warns

FILE PHOTO: Fighters of al-Qaeda linked ISIL carry their weapons during a parade at the Syrian town of Tel Abyad, near the border with Turkey January 2, 2014. © Yaser Al-Khodor / Reuters

Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS, ISIL) and Al-Qaeda terrorists are plotting to take down a plane and carry out a devastating explosion on the scale of 9/11, senior US security official Elaine Duke warns.


“The terrorist organizations, be it ISIS or Al-Qaeda or others, want to have the big explosion like they did on 9/11. They want to take down aircraft, the intelligence is clear on that,” the acting US secretary of homeland security said during a visit to the UK, as cited by British media.

On September 11, 2001, (aka 9/11) terrorists hijacked aircraft and carried out the deadliest attack in history, killing almost 3,000 people.


“The threat is still severe,” she stated on Wednesday in London following her meeting with Home Secretary Amber Rudd, where the officials discussed terrorist content online.

The terrorist groups are using smaller attacks to keep their members“engaged,” remain visible and provide the flow of finances, according to Duke.

At the same time smaller plots can be followed with major ones, she warned.

“Creating terror is their goal. A bladed weapon attack causes terror and continues to disrupt the world, but that does not mean they have given up on a major aviation plot,” she said.

Tough internet control is necessary to prevent terrorists’ propaganda from spreading online, Duke said. She added that while tech firms are already cooperating on these issues with the authorities, there is still much to be done.

“We will continue to push as far as we can go. I think that we have the cooperation of those companies and we just need to work on that,” she said. Social media firms joining a meeting of G7 interior ministers to discuss the issue this week “is a positive sign,” she said.

READ MORE: Passenger reading aloud from Bible causes panic on London rush hour train

“There has been a shift and for us somewhat with the Charlottesville incident,” said Duke, adding that tech companies are under “social pressures” and have “to balance between keeping their user agreements and giving law enforcement what they need.”


The UK has seen a wave of deadly terrorist attacks this year, which have killed a total of 36 people. Responsibility for the attacks has been claimed by Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL).

The bombing in the Manchester Arena last May killed 23 people and injured more than 100 others, making it the deadliest attack of its kind in the UK since 2005. The latest terrorist attack occurred on September 15 at Parsons Green tube station, where a partially-exploded bomb injured 30 commuters.

After the series of jihadi attacks, British Prime Minister Theresa May called on“allied democratic governments” to “regulate cyberspace to prevent the spread of extremism and terrorism planning.” 

Just one day before the US security chief’s warnings, Andrew Parker, director general MI5, Britain’s domestic intelligence agency, said that Britain was under unprecedented threat from Islamist terrorists.


Uranium One scandal threatens to bring down the entire Democratic Party

 | – OCTOBER 19, 2017

WASHINGTON, D.C. – While the mainstream media continues to obsess over Paul Manafort and Gen. Michael Flynn’s supposed “Russian collusion,” totally ignored are the ties Tony Podesta, the brother of Hillary’s 2016 presidential campaign chairman John Podesta, had to both Uranium One and to Sherbank, Moscow’s largest state-run bank with close ties to international terrorism and to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

As the Russians gained control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 through 2013, the Podesta Group was paid a total of $630,000 between 2010 and 2015 to represent Uranium One, the Russian-controlled firm with close financial ties to the Clinton Foundation that today controls 20 percent of all U.S. uranium produced.

Podesta ties to Russian Money, Putin, and Russian clandestine operations

Among the revelations made public through the 11.5 million documents leaked by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists detailing the legal and financial arrangements behind secretive off-shore banking transactions dating back to the 1970s was the disclosure Russia’s largest bank, the state-owned Sherbank, uses the Podesta Group as its registered lobbyist in Washington.

“Sberbank (Savings Bank in Russian) engaged the Podesta Group to help its public image—leading Moscow financial institutions not exactly being known for their propriety and wholesomeness—and specifically to help lift some of the pain of sanctions placed on Russia in the aftermath of the Kremlin’s aggression against Ukraine, which has caused real pain to the country’s hard-hit financial sector,” wrote former National Security Agency analyst and counterintelligence officer John R. Schindler in an article entitled “Panama Papers Reveal Clinton’s Kremlin Connection” published by the Observer on April 7, 2016.

