News flash: Hillary Clinton did NOT participate in a 'pay-for-play' scheme with Russia

During the long and divisive 2016 Presidential campaign, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton was given the nasty nickname "Crooked Hillary" by then-candidate Donald Trump and his followers.

The former First Lady, ex-Senator from New York, and President Barack Obama's first Secretary of State was hit by broadsides from all sides from the moment that she announced her candidacy in April of 2015 all the way to Election Day last November. The criticism covered a wide range of issues, including the use of a private email server during her stint at the State Department, her handling (or mishandling) of a terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, and even wacko stories about her knowledge that the Democratic Party was running a child-sex ring out of several restaurants in the U.S.

One story in particular that was disseminated by the alt-right during the election was an accusation that Clinton benefited from a uranium deal with Russia while she was Secretary of State.

In a nutshell, this is the allegation made by Peter Schweizer, an editor-at-large for Breitbart (you know, the same right-wing news outlet that Steve Bannon used to run) and a former William J. Casey Research Fellow at the Hoover Institute:

 Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's approval of a deal to transfer control of 20% of U.S. uranium deposits to a Russian company was a quid pro quo exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation. 

Schweizer, who has also co-written two novels with former Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger and the well-received non-fiction book Reagan's War, made this allegation in his 2015 book Clinton Cash. 

Per the fact-checking website Snopes: 

A chapter in the book suggests that the Clinton family and Russia each may have benefited from a “pay-for-play” scheme while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, involving the transfer of U.S. uranium reserves to the new Russian owners of an international mining operation in exchange for $145 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation.

The mining company, Uranium One, was originally based in South Africa, but merged in 2007 with Canada-based UrAsia Energy. Shareholders there retained a controlling interest until 2010, when Russia’s nuclear agency, Rosatom, completed purchase of a 51% stake. Hillary Clinton played a part in the transaction because it involved the transfer of ownership of a material deemed important to national security — uranium, amounting to one-fifth of U.S. reserves — thus requiring the approval of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), on which the U.S. Secretary of State sits.

During the same time frame that the acquisition took place, Schweizer claims in Clinton Cash, the Clinton Foundation accepted contributions from nine individuals associated with Uranium One totaling more than $100 million

According to Snopes , Schweizer's claims were accepted as fact by the Trump campaign. Mr. Trump seized on the allegation - he even referred to it in a campaign speech on June 16, 2016:

"Hillary Clinton’s State Department approved the transfer of 20% of America’s uranium holdings to Russia, while nine investors in the deal funneled $145 million to the Clinton Foundation."

The Republican candidate repeated this allegation several times in his campaign ads, too.  

As it turns out, Schweizer's book was fact-checked by several organizations, including the non-partisan website FactCheck.org and the Pulitzer Prize-winning Politifact. FactCheck.org investigated the Clinton-uranium deal claim and found it to be inaccurate. 

This is what FactCheck.org had to say about the allegations in Clinton Cash:

The author of “Clinton Cash” falsely claimed Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State had “veto power” and “could have stopped” Russia from buying a company with extensive uranium mining operations in the U.S. In fact, only the president has such power.

At the time of the sale, Clinton was a member of the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States, which is required by law to investigate all U.S. transactions that involve a company owned or controlled by a foreign government. Federal guidelines say any one of nine voting members of the committee can object to such a foreign transaction, but the final decision then rests with the president.

“Only the President has the authority to suspend or prohibit a covered transaction,” the guidelines say.

Through a spokeswoman, author Peter Schweizer told us he meant that Clinton could have forced the issue to the president’s desk. But that’s not what he said when he appeared on “Fox News Sunday,” where he discussed the uranium deal and his upcoming book to be released on May 5.

To be fair, the Clinton Foundation did receive large donations from the former owner of the company- Uranium One - that was bought by the Russian energy conglomerate Rosatom. Frank Giustra, who founded Uranium One, donated $131.3 million to the foundation. But, as Snopes points out:

Giustra sold off his entire stake in the company in 2007, three years before the Russia deal and at least 18 months before Clinton became secretary of state. 

The Clinton Foundation could have avoided this headache by having more transparency regarding donations such as those made by Frank Giustra.

As Snopes fact-checker David Emery notes:

"The foundation admitted this shortcoming and pledged to correct it, but as the Guardian pointed out in its May 2015 discussion of Clinton Cash, the fact that it happened is reason enough to sound alarm bells:

"It is also true that large donations to the foundation from the chairman of Uranium One, Ian Telfer, at around the time of the Russian purchase of the company and while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, were never disclosed to the public. The multimillion sums were channeled through a subsidiary of the Clinton Foundation, CGSCI, which did not reveal its individual donors.

"Such awkward collisions between Bill’s fundraising activities and Hillary’s public service have raised concerns not just among those who might be dismissed as part of a vast right-wing conspiracy."

It's stuff like this that makes me dislike President Trump and his supporters, especially those that get their news from Breitbart and other conservative-leaning websites.

Sources:

http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/04/no-veto-power-for-clinton-on-uranium-deal/

http://blog.ceo.ca/2015/04/23/statement-of-frank-giustra/