Image 01 Image 03

Uranium One Informant: Russia Hired Lobbying Firm to Influence Hillary, Obama Admin

Uranium One Informant: Russia Hired Lobbying Firm to Influence Hillary, Obama Admin

“I was speechless and angry in October 2010 when CFIUS approved the Uranium One sale to Rosatom.”

An undercover FBI informant spoke to Congress about the Uranium One controversy, which included accusations that the Russians paid American lobbying firm APCO Worldwide to influence former President Barack Obama’s administration…especially Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

From The Hill:

The informant, Douglas Campbell, said in the statement obtained by The Hill that he was told by Russian nuclear executives that Moscow had hired the American lobbying firm APCO Worldwide specifically because it was in position to influence the Obama administration, and more specifically Hillary Clinton.

Democrats have cast doubt on Campbell’s credibility, setting the stage for a battle with Republicans over his testimony.

Campbell added in the testimony that 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 Clintons’ Global Initiative.”

“The contract called for four payments of $750,000 over twelve months. APCO was expected to give assistance free of charge to the Clinton Global Initiative as part of their effort to create a favorable environment to ensure the Obama administration made affirmative decisions on everything from Uranium One to the U.S.-Russia Civilian Nuclear Cooperation agreement.”

Campbell’s written statement also confirmed what sources told The Hill in previous reports such as the Obama admin “making decisions that ended up benefitting the Russian nuclear industry, which he said was seeking to build a monopoly in the global uranium market to help President Vladimir Putin seek a geopolitical advantage over the United States.”

He witnessed Russians boasting during “vodka-fueled meetings” that the U.S. is weak and basically gave away the uranium industry. has more:

“The Russians expressed a sense of urgency to secure new U.S. uranium business because they knew that the two-decades-old ‘Megatons to Megawatts’ program would cease in 2013,” Campbell said. “Then Russia would no longer be guarantedd a market to sell recycled nuclear warhead materials as peaceful reactor fuel in the United States. I gathered evidence for the FBI by moving closer and closer to the Russians’ key nuclear industry players, including those inside the United States and high-ranking Russian officials who would visit.”

Campbell could not believe that the admin approved the sale:

“I was speechless and angry in October 2010 when CFIUS approved the Uranium One sale to Rosatom. I was deeply worried that TLI continued to transport sensitive uranium despite the fact that it had been compromised by the bribery scheme,” stated Campbell in his testimony to lawmakers. “I expressed these conserns repeatedly to my FBI handlers. The response I got was that ‘politics’ was somehow involved. I remember one response I got from an agent when I asked how it was possible CFIUS would approve the Uranium One sale when the FBI could prove Rosatom was engaged in criminal conduct. His answer: ‘Ask your politics.'”

Denials and Democrat Backlash

APCO officials reached out to The Hill to deny Campbell’s accusations. The company insisted that its support with the Clinton foundation did not have anything to do with their work with Russia. Instead, the company lobbying for Russia involved “regulatory issues aimed at helping Russia better compete for nuclear fuel contracts inside the United States.”

Of course the Clinton family denies any wrongdoing:

“Just yesterday the committee made clear that this secret informant charade was just that, a charade. Along with the widely debunked text-message-gate and Nunes’ embarrassing memo episode, we have a trifecta of GOP-manufactured scandals designed to distract from their own President’s problems and the threat to democracy he poses,” [Clinton spokesman Nick] Merrill said.

Democrats have also come to save the Clintons, but the Republicans have reminded everyone that the FBI obviously found Campbell’s information credible because they paid him $50,000 in 2016.

Previous Reports

The Hill broke Campbell’s story back in October, but he could not speak due to a confidentiality agreement. He claimed he witnessed “conversations and transactions” within the Russian nuclear industry about influencing the Clintons to grab the Canadian company Uranium One.

Cambell worked as an undercover agent in Russia’s nuclear industry with the country’s main nuclear energy company Rosatom’s Tenex subsidiary.

His records refer to the FBI informant as “confidential source 1,” “contractor,” and “Victim 1.” Toensing said this man is her client. It also shows that her client went to the FBI in 2009 “after Russian officials asked him to engage in illegal activity.”

The FBI allowed the informant to hand out “kickback payments to the Russians” as he gathered other evidence.