“It’s hardly surprising that Sberbank sought the help of Democratic insiders like the Podesta Group to aid them in this difficult hour, since they clearly understand how American politics work,” Schindler continued.

“The question is why the Podesta Group took Sberbank’s money,” Schindler asked. “That financial institution isn’t exactly hiding in the shadows—it’s the biggest bank in Russia, and its reputation leaves a lot to be desired. Nobody acquainted with Russian finance was surprised that Sberbank wound up in the Panama Papers.”

Schindler noted that since the 1990s, Sberbank has grown to be Russia’s dominant bank, controlling nearly 30 percent of Russia’s aggregate banking assets and employing a quarter-million people.  The majority stockholder in Sberbank is Russia’s Central Bank, making Sberbank functionally an arm of the Russian government, though officially Sberbank is a private institution.

“Certainly, Western intelligence is well acquainted with Sberbank, noting its close relationship with Vladimir Putin and his regime. Funds moving through Sberbank are regularly used to support clandestine Russian intelligence operations, while the bank uses its offices abroad as cover for the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service or SVR,” Schindler pointed out.

A NATO counterintelligence official explained that Sberbank, which has outposts in almost two dozen foreign countries, “functions as a sort of arm of the SVR outside Russia, especially because many of its senior employees are ‘former’ Russian intelligence officers.” Inside the country, Sberbank has an equally cozy relationship with the Federal Security Service or FSB, Russia’s powerful domestic intelligence agency.

On April 17, 2014, the Moscow Times reported Ukraine opened criminal proceedings against Sberbank and 13 other banks on suspicion of “financing terrorism.”

Schindler noted the Ukrainian criminal infestation concluded Sberbank had distributed millions of dollars in illegal aid to Russian-backed separatists fighting in eastern Ukraine, with the bank serving as “a witting supporter of Russian aggression against Ukraine.”

On April 5, 2016Lachlan Markay reporting in the Washington Free Beacon published the lobbying registration form the Podesta Group filed with the U.S. government proving Sberbank had contracted with the Podesta Group to advance their interests with banking, trade, and foreign relations.

Markay further reported that according to the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, a consortium of journalists exploring the Panama Papers leak, Sberbank and Troika Dialog have ties to companies used by members of Putin’s inner circle to funnel state resources into lucrative private investments.

“Some of these companies were initially connected to the Troika Dialog investment fund, which was controlled and run by Sberbank after the bank bought the Troika Dialog investment bank. Troika and Sberbank declined to comment,” Markay noted the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, concluded in a report published in April 2016.

On March 30, 2016, Politico reported the Podesta Group registered to lobby for the U.S. subsidiary of Sherbank to see if relief could be obtained for the bank in the easing of U.S. sanctions against Russia for Russia’s role in the Ukraine conflict.

The Podesta Group and the Russian uranium scam

As first documented in Peter Schweizer’s bestselling book “Clinton Cash,” and confirmed in Jerome Corsi’s bestselling book “Partners in Crime: The Clinton’s Scheme to Monetize the White House,” Uranium One directed millions to the Clinton Foundation as the Russian government gained ownership of the company.

New York Times reporters Jo Becker and Mike McIntire, in an article entitled “Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal,” that the newspaper printed on April 23, 2015, documented the tie between the Russians and the Clinton Foundation as the Uranium One deal evolved.

“As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation,” Becker and McIntire wrote.

“Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million,” the New York Times reporters continued.  “Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.”

Becker and McIntire further noted that shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Bill Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.

CIFUS is the acronym for the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, the inter-agency committee of the U.S. government, operating out of the U.S. Treasury, that is responsible to review and authorize transactions of a U.S. business that could result in a foreign person or entity undermining U.S. national security interests.

As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton was a member of CIFUS and she was the only presidential candidate in 2008 to make an issue of the importance of strengthening CIFUS to protect U.S. economic sovereignty and national security.

In October 2010, CIFUS reviewed and approved the Rosatom acquisition of majority control in Uranium One before the deal was done.

In 2013, Rosatom acquired all remaining shares of Uranium One. Becker and McIntire estimated that by 2015, after getting CIFUS approval, the Russians ended up controlling one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.

John Podesta served as Clinton Foundation CEO

According to a New York Times report published Aug. 13, 2013, in 2011, a wave of midlevel program staff members departed the Clinton Foundation, “reflecting the frustration of much of the foundation’s policy personnel with the old political hands running the organization.”

