Crime FBI Raid Home Of Whistleblower in Hillary Clinton's Uranium One Scandal, Ignore Protection Laws

Biased. All of the "fact check" sites are biased one way or another.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/politifact/

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blog...inds-fact-checkers-biased-against-republicans

When even left leaning NPR is calling you out, you have issues.

The article isn't calling into question the accuracy of Politifacts findings during a 4 month period and Factcheck.org again a source with more credibility than you or Fox News comes to the same conclusion:

We covered it during the 2016 presidential campaign, when Donald Trump falsely accused former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of giving away U.S. uranium rights to the Russians and claimed — without evidence — that it was done in exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation.

Uranium One also has exploration projects in Arizona, Colorado and Utah.

But the deal required multiple approvals by the U.S., beginning with the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States. Under federal law, the committee reviews foreign investments that raise potential national security concerns.
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/10/facts-uranium-one/

The UK based Independent comes to the very same conclusion.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...s-it-true-truth-explained-obama-a8030116.html

Stop embarrassing yourself with these ridiculous conspiracy theories.
 
Some choose to follow the Russia hoaxes, some follow Uranium One.
I would like to know why WTC 7 collapsed from fire. Never sat well with me since 2006-7.
Fire can't melt steel beams! You tell em Rosie
 
The article isn't calling into question the accuracy of Politifacts findings during a 4 month period and Factcheck.org again a source with more credibility than you or Fox News comes to the same conclusion:.

Straws, reach far for them to maintain clinging only to things that fit your narrow-minded view.
 
Not everything posted here is partisan commentary. Sometimes its just a bleak appraisal of the fact that the rich and powerful dont often actually suffer any real consequences for their actions regardless of how noteworthy one may feel their scandals are.

As for the EU, that was just a matter of time and pressure.


<DontBelieve1>
 
Yup straws called evidence from credible sources not that you would know anything about that.
Btw Snopes also comes to the same conclusion.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/

Hilarious...even FactCheck says "everyone who goes to Snopes.com for “the bottom line facts” should “proceed with caution.”" lol...

https://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/snopescom/

Or how about this one where Snopes doesnt even come out on top of the DAILY-MAIL...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevl...fact-checking-the-fact-checkers/#fc09e11227f8

If you were attempting to take the retard of the day award away from hillelslovak87, you may have succeeded.
 
Hilarious...even FactCheck says "everyone who goes to Snopes.com for “the bottom line facts” should “proceed with caution.”" lol...

https://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/snopescom/

Or how about this one where Snopes doesnt even come out on top of the DAILY-MAIL...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevl...fact-checking-the-fact-checkers/#fc09e11227f8

If you were attempting to take the retard of the day award away from hillelslovak87, you may have succeeded.
The Washington Post comes to the same conclusion as the rest:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ercent-of-our-uranium/?utm_term=.afe1c0098d04
Again a source much more credible than you or Fox News. Pleas stop doing this to yourself, you aren't very good at this game.
 
Forbes another source more credible than you or Fox News reaches the same conclusion:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesc...scandal-are-a-real-empty-barrel/#29927d697b55

You keep saying "Better than you or Fox" when I havent given anything from Fox and in fact, give the same things you do...you give a Forbes link to counter a Forbes link while I also give a link from the site you are defending as trustworthy saying that another site you are using cant be trusted. You are the very definition of a brain-dead twat.

Hilarious...even FactCheck says "everyone who goes to Snopes.com for “the bottom line facts” should “proceed with caution.”" lol...

https://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/snopescom/

Or how about this one where Snopes doesnt even come out on top of the DAILY-MAIL...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/12/22/the-daily-mail-snopes-story-and-fact-checking-the-fact-checkers/#fc09e11227f8

If you were attempting to take the retard of the day award away from hillelslovak87, you may have succeeded.

Keep retarding away bro.
 
If it wasn't for the Right's obsession with Hillary, I'd happily have forgotten she was a thing.... much like other failed presidential contenders. Instead, I am treated to weekly reminders that a solid 5th of this country is lost in a world of faux conspiracies and the oddest type of misogyny and paranoia.

Legit, I don't care about this story, but I can believe the FBI and Clinton aren't great people.... but holy crap you guys are so focused on her and the spins into insanity regarding high-level conspiracy.
 
Hilarious...even FactCheck says "everyone who goes to Snopes.com for “the bottom line facts” should “proceed with caution.”" lol...

.

"We think that’s terrific advice, not just in connection with material on Snopes but for practically anything a reader finds online — including articles on FactCheck.org. The very reason we list our sources (as does Snopes.com) and provide links is so that readers can check things out for themselves."
 
You keep saying "Better than you or Fox" when I havent given anything from Fox and in fact, give the same things you do...you give a Forbes link to counter a Forbes link while I also give a link from the site you are defending as trustworthy saying that another site you are using cant be trusted. You are the very definition of a brain-dead twat.



