Anonymous ID: 3ceba7 Feb. 9, 2019, 7:14 p.m. No.5100349   🗄️.is 🔗kun

"Washington (CNN)A top federal prosecutor in Utah is continuing to investigate allegations that the FBI abused its powers in surveilling a former Trump campaign adviser and should have done more to investigate the Clinton Foundation, according to a source familiar with the matter.

While the Justice Department has not publicly commented on the investigation in almost a year, the source said acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker told former Attorney General Ed Meese during a breakfast meeting in Washington on Wednesday that US Attorney John Huber is continuing his investigation into the wide-ranging allegations.

The meeting was first reported by the AP.

The source said that Whitaker did not provide Meese with any details on Huber's work or his findings – but this is the most recent indication from senior Justice Department leadership that Huber's work is still ongoing.

 

The source could not confirm who first raised the issue at the meeting or why it was being discussed.

In March 2018, amid calls by Republican lawmakers for a second special counsel, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions revealed that Huber was looking into allegations that the FBI abused its powers in surveilling Carter Page, and investigating claims that more should have been done to investigate Hillary Clinton's ties to a Russian nuclear energy agency.

The department has provided no public updates on Huber's work and the source could not confirm to CNN when Huber will finish his investigation, or whether he has been able to substantiate any of the GOP's allegations.

 

Huber wields significant power as a federal prosecutor with the ability to bring charges and convene a grand jury, if necessary.

CNN has reached out to Meese for comment. "

 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/03/politics/whitaker-prosecutor-fbi/index.html

Anonymous ID: 3ceba7 Feb. 9, 2019, 7:15 p.m. No.5100357   🗄️.is 🔗kun

"In his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee Tuesday, Barr was asked about his previous comments regarding Uranium One. “I have no knowledge of Uranium One,” he told lawmakers. “I didn’t particularly think that was necessarily something that should be pursued aggressively. I was trying to make the point that there was a lot out there. I think all that stuff at the time was being looked at by [Utah U.S. Attorney John] Huber.”

 

Huber, tasked by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions, is looking into whether the law enforcement officials ignored allegations of Clinton involved in the sale of American uranium rights.

 

“The point I was trying to make there was that whatever the standard is for launching an investigation, it should be dealt with evenhandedly,” Barr added.

 

Brought to the forefront by Breitbart News senior editor-at-large Peter Schweizer in his New York Times best-selling book, Clinton Cash, the Uranium One scandal refers to an alleged scheme in which then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave Russia control over more than 20% of America’s uranium supply in exchange for $145 million in pledges benefiting the Clinton family and their foundation.

 

Rosatom acquired a majority stake in Uranium One in 2010 and bought the remainder of the company in 2013. Because Uranium One had holdings in American uranium mines, which at the time accounted for about 20 percent of America’s licensed uranium mining capacity, Rosatom’s 2010 purchase had to be approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. Such committee, known as CFIUS, is made up of officials from nine federal agencies, including the State Department. Other agencies represented on the committee include the departments of Treasury, Defense, Commerce, Energy, and Homeland Security and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.

 

In April 2015, The New York Times published an article echoing much of the Schweizer book, including one item that not long after the Russians said they wanted to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, former president Bill Clinton received $500,000 for a speech in Moscow. The speech was paid for by a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin as it promoted Uranium One stock.

 

Canadian financier Frank Giustra, a top Clinton Foundation donor, sold his company, UrAsia, to Uranium One, which was chaired by Ian Telfer, also a Clinton Foundation donor. Giustra has said he sold his stake in the deal in 2007, while Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were vying for the Democratic presidential nomination.

 

According to Schweizer, who also serves as president of the Government Accountability Institute, the FBI, headed up by now special counsel Robert Mueller at the time, appears to have ignored evidence of Russian involvement in the uranium market when they approved the deal in 2010. “There was a megatons program that was designed to, in a sense, help the Russian nuclear industry transition from sort of military-based work to civilian work — a lot of detailed corruption that the FBI tracked in the 1990s and 2000s, so going up to the 2010 approval for Uranium One, it’s really impossible for senior FBI officials, including the director at the time — Mueller — to argue that they are just completely shocked that Uranium One and these kickbacks were taking place. It was widely known,” Schweizer told SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Tonight co-hosts Rebecca Mansour and Joel Pollak last February.

 

The congressional testimony of “Uranium One whistleblower” William Douglas Campbell has led to the convictions of Russian executives tied to Rosatom in 2015 on bribery and money-laundering charges in connection to the Uranium One agreement. “This is a guy who was an FBI witness. It’s known that the Russians were paying him $50,000 a month to do work for them, and some of that work included, according to his job description, setting up meetings with high-level ranking U.S. officials. That’s all not in dispute,” Schweizer said of Campbell. “So this is a guy that certainly was there. The FBI found him credible. He got FBI executives thrown into jail, and they eventually pleaded guilty to a variety of charges, including bribery and kickbacks. So you can’t dismiss, as some Clinton defenders want to, this whistleblower as if he has no credibility because he was there.”

 

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/01/16/william-barr-in-2017-doj-abdicating-its-responsibility-by-ignoring-clinton-uranium-deal-in-favor-of-russia-collusion/

Anonymous ID: 3ceba7 Feb. 9, 2019, 7:24 p.m. No.5100526   🗄️.is 🔗kun

"Remember when D's and the FAKE NEWS media [+FAKEWOOD] pushed mass fear that POTUS would start WWIII re: North Korea?

POTUS PEACE on the Korean P > NO further missile tests or U enrichment.

New narrative created.

Refusal to provide coverage of successes.

Remember when D's and the FAKE NEWS media [+FAKEWOOD] pushed a stock market collapse if POTUS was elected?

POTUS E + policies largest gains recorded in market's history

New narrative created.

Refusal to provide coverage of successes.

[Use FED to inc rates to counter growth and project POTUS blame]

Remember when D's and the FAKE NEWS media [+FAKEWOOD] pushed complete economic collapse if POTUS was elected?

POTUS E + policies lowest unemployment records in history + record jobs/GDP growth

New narrative created.

Refusal to provide coverage of successes.

[Deploy and use 'racism' 'sexism' and every other ….'ism' to counter potential Black/Hispanic pop support]

Why do D's and the FAKE NEWS media [+FAKEWOOD] continually push the 'IMPEACH' narrative if impeachment requires 2/3rd SENATE VOTE TO ENACT (odds of that?)?

Do they push this FAKE NARRATIVE to project a supposed 'supportable w/ evidence' wrongdoing to their BASE (confirmation bias)?

Accusations never supported by facts?" -Q

Anonymous ID: 3ceba7 Feb. 9, 2019, 7:44 p.m. No.5100893   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>5100768

Hey, I was working on a theory that Q took over a fake news site to get news out.

Back then I didn't know how Q worked, kek

At the time, the site was putting up same stories Anons were talking about.

However, their name was so bad Anons would immediately shoot them down.

Also, some articles were very suspicious.

I assumed Newswire was half-real, half-fake or some percentage.

Left it behind after awhile.

I noticed it change names but haven't keeping up with their stories.