Around that time, in 2011, Bruce Lindsey, then the Clinton Foundation’s CEO, suffered a stroke, underscoring concerns about the foundation’s line of succession. John D. Podesta, a chief of staff in Mr. Clinton’s White House, stepped in for several months as temporary chief executive.

An earlier version of this report was published by Jerome R. Corsi, “Media Neglect Clinton-Linked Firm’s Role in Russia Scandal,, Sept. 28, 2016,


Mass shooting in Maryland; media SILENT because suspect is…


By Derrick Wilburn

On Wednesday there was another tragic mass-shooting in America. Did you know about it? Have you heard anything from the mainstream news media? Were headlines splashed across your newsfeeds when you logged onto the web this morning? Probably not. Neither Diane Feinstein nor Chuck Schumer nor any of the other usual suspects are standing in front of cameras decrying another shooting and demanding more gun control laws. The story didn’t and won’t make Rachel Maddow’s nightly show.

Fox News has reported that around nine o’clock yesterday morning in Edgewood, Maryland 37-year-old Radee Labeeb Prince, a disgruntled employee with a rap sheet as long as his leg, entered a business with a gun and opened fire, shooting five people, critically wounding two and killing three.

“The man believed to have killed three people in a “targeted attack” near a Maryland business and also suspected in a later shooting in Delaware was apprehended by police in Delaware Wednesday evening after a manhunt that stretched on for hours.

The suspect was identified by Harford County Sheriff Jeffrey Gahler as 37-year-old Radee Labeeb Prince.

The shooting took place at the Emmorton Business Park in Edgewood, located about 20 miles northeast of Baltimore. Shots rang out around 8:58 a.m., according to Gahler.

“We have lost three lives so far this morning in Harford County,” Gahler said at a news conference, adding it was not a random shooting but a “targeted attack.”

All five of the victims are believed to have been employees of Advance Granite Solutions, according to Gahler. Prince is believed to have used a single hand gun in the shooting, he added.

Police later linked Prince to a second shooting in Wilmington, Del., located about 55 miles away.

So the perp has been linked to two separate shootings and tragically the loss of three lives. But were there any leading indicators, any hints that he was capable of violence? Yes.

A former co-worker of Prince’s told The Baltimore Sun that the suspect was also fired from a different job earlier this year after he allegedly attacked a separate employee.

After Prince was fired, the man said Prince came back to the business several times and once went to see him directly and cursed and yelled at him. The co-worker later filed a restraining order against Prince with the Harford County District Court.

In the application for the order, the man wrote: “I felt very threatened because he is a big guy and very aggressive on me.”

The man said Prince did not get physical with him, but wrote: “I do not want to wait until he will.

A Harford County District Court judge denied the order.”

A judge denied the order.

According to WTTG, Prince has been arrested 42 times in Delaware. He has 15 felony convictions and 4 more misdemeanor convictions.

Downtrend offers some great commentary on the matter: I guess we found at least one reason why democrats aren’t making a big deal about this. It’s kind of hard to push gun control when a guy with 15 felony convictions gets his hands on a gun and kills three people. In fact, this story proves exactly how ineffectual gun control laws are.

This is also a pretty good story to do away with that “ban the box” nonsense. Liberals want to make it illegal for employers to ask applicants if they’ve ever been convicted of a crime. This [expletive deleted] was convicted of 19 crimes and he still managed to get a job. I wonder if the boss was aware of his criminal history, because I have to believe after more than one felony conviction a person becomes unemployable.

The fact that Prince is black however may be the real reason this mass shooting hasn’t gained any traction on the left. Mass shooters are supposed to be white men and it is used by the liberal media to push both a racism and a sexism narrative. It’s also used to show that we need tougher gun laws because otherwise normal white guys can snap and go on shooting sprees so nobody should be allowed to own guns. A black guy with a long criminal history using an illegally obtained gun doesn’t help any liberal agenda.”

Final analysis – a judge denied a restraining order request against an aggressive man who had been arrested 42 times and has 15 felony convictions. That man was able to acquire a gun and now the families of three Americans will be laying their loved ones to rest and the gun-control liberals haven’t a thing to say about it. Sad yet not surprising at the same time.