Keep retarding away bro.

You keep screaming at people, calling them retards. Did you even read the factcheck.org page you linked? It operates in opposition to your assertions about snopes........
 
You keep screaming at people, calling them retards. Did you even read the factcheck.org page you linked? It operates in opposition to your assertions about snopes........

Incorrect cunt, the quote from MilesAbove comes after what I quoted...how the fuck are you so stupid you think their saying proceed with caution applies to everyone, somehow refutes the entire article, which is about Snopes being wrong.

Again, you are a retard of epic proportions.
 
"We think that’s terrific advice, not just in connection with material on Snopes but for practically anything a reader finds online — including articles on FactCheck.org. The very reason we list our sources (as does Snopes.com) and provide links is so that readers can check things out for themselves."

And? I know that comes at the end...they are saying to take everything online with caution after a long article about Snopes being wrong about some things. This does not refute what I said, or what the entirety of the article is saying.
 
You keep saying "Better than you or Fox" when I havent given anything from Fox and in fact, give the same things you do...you give a Forbes link to counter a Forbes link while I also give a link from the site you are defending as trustworthy saying that another site you are using cant be trusted. You are the very definition of a brain-dead twat.



Keep retarding away bro.
Speaking of retard I've been doing nothing but presenting credible source and you of course gave gone your usual jackass mode. Give it a break.
 
Incorrect cunt, the quote from MilesAbove comes after what I quoted...how the fuck are you so stupid you think their saying proceed with caution applies to everyone, somehow refutes the entire article, which is about Snopes being wrong.

Again, you are a retard of epic proportions.

You clearly did not read what you linked. It is also quite funny how petulantly mad you're getting. The grammar, too. Please reply.
PleasantSparseDassie-size_restricted.gif
 
You clearly did not read what you linked. It is also quite funny how petulantly mad you're getting. The grammar, too. Please reply.
PleasantSparseDassie-size_restricted.gif

You can pretend it doesnt say things all you want, you are only fooling yourself and other retards that believe what they want, everyone else that looks at it will see you are lying.

Also lol at pretending to take the moral high road because words offended your ears and grammar nazi also? lol, you are clearly the one being too serious and you should give me back my popcorn bitch.

<codychoke>
 
You can pretend it doesnt say things all you want, you are only fooling yourself and other retards that believe what they want, everyone else that looks at it will see you are lying.

Also lol at pretending to take the moral high road because words offended your ears and grammar nazi also? lol, you are clearly the one being too serious and you should give me back my popcorn bitch.

<codychoke>

People, unlike you hopefully, can read the links you brought. People can also see the absurdity in your position, given the contents of said link.

I am not taking the moral high ground. My view is that if one wants to articulate their point, they should not do so while sounding like a bleating pig, or orangutan on a word processor. I am sorry if this offends your delicate sensibilities.

Why are you so angry? If you don't calm down, you might explode, and this would surely get you kicked out of the trailer park.

coy.gif
 
Cliffs: This appears to be a classic case of whistleblower retaliation by the FBI that occurred on Nov. 19th/2018.

- The whistleblower gave the DOJ Inspector General (Michael Horowitz) evidence against the Clinton Foundation to do with Uranium One. The DOJ Inspector's job is to find wrong-doing in the FBI.

- 16 FBI agents raid the home of Dennis Cain on Nov. 19th/2018, spend about 6 hours there. Cain is forthright with the copied evidence he has and hands it over. They still search his house.

- Whistleblowers are supposed to be protected by the government when they hand over information. They have protected status under the law.

Senator Grassley brought up several questions with regard to this FBI agent raid:

1. Why was Cain's house raided?
2. Did the FBI know about Cain's discovery?
3. Are the documents considered protected?
4. Did the FBI seize any classified information?

Analyst Luke Rosiak concludes wrong-doing on multiple accounts. The raid implies that a) that the Clintons violated the law in relation to their foundation and Uranium One, b) the FBI knew about that, or at least had strong evidence of illegality and didn't act on it, c) Robert Mueller was head of the FBI at the time this occurred which suggest bias now in his current role as special counsel, and d) the strong action taken on the Whistleblower, or the cover-up of the cover-up (no word on why they searched his house and didn't arrest him after already accepting the copy of what was turned over to Michael Horowitz). Luke further concludes that Mueller really now has to make this stuff go away because it shows the FBI didn't act on known Clinton information before.

People on both the right and the left are concerned today (yesterday the 6th) about the FBI's abuse of authority and clear Whistleblower retaliation.

- The judge in this case hasn't disclosed the warrant, so it's unknown if the FBI told the judge if they knew this guy was a protected Whistleblower, or was it a similar situation to the misleading of the FISA court to obtain the warrant against Trump.

