In my last three parts on the Uranium One story, which you can read here, I laid out the saga of how the Russian government came to own nearly 20% of America’s uranium reserves. I believe that I presented the facts as near as they could be collected, and presented them fairly. As I read through the essays, I asked myself if the readers would be able to ascertain what actions broke US law. In that regard, I now want to point to where laws may have been broken.
In part 1 of the saga I laid out the case exactly how Frank Giustra was able to acquire the mining rights to three large mines in Kazakhstan, worth billions, which was the first step in creating the Canadian company, Uranium One. Were any laws broken? Certainly, it is a fact that Kazakh laws were broken. Even though Mr. Ablyazov has not faced justice in Kazakhstan, he was tried, in absentia, for illegally selling the Kazakh assets of uranium rights to Urasia, and sentenced to 22 years in prison. If you will recall, he fled Kazakhstan to France, where France decided not to extradite him to Kazakhstan. He lives free today in France. But were any US laws broken? I am not a lawyer, or educated in US law as it pertains to contracts and corporate purchases. It is a fact that Bill Clinton flew to Kazakhstan and met with Mr. Ablyazov weeks before the deal was consummated. This meeting was long before Mr. Ablyazov was arrested and long before his criminality was prosecuted. All I can say is Mr. Clinton is no dummy. He should have known the kind of man he was dealing with. That said, there is a tactic used in business called “plausible deniability”. Mr. Clinton can certainly claim he didn’t know anything about Mr. Ablyazov, or his criminal behavior. All we can hope to gather is why he met with him at all? I suspect that this is not a provable crime.
The next part where criminality must be looked at, is the lack of prosecution of Mr. Mikerin in the bribery, extortion, and money laundering investigation, that was going on from 2009 until 2014, when Mr. Mikerin 
was finally arrested, tried and convicted. Why did it take 5 years after the investigation was started……5 years? If I did not see a pattern in this case, I could only conclude that the FBI simply hadn’t collected enough evidence. But there is a pattern. In all that time Hillary Clinton was SOS. Certainly, every Clinton supporter will howel….coincidence! In one of my past blogs, I wrote about a man named Gilbert Chagoury. Mr. Chagoury was judged to be aiding terrorists, and thus, the state department was asked by the intelligence community to place Mr. Chagoury on the terrorist list. Hillary Clinton was SOS at the time, and ignored the request during her entire tenure. Again, in 2014, when she left, Mr.Chagoury was placed on the terrorist list. The pattern is that Mr. Chagoury is one of the largest contributors to the Clinton Foundation, just as Mr. Giustra is the largest contributor. Once again, no provable crime, yet the appearance of pay for play, while criminal behavior is being conducted is unmistakable.
Then there’s the actual approval given to Rosatom in their purchase of Uranium One. Even though Uranium One was a Canadian company, it was well known that Uranium One held American assets in uranium production. This information was known well before Russia initially purchased a majority stake, and also when they purchased the entire company. Just why approval was given is a mystery. There was similar outrage by congress, when Dubai attempted to take control of a US port. That sale was eventually blocked by CFIUS. In late January, of 2016, the CFIUS blocked a Chinese-backed private equity firm’s proposed $3 billion purchase of the lighting unit of Philips, a Dutch company, citing “unforeseen concerns.” Last summer, China Resources, a giant state-owned conglomerate, was forced to rescind its $23 billion offer for Micron, the U.S. memory chip manufacturer, because of worries that the deal would not clear the CFIUS review.
In February this year, Fairchild Semiconductor International, a Silicon Valley pioneer, turned down a $2.5 billion offer by another Chinese state-owned entity because of the near certainty that the CFIUS would veto the deal. Getting CFIUS approval is fairly common. I reported that in its 29 year history, CFIUS has only blocked 15 sales, while 114 have been withdrawn from consideration, out of the 2380 cases that have been considered. But certainly, uranium acquisition is far different than lighting technology? One thing different about the Uranium One purchase is the flow of money to the Clinton Foundation from Russia and directors of the company. Again, part of a pattern of pay for play. And in case I didn’t make it clear in the saga of Uranium One, Bill Clinton and Frank Giustra created CGEP.
(Clinton-Giustra Enterprise Partnership) A Canadian arm of the Clinton Foundation, where foreign donors do not have to be disclosed. Literally, billions of dollars flowed into the CGEP from Criminal and State donors, then funneled that money to the Clinton Foundation. A pure case of money laundering. I think if we had access to that donor list, we could get a much clearer picture of the pattern of corruption conducted by Bill and Hillary Clinton.
Last but not final, is the pardon of Marc Rich by Bill Clinton in 1999, and the $100 million Donated by Denise Rich. Did Bill Clinton sell a pardon? In 1999 you might have easily concluded no…..but after you see the pattern, today you might see it differently. Marc Rich and his company, Glencore, made may deals just like the one Giustra made, many times breaking the law. Its why he was a fugitive, and why, I think, Bill Clinton pardoned him. Adding to the intrigue was finding out that Frank Giustra not only enlisted the assistance of Bill Clinton, but also a man named Sergei Kirzin, a former employee of Marc Rich. Then there’s, shall we say, “unsavory characters” Bill Clinton considers friends, and known criminals and thugs he met with, while millions flowed into his charity. Men like Muchtar Ablyazov, Grigori Lutchansky, Marc Lasky, Viktor Vekselberg, and Alvaro Uribe. And then to find that Sergai Kirzin, a former employee of Mark Rich worked with Frank Giustra to close the deal in Kazakhstan, was just stunning.
So it doesn’t go unsaid. Pay for Play is a form of bribery and it is illegal. It has always been hard to prove, because one must show a quid pro quo. That is, a case must be made that an unrelated payment was made “in exchange” for an unrelated overt act. Because these types of criminality never have signed contracts or agreements in writing, often the proof is in a pattern of behavior. I think that’s exactly what we have discovered.
KenGeorge.org 