The Hill heard from sources that this informant led the government “to crack a multimillion dollar racketeering scheme by Russian nuclear officials on U.S. soil that involved bribery, kickbacks, money laundering and extortion.” This led to an executive to expand the nuclear business, an executive at a U.S. trucking firm, and Russian financier from New Jersey to plead “guilty to various crimes in a case that started in 2009 and ended in late 2015.”

The documents that the informant has shows connections between the Clintons and Obama:

The information the client possesses includes specific allegations that Russian executives made to him about how they facilitated the Obama administration’s 2010 approval of the Uranium One deal and sent millions of dollars in Russian nuclear funds to the U.S. to an entity assisting Bill Clinton’s foundation. At the time, Hillary Clinton was serving as secretary of State on the government panel that approved the deal, the lawyer said.

It has been previously reported that Bill Clinton accepted $500,000 in Russian speaking fees in 2010 and collected millions more in donations for his foundation from parties with a stake in the Uranium One deal, transactions that both the Clintons and the Obama administration denied had any influence on the approval.

Federal law requires officials such as then-Secretary Clinton to avoid both conflicts of interest and the appearance of conflicts when it comes to the business and financial interests of a spouse. Clinton signed a special agreement when she became secretary to disclose her husband’s charitable donations to the State Department to avoid any such conflicts. Both Clintons have repeatedly insisted no donations raised by the foundation ever influenced her decisions.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


paid American lobbying firm APCO Worldwide to influence

My God a lobbyist was paid to influence a politician to do something that was not in the greater interest of the American People! Hang that lobbyist! Hang that politician!

Let’s get the ones who rolled back environment regulations that protect our water and air. Let get the ones who keep our drug prices high! Let’s get the ones who got the FDA to approve the widespread dissemination of Oxycontin! Let’s get the one who get us to buy military equipment like the F-35 that don’t work and can’t win a dog fight against an F-16!

Lets get every single lobbyist. If only we knew where they hang out and where they do business. If only we knew which politicians acted for the benefit of the lobbyist’s clients and against the interests of the people.

If only!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Tom Servo in reply to YellowSnake. | February 8, 2018 at 3:30 pm

    When a poster comes to this website, and their only goal is to shit all over an article that one of the established writers here has put a lot of good work into, isn’t it about time for that poster to be banned?

    Especially when that’s the only thing that poster does on any thread? This isn’t enhancing “conversation” – this is just a malicious attempt to disrupt the authors on this site, and there’s no reason for anyone to be forced to put up with it.

    It’s a little different when it concerns nuclear weapons, Yellow Dog. Empowering our enemies with The Bomb is direct treason.

      YellowSnake in reply to luagha. | February 8, 2018 at 3:58 pm

      It has nothing to do with nuclear weapons! We have plenty of military grade uranium. Apparently you know nothing about the topic. For one thing, the article mentions that we have been buying military grade enriched uranium from the Russians and diluting it under the two-decades-old ‘Megatons to Megawatts’ program. The goal was to avoid proliferation.

      If this was about weapons, why were the Russians selling us enriched uranium for 20 years?

      This is strictly to do with civilian nuclear power. This was strictly about business and it was a bad investment. The mines are not functioning. In time of war, we could requisition them! Are the Russians planning to move the mines to Russia?

      Boy, you guys are quick to throw around ‘treason’. Too bad ignorance isn’t a crime. It sure is good for conservative ideology.

      YellowSnake in reply to luagha. | February 8, 2018 at 4:34 pm

      Your didn’t notice that the Russians got the bomb in 1949?

      You don’t know that we are not producing highly enriched uranium or plutonium and actually have a huge surplus? The half life of U-235 is 700,000,000 years. We are not going to run out.

      International Panel on Fissile Materials

    02sbxstr in reply to YellowSnake. | February 8, 2018 at 5:03 pm

    Well, the F35 can do at least 2 things the F16 cannot do: take-off and land on a carrier and perform a short take-off and vertically land. The F16 is an air superiority fighter and the F35 is basically an attack vehicle. Your comparison is like comparing a Porsche 911 and a Macan SUV. Different animals.

      Gremlin1974 in reply to 02sbxstr. | February 8, 2018 at 6:21 pm

      As much as I hate to agree with the troll, he is correct on that point, if not for the right reasons, the F-35 is a boondoggle at best.

      YellowSnake in reply to 02sbxstr. | February 8, 2018 at 6:36 pm

      My point was about lobbying.

