When I wake up daily, because I don't buy newspapers anymore, I check my FB or Twitter feed for news links. Each day, and this isn't good, I have a default expectation: what has 45 done or said today?

Wow. Seems to me more people need to brush up on American history and recognize what the First Amendment truly (and thoroughly) stands for.

-C!

-----

The NYT 2015 story on Uranium One:  https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton -foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-compa ny.html

The Washington Post's 2016 story and debunking of the matter:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/10/ 26/the-facts-behind-trumps-repeated-claim-about-hillary-clin tons-role-in-the-russian-uranium-deal/?utm_term=.093ceab99ff 5&tid=a_inl

What's pathetic is the Right Wing Media ignores Trump's ridiculousness and focuses on old Clinton stories. I'm surprised Fox News hasn't turned up a new development on Whitewater. Maybe Breitbart will turn up some new dirt on Vince Foster.

John Jackson, you may want to read the article you linked and point to where it indicates Mueller is looking into the Uranium One deal or the Clinton Foundation. I'll wait.

Yes, and that is where critical thinking comes into play. Instead of dismissing the media outright, as conservatives are wont to do, evaluate the claims and the counter-claims on their own.

-----------------------------------------------------------

How much uranium from Uranium One Inc has been exported to Russia since this deal? The answer is none. It has all stayed in the US. If you read through the information, you will see that Uranium One has to obtain a specific licence in order to export anything outside the US. Furthermore, Russia was not interested in Uranium One for its US mines (which cannot provided enough even for the US); it was for the Kazakh mines that Uranium One owns. So hardly a case of handing over US uranium to Russia. It was a case of not blocking a deal between a partially Russian-owned (but still publicly-listed) company at a time when relations with Russia were more cordial and Putin had stepped aside in favour of Dmitiri Medvedev. They did not, at the time, have the power of hindsight to know Russia would invade Crimea, etc. The improvement in relations allowed the US to use Russian land to provide supplies to the American military in Afghanistan. [Edited to add: we should also not over-egg Hillary's ability to unilaterally control this deal one way or the other. She was potentially a large voice in a committee that then recommended action to the President, who had the power of veto. It is not a matter of record whether she actually got involved in the committee, but it seems safe to assume she would have been involved in such an important matter].

Regarding the foundation and foreign contributions while Hillary Clinton was  Secretary of State, the foundation had to publicly disclose all contributors. This is hardly the actions of trying to conduct secret deals, but let's say the donations were intended to ease the wheels for approval of the Uranium One deal. Would restricting the freedom of the press in the future make such murky transactions less or more likely?