Uranium One informant says Moscow paid millions in bid to influence Clinton

by Brooke Singman
February 8, 2018

An FBI informant involved in the controversial Uranium One deal has told congressional committees that Moscow paid millions to a U.S. lobbying firm in a bid to influence then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by helping former President Bill Clinton’s charities during the Obama administration.

The Hill first reported late Wednesday that informant Douglas Campbell gave a 10-page statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee, House Intelligence Committee and House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and was interviewed for several hours behind closed doors by committee staff.

In the statement, obtained by Fox News, Campbell said Russian executives told him that Moscow was hiring APCO Worldwide in an effort to influence the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton.

Campbell said Russian nuclear officials “told me at various times that they expected APCO to apply a portion of the $3 million annual lobbying fee it was receiving from the Russians to provide in-kind support for the Clinton’s Global Initiative.”

7 Comments - what are your thoughts?

  • bobnstuff says:

    Real news outlets have a different story on this. The AG has said that Foxes hero is a known liar and says there is not truth in the accusations against Clinton.

    1. Navy Bob says:

      Ask your “real news outlets” and the FORMER AG why the FBI continued to pay thousands of taxpayers dollars to this person if they knew he was a lair. Ask why they used his information in the past to get search and wire tap warrants if he was a known liar. That’s right…if the FORMER AG and her Just-Us Department used lies against Trump to get a warrant, so it MUST be oaky, right? And since when do liberals want truth in accusations? Any truth in Dick Durbin’s allegation about what he heard Trump say? Any evidence of Russian collusion, except between Obama, Clinton and the Russians? Go back to your “real” news services and enjoy the stories from porn actresses, those stories about MLK busts missing and the rest of the PROVEN LIES the “real” news outlets like to push, only to be repeated by mindless worms.

      1. Maxx says:

        That’s right. The porn star named Stormy (?) actually came forward and denied anything ever happened. She said she had to come forward because it was pure B.S. and she needed to set the record straight. I believe her before I would believe any democommie slug.

        1. bobnstuff says:

          Stormy got a very big check to change her story. It was the present AG that said the story was a whole lot of nothing. I find it funny that you will except a story from a guy whit on reliability but not one who has a long history of being trusted. I guess you believe what you want not what is true. The Uranium One story doesn’t even make sense since Clinton didn’t sign off on it personally and had no great amount of power in the deal.

          1. Navy Bob says:

            Before you make up a tory, check the facts. The porn actress got the check BEFORE Trump was running for President. she had the check BEFORE the story broke in the press. She had the check YEARS BEFORE she set the story straight. Like the lies about Trump Jr. getting the codes for Wikileaks which proved to be much ado about nothing, get your story straight before you try to follow up the lies of your queen.

            As for your belief that Hillary “…didn’t sign off on it personally and had no great amount of power in the deal.” as usual, only partially right. As Sec State, she DID have to “sign off” on the sale or her master in the WH would not have approved it. While she did not approve the sale, she sure DID sign off on it. And her support of the deal amazingly changed AFTER Bill was paid a handsome some for one of his speaking engagements, money that was easily connected to the Russians. Suppose we are looking at the wrong campaign for “Russian Collusion”??

  • Dee says:

    The Clinton And Obama Crime families are coming to light ! Oh what a tangled web we weave , when we try to decieve !

  • Navy Bob says:

    According to the democrats, this is not a “creditable” allegation. The person making the statement has been paid by the FBI for information for years. They have paid him thousands of taxpayer dollars for his information.. Yet now that he is “leaking” information about the Clinton Crime family, he is no longer “creditable”. This coming from democrats who race to believe any/repeat any story attributed to “anonymous sources”, “unnamed officials”, or anything they, but no one else, heard the President say. Maybe if this informant had said he never heard Hillary or Billary take a bribe he would hold on to his “creditability” with the Democrats, even if he had to lie to keep this form of “Democrat Creditability”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Keep the Fake News Media in check.

Don’t let the MSM censor your news as America becomes Great Again. Over 500,000 Americans receive our daily dose of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness along with Breaking News direct to their inbox—and you can too. Sign up to receive news and views from The 1776Coalition!

We know how important your privacy is and your information is SAFE with us. We’ll never sell
your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time directly from your inbox.
View our full privacy policy.