Grassley Exposes Possible DOJ Action Against Clinton In Questioning Sessions

Sen Grassley asked Sessions, “What are you doing to find out how the Russian takeover of the American uranium was allowed to occur despite criminal conduct by the Russian…

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
sessions grassley

Senator Chuck Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, asks Attorney General Sessions some questions about the Clinton Uranium One deal and gives at one  point what may have been an unguarded response that spells trouble for Hillary Clinton and the rest of the criminal Democrats, included Hussein Obama.

Grassley opens his question of Sessions, saying, “According to government documents and recent news reports, the Justice Department had an ongoing criminal investigation for bribery, extortion and money laundering into officials for the Russian company making the purchase of Uranium One.”

He notes, “That purchase was approved during the previous administration and resulted in the Russians owning twenty percent of America’s uranium mining capacity.  What are you doing to find out how the Russian takeover of the American uranium was allowed to occur despite criminal conduct by the Russian company that the Obama administration approved to make the purchase?”

Sessions is very guarded in his response, saying, “Mr. Chairman, we will hear your concerns. The Department of Justice will take such actions as is appropriate, I know. And I would offer that some people have gone to jail in that transaction already, but the article talks about other issues. So without confirming or denying the existence of any particular investigation, I would say I hear your concerns and they will be reviewed.”

That sounds like the statement of someone who has an ongoing investigation to protect, not someone justifying not having taken action. Adding to the intrigue, Grassley says, “I think I know why you’re probably reluctant to go into some detail on that.” Again, if there were no investigation it’s unlikely Grassley would be aware of what prohibits him from going into detail.

He continued, “but I would like to remind you that Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein directly supervised the criminal case when he was US Attorney in Maryland. I don’t think it would be proper for him to supervise a review of his own conduct, do you?”

Sessions makes the somewhat surprising statement that it’s up to Rodentstein to make that determination for himself as to whether or not to recuse himself. It’s a topic that Sessions is familiar with and one in which his track record is not very good.

He suggested that Rosenstein would be consulting with the senior ethics people at the Department. That’s the wrong answer, someone else should at a minimum be called in to review areas in which Rosenstein oversaw the original decision making process. He didn’t hesitate to call in his crony Bob Mueller to take down the President.

Grassley reads a little more, saying, “Reports suggest that the Clinton Foundation received millions of dollars from interested parties from the transaction. Bill Clinton received $500 thousand for a speech in Moscow, June 2010 from a Russian government aligned bank.”

He continues, “The same month as the speech Russia began a uranium acquisition process. This fact pattern raises serious concerns about improper political influence on the process by the Clintons during the Obama administration.”

Grassley asks, “Has the Justice Department fully investigated whether the Russians compromised the Obama administration’s decisions to smooth the way for transactions and if not why not?” In refusing to answer the question, Sessions doesn’t deny that an investigation is ongoing.

He says, “Mr. Chairman, we’re working hard to maintain discipline in the Department. It wouldn’t be appropriate for me to comment on any ongoing investigation.” Is Sessions actually doing something, conducting investigations other than the Clinton email and espionage one that has a mountain of prepared evidence piled up waiting for him to revive it?

There’s subtle little hints indicating that might be the case. Sadly, that is a lot more than we’ve had out of the DOJ in a long, long time.

 

Thank you for reading and sharing my work –  Please look for me, Rick Wells at https://www.facebook.com/RickRWells/, https://gab.ai/RickRWells, https://plus.google.com/u/0/+RickwellsUs and on my website http://RickWells.US  – Please SUBSCRIBE in the right sidebar at RickWells.US, (not dot com), and also follow me on Twitter @RickRWells.

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

3 Comments on Grassley Exposes Possible DOJ Action Against Clinton In Questioning Sessions

  1. I would like to believe that Trump is orchestrating a Michael Corrleone moment. We should soon find out if legislation will favor the swamp or the people, and that should give us a clue.

  2. well.
    it’s always said to NEVER SHOW YOUR HOLE CARD, so maybe AG SESSIONS IS HOLDING HIS CARDS CLOSE TO HIS CHEST?
    but i guess we will have to WAIT AND SEE at this point, but the FBI AND JUSTICE NEEDS A TOTAL SWEEP ESPECIALLY OF THE MUSLIMS HOLD OVERS.

    • I’m stunned that there’s any hold overs. what is wrong w trump? he’s smarter than that, I thought.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*


%d bloggers like this: