Sessions and DOJ Officials Now Claim Uranium One Informant Offers “Nothing New”

If it was possible to roll up all the investigations into the Obama administration into one huge interrogation at the hands of, say, Trey Gowdy, I don’t believe at the end of the day there’d be any doubt in anyone’s mind as to the culpability and guilt of that vast arm of the presidency that was responsible for so many scandals and cover-ups.

The same is true for Hillary Clinton.  The mere fact that there are so many intersecting scandals between just these two individuals is testament to the belief (and some would say “fear”) that no matter how evil your intent, if you’re powerful enough to snap your fingers and make investigations disappear, witnesses shut their mouths, and informants keel over by accidental suicide, you’ll be far from reproof or prosecution.

Couple this with an effete attorney general who is as quiet as a church mouse when it comes to affixing blame or assigning investigators, as well as a very badly broken and corrupt intelligence community where all the top players are “in the boy’s club,” and you’ve got a monopoly on power and non-transparency not to be rivaled by even the most powerful world leaders.

Jeff Sessions is an Establishmentarian who broke with traditional partners and did something unthinkable.  In a moment of obvious clarity of purpose, he gave up the ethereal tether that bound him to his colleagues in the Senate and backed Donald J. Trump as president.  In return for his loyalty and extremely risky venture, he was offered the Attorney General’s position, which he obviously accepted.

This type of position demands a certain amount of dispersal of earlier held loyalties and points-of-view and it goes without saying that in order to be an effective attorney general, you’re going to have to lose some friends and long-time acquaintances.  Sessions has done just about as much as a person is humanly possible by performing to remain standing on that fence rail.  It was never going to be easy, but considering that Donald Trump was the winning candidate, the possibility of remaining a fence-sitter was all but gone.

The pressure is being brought to bear now, particularly in view of the call by multiple groups, senators, representatives and citizens to pull into focus an investigation into the many scandals that have been whispered about over the years in regards to both Barack Hussein Obama and Hillary Clinton.

The Uranium One story is one filled with misconceptions, misdirections, and misinformation.  The only thing missing from the Uranium One story is the answer to the question of “Why?”

Why did this deal go through when it was made obvious by the FBI through its informant (who has now been outed as being William Campbell through an illegal Deep State leak) that Rosatom was rife with Russian collusion, bribery and kickbacks?

Campbell, who is in very poor health as he battles cancer, is ready to testify in Congress regarding these allegations against the Obama administration and CFIUS committee members, including Hillary Clinton and Eric Holder.  One would assume that AG Sessions, having just lifted the FBI-induced gag order from Campbell, would be on board with getting to the bottom of this Swamp-choked scandal.

Instead, he (and others in the Department of Justice, both on and off the records, named and unnamed) has opted to downplay the importance of the information that Campbell has to offer, citing that he does not believe that the informant can come forward with any new evidence that would be important to the hearing proceedings.

Following the release of the identity of the FBI informant, Justice Department officials in recent days said that informant William Campbell’s prior work won’t shed much light on the U.S. government’s controversial decision in 2010 to approve Russia’s purchase of the Uranium One mining company and its substantial U.S. assets.

However, The Hill’s John Solomon has reviewed 1000s of new memos from an FBI informant that clearly show illegal activity surrounding a Russian plot to corner the American uranium market, ranging from corruption inside a U.S. nuclear transport company to Obama administration approvals that let Moscow buy and sell more atomic fuels.

FBI informant Campbell, acting as a consultant trying to help Rosatom overcome political opposition to the Uranium One deal, gathered evidence for six years, and, according to the more than 5,000 pages of documents from the counterintelligence investigation, there are a number of evidenciary links betweeen corrupt Russians, President Obama, and Hillary Clinton…

The Hill’s John Solomon details that Campbell documented for his FBI handlers the first illegal activity by Russians nuclear industry officials in fall 2009, nearly a entire year before the Russian state-owned Rosatom nuclear firm won Obama administration approval for the Uranium One deal.

“The attached article is of interest as I believe it highlights the ongoing resolve in Russia to gradually and systematically acquire and control global energy resources,” Rod Fisk, an American contractor colleage working for the Russians, wrote in a June 24, 2010 email to Campbell.

Part of the goal was to make Americans more reliant on Russian uranium before a program that converted former Soviet warheads into U.S. nuclear fuel expired in 2013, according to documents and interviews. Russia’s ambitions including building a uranium enrichment facility on U.S. soil, the documents show.

The FBI task force supervising Campbell since 2008 watched as the Obama administration made more than a half dozen decisions favorable to the Russian’s plan, which ranged from approving the sale of Uranium One to removing Rosatom from export restrictions and making it easier for Moscow to win billions in new commercial uranium sales contracts.  The favorable decisions occurred during a time when President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were pursuing a public “reset” to improve Moscow relations, a plan that fell apart after Russia invaded Ukraine.

Multiple congressional committees recently got permission from the Justice Department to interview Campbell after The Hill reported last month the existence of his informant work. Lawmakers want to know what the FBI did with the evidence Campbell gathered in real time and whether it warned President Obama and top leaders before they made the Russian-favorable decisions, like the Uranium One deal.

Since Campbell’s identity emerged in recent days, there have been several statements by Justice officials, both on the record and anonymously, casting doubt on the timing and value of his work, and specifically his knowledge about Uranium One. However, as The Hill’s John Solomon crucially details, the more than 5,000 pages of documents reviewed by The Hill directly conflict with some of the Justice officials’ accounts.

There is an air of desperation about these dismissive statements.  Take, for instance, this line from the ZeroHedge report:

“It is clear by their desperation, that someone is trying to hide something as in leaked stories late last week, Justice officials anonymously questioned Campbell’s credibility pointing to episodes of drinking and reckless driving.”

Here’s an interesting lesson in government legislators and their penchant for blaming the whistleblowers.  This is the exact reason why we have existing whistleblower laws.  Questioning Campbell’s credibility through anonymous (or named) sources by equating episodes of drinking and reckless driving to his blowing the whistle on a multi-billion dollar racketeering scam that involved corrupt Russian and American officials is like saying that Susan Atkins should not have been convicted of Sharon Tate’s murder because the actress was once arrested for possession of LSD!

Besides the fact that the drinking in which Campbell was involved could have been induced by what he saw in all this corruption and, after having blown the whistle on the whole operation, nothing was done about it anyway.  Reckless driving?  Did he improperly pass someone on the right?

Exactly what stymied the investigations against Hillary Clinton during Benghazi when we couldn’t get a straight answer about who ordered the stand-down, or when Clinton couldn’t remember through convenient amnesia why she didn’t just surrender the email server to the authorities when they were subpoenaed, is what is throwing roadblocks in the way of this investigation as well.  The ability of the authorities in question to stall while evidence is created, destroyed, or altered is what the Deep State does best.  In this case, it appears that they once again get away with never answering the question, but merely delegitimizing the witness/informant.

Sessions would best be suited by snapping out of the fog that he’s in right now and just going to the mat for team Trump.  This is no longer looking good for the Establishment, no matter how you slice it and it’s best if the embattled AG just ups and admits that.  He cannot protect those he formerly served with and he cannot say that this is the right thing to do when he must qualify statements with ridiculous announcements that don’t hold water.

Time to come clean and do what’s right and good.  Time to open investigations into everything that has been held up to the light and been shown to be infected and decomposing.

Source:  ZeroHedge

Image: Gage Skidmore



Leave a Reply

Pin It on Pinterest