It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: xuenchen
Canadian Partnership Shielded Identities of Donors to Clinton Foundation
Canadian Clinton Foundation affiliate discloses some donors
What I follow, from the NY Times on this, is that the group of people that sold the company that became Uranium One, to Canadians, was later taken over by a Russian company. Some of these people donated 2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation. There are no facts to show this is related. The source in the OP links to the NY Times article from April.
That is NOT a lot of money for that foundation. I would think if it was a payoff, it would be larger.
originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: HUMBLEONE
This has been looked into. Let snopes finish it's investigation. I am thinking hoax as who it was originally attributed to has been proved to not have said it. There is no real place to even start as of yet on any allegation.
I am not convinced, there has been no evidence.
originally posted by: reldra
originally posted by: xuenchen
Canadian Partnership Shielded Identities of Donors to Clinton Foundation
Canadian Clinton Foundation affiliate discloses some donors
Canada has different laws about naming names. The uranium One thing has been dealt with on ATS already. Not new. Why all the smilies????
YOU in the previous ATS thread said "The truth is coming out" . Well, let me know when.
ATS
What I follow, from the NY Times on this, is that the group of people that sold the company that became Uranium One, to Canadians, was later taken over by a Russian company. Some of these people donated 2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation. There are no facts to show this is related. The source in the OP links to the NY Times article from April.
That is NOT a lot of money for that foundation. I would think if it was a payoff, it would be larger.
The internal quotes were mine from that thread.
That was jan 24 16. nothing new has come about.
originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: HUMBLEONE
She is a crook.What a mess.
originally posted by: elementalgrove
a reply to: HUMBLEONE
This sounds about exactly right.
I imagine there is plenty of money being thrown around to guarantee that finding evidence of such a thing will be quite difficult. That is to say if you believe accepting massive amounts of money from Saudi Arabia is not corruption at its finest already, I mean if there is a terror state scale they take the cake!
One day I hope to see all involved with this corrupt globalist enterprise thrown in prison till the end of their time!
originally posted by: Spodeeodee
a reply to: HUMBLEONE
I say interesting indeed. I never heard of the Canadian guy so I did look into him. Crazy connections.
cgepartnership.com...
And Haiti / Clinton debacle- 20 million
Clinton hiv/aids foundation 30 million
International crisis group
He is a major player in the world.
Thanks for the post!
originally posted by: Granite
originally posted by: reldra
originally posted by: xuenchen
Canadian Partnership Shielded Identities of Donors to Clinton Foundation
Canadian Clinton Foundation affiliate discloses some donors
Canada has different laws about naming names. The uranium One thing has been dealt with on ATS already. Not new. Why all the smilies????
YOU in the previous ATS thread said "The truth is coming out" . Well, let me know when.
ATS
What I follow, from the NY Times on this, is that the group of people that sold the company that became Uranium One, to Canadians, was later taken over by a Russian company. Some of these people donated 2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation. There are no facts to show this is related. The source in the OP links to the NY Times article from April.
That is NOT a lot of money for that foundation. I would think if it was a payoff, it would be larger.
The internal quotes were mine from that thread.
That was jan 24 16. nothing new has come about.
President Trump will order the Justice Dept to procecute Hillary...Bill in about one year from now.
Patience...
Innocent until proven guilty is reserved for non repeat offenders.
originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: CriticalStinker
Innocent until proven guilty is reserved for non repeat offenders.
No it means your innocent until it is proven otherwise...repeat offender or not.
And as of yet she has yet been proven guilty of anything legally...morally may be a different story.
originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: tsurfer2000h
Obviously in court innocent until proven guilty stands, I was talking more about the conversation of her becoming president. The courts of the minds if you will. That being said Hillary for prison sounds nice, but I think I can still live with her just not being president.