- This Whistleblower DID follow the proper procedure in handing over the information to the Inspector General of the DOJ, Michael Horowitz, who then turned this information over to the House Intelligence committee and the Senate.

Clarifying concern of Mueller's complicit part in this all, is, what if Clinton campaign illegality is getting so difficult to further cover up (now, particularly with these new Whistleblower documents that were released to Republicans and Democrats alike), that Bob has to send an FBI raid to cleanup further.

Finally, the analyst and hostess agree, that these Uranium One documents should likely be released to the public.



https://dailycaller.com/2018/11/29/fbi-whistleblower-clinton-uranium/

BTW, in the first couple of pages of Google search results, not one link to CNN, MSNBC, ABC or any other mainstream media source outside of FOX. This clearly shows MSM bias.

*edit - further info from dailycaller link:

"FBI agents raided the home of a recognized Department of Justice whistleblower who privately delivered documents pertaining to the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One to a government watchdog, according to the whistleblower’s attorney.

The Justice Department’s inspector general was informed that the documents show that federal officials failed to investigate potential criminal activity regarding former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation and Rosatom, the Russian company that purchased Uranium One, a document reviewed by The Daily Caller News Foundation alleges.

The delivered documents also show that then-FBI Director Robert Mueller failed to investigate allegations of criminal misconduct pertaining to Rosatom and to other Russian government entities attached to Uranium One, the document reviewed by TheDCNF alleges. Mueller is now the special counsel investigating whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia during the 2016 election.

“The bureau raided my client to seize what he legally gave Congress about the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One,” the whistleblower’s lawyer, Michael Socarras, told TheDCNF, noting that he considered the FBI’s raid to be an “outrageous disregard” of whistleblower protections. (RELATED: FBI Takes Aim At The Clinton Foundation)

Sixteen agents arrived at the home of Dennis Nathan Cain, a former FBI contractor, on the morning of Nov. 19 and raided his Union Bridge, Maryland, home, Socarras told TheDCNF.

The raid was permitted by a court order signed on Nov. 15 by federal magistrate Stephanie A. Gallagher in the U.S. District Court for Baltimore and obtained by TheDCNF.

A special agent from the FBI’s Baltimore division, who led the raid, charged that Cain possessed stolen federal property and demanded entry to his private residence, Socarras told TheDCNF.

“On Nov. 19, the FBI conducted court authorized law enforcement activity in the Union Bridge, Maryland area,” bureau spokesman Dave Fitz told TheDCNF. “At this time, we have no further comment.”

Cain informed the agent while he was still at the door that he was a recognized protected whistleblower under the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act and that Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz recognized his whistleblower status, according to Socarras.

Cain further told the FBI agent the potentially damaging classified information had been properly transmitted to the Senate and House Intelligence committees as permitted under the act, Socarras said. The agent immediately directed his agents to begin a sweep of the suburban home, anyway.

Frightened and intimidated, Cain promptly handed over the documents, Socarras told TheDCNF. Yet even after surrendering the information to the FBI, the agents continued to rummage through the home for six hours.

“After asking and getting my approval to do so, DOJ IG Michael Horowitz had a member of his staff physically take Mr. Cain’s classified document disclosure to the House and Senate Intelligence committees,” Socarras told TheDCNF.

“For the bureau to show up at Mr. Cain’s home suggesting that those same documents are stolen federal property, and then proceed to seize copies of the same documents after being told at the house door that he is a legally protected whistleblower who gave them to Congress, is an outrageous disregard of the law,” he continued.

Cain came across the potentially explosive information while working for an FBI contractor, Socarras told TheDCNF."

>
"The two law enforcement officials directed the documents be sent to the Senate and House Intelligence committees for their examination, according to Socarras, who said that a high-level IG official hand-delivered the documents to the the two intelligence committees.

“I cannot believe the Bureau informed the federal magistrate who approved the search warrant that they wanted to search the home of an FBI whistleblower to seize the information that he confidentially disclosed to the IG and Congress,” Socarras told TheDCNF.

The whistleblower act is intended to protect whistleblowers within the intelligence community, which includes the FBI.

“The [intelligence community] is committed to providing its personnel the means to report violations of law,” according to a 2016 intelligence community directive.

“The [whistleblower act] authorizes employees of contractors to take government property and give it to the two intelligence committees confidentially,” Socarras told TheDCNF.

The FBI has yet to talk to Cain’s attorney despite the raid, according to Socarras.

“After the raid, and having received my name and phone number from Mr. Cain as his lawyer, an FBI agent actually called my client directly to discuss his seized electronics,” Socarras told TheDCNF. “Knowingly bypassing the lawyer of a represented client is serious misconduct.”

The Justice Department and the IG both declined to comment."


Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think a former contractor should be in possession of classified documents.

Pretty hard to claim it's retaliation if he in fact had the documents.
 
Back
Top