THERE ARE AT LEAST TWO SIDES TO EVERY STORY

How big is the Clinton-Uranium scandal?

This story has been exaggerated

Evidence indicates she's guilty

 Getty: Spencer Platt / Staff

The supposed Uranium One scandal involving Hillary Clinton approving the sale of uranium to Russia has been widely overblown, argues John Ritch in The New York Times. The fact of the matter is that the global uranium market is open and free-flowing, making the material easy to get for governments that can afford it. The story that Clinton gave 20% of American-produced uranium to Russia because she was paid off by them has many holes. Most importantly, the US gets most of its uranium abroad and 20% of its own production is a very small amount. There is no proof of Clinton doing anything unethical or against US national interests.

Keep on reading at the New York Times

Russia was trying to undermine America’s uranium capabilities by buying up a significant portion of its reserves. Hillary Clinton, who was then in a position to approve this deal, did so under what it appearing to be shady ties to the Russian government, believes Thomas Lifson of American Thinker. An informant to the FBI has revealed how important this deal was to Moscow, as it would make the US more dependent on its uranium. Our government, including Obama likely knew of this intel, but didn’t stop it. Clinton’s hand in pushing through this deal that gave Russia a lot of our uranium makes her majorly suspect of cooperating with Moscow.

Keep on reading at American Thinker
23.5%
Where do you stand?
76.5%
SHOW COMMENTS
Write a response...
See what else you’re missing
single
modal image