      The F-35 may become a pretty good Swiss Army knife; albeit a very expensive one. I own a few of Swiss Army Knives and a couple of Leathermans. They are useful in a pinch. But when I want to do a serious piece of work, I reach for the proper tool.

      Because of the STL ‘feature’ the F-35 is wider than it has to be and is seriously under-powered. Ironically, the Chinese stole the design, but they ditched the STL and slimmed down the fuselage.

      The last time we tried to build ‘one-size-fits-all’ we got the F-111. The Navy never accepted it. The Air Force used it as little as possible.

      There is one argument in favor of the F-35. The Israelis bought some. They can’t afford to buy crap or play politics with their military. That is the one thing that makes me think it might be useful. Then again, maybe no one else will sell them anything.

      And this: Australia’s F-35A stealth fighters may cost millions to bring up to a fighting standard

    Jack Klompus in reply to YellowSnake. | February 9, 2018 at 11:04 am

    Fuck off, you useless, tiresome twit.

These nefarious Russians did such a good job of cornering the market that the spot market for yellow cake has gone from 100/lb in 2007 to 23/lb today. The long term price followed similar trends. Supply & Demand

These guys are geniuses! No wonder they need to fuel themselves with vast quantities of vodka!

No mention here that there is much more supply than demand or that actual purchases are down 80% from 2007-2016 or that the mines purchased were not functioning.

Well, if it sounds like a scandal, it must be a scandal. Is that true of Trump, too? Just askin’


I asked how it was possible CFIUS would approve the Uranium One sale when the FBI could prove Rosatom was engaged in criminal conduct. His answer: ‘Ask your politics.’”

Good idea.

And it comes right when the D’rats have been telling us that it’s “unpatriotic” to criticize the FBI. The timing couldn’t be better.

The ducks are lining up nicely. One carefully-placed shot should be able to get them all. Then the United States might become a country again, instead of a crime syndicate.

As usual, in his desire to protect the Obama administration, including HRC, YellowSnake ignores the important stuff here.

Russia was facing three problems in 2010, The first was the age of its weapons grade nuclear material. Some of this stuff was old. It needed to be replaced. Second, in 2013, the Megaton to Megawatt program, which allowed Russia to sell obsolete weapons grade nuclear material to the US [a very sweet deal there and not in the US interest], as low energy commercial uranium, was set to expire. This meant that Russia would have to find another way to pay for its weapons grade uranium program or to reduce replenishment costs. Third, Russia did not want to use its own uranium reserves if it could be avoided.

So, the Uranium One deal made sense both economically and strategically for Russia. It gets a source of income to replace what it will lose when MtoM ends. Or, if it sells the uranium to itself, it gets it for free. And, it gains strategic control of 20% [one fifth] of the uranium supply of the United States.

YellowSnake tries to make the case that as the cost of U3O8 uranium dropped from $100/# to $23/# in 2016, this was a disaster for the purchasers of U-One. However, this is misleading. As noted, this is the long term price [futures market] not the actual spot price. The spot price was $50/# in 2010 and was $25/# in 2016. And, the demand for uranium was virtually identical in 2010 and 2016. So, yes, if the idea was to make money, this was still a disaster. And, as the demand for uranium was steady and spot prices were also steady, why would anyone want to buy a company, which we are now assured, never shipped any product out of the country? This is just too unbelievable for words. However, if the goal of the acquisition was to secure a cheap supply of foreign uranium and increase foreign control of the US strategic supply, this was accomplished.

This was never about MAKING money. It was not a “business” deal.

    SDN in reply to Mac45. | February 8, 2018 at 5:27 pm

    Look, YellowDick is never going to admit the obvious: this was all about bribing the Clintons and helping Obama damage America.

    moonmoth in reply to Mac45. | February 8, 2018 at 5:42 pm

    YellowSnake ignores the important stuff here.

    Unless a better word might be “obfuscates”. Thanks for the excellent analysis, BTW.

    YellowSnake in reply to Mac45. | February 8, 2018 at 7:01 pm

    The link I provided included the Spot, Average Spot & LT quotes. Went from 100 down to 23 (today)

    The only thing that gets old in nuclear weapon is the Tritium. The half-life of Pu-239 is 24,100 years. Yep, the Russian sold us their old stuff.

    BTW, they need an export license to take it from the US and a very, very big ship to get the whole mine to Russia.

    You are almost as well informed as our President.

    Of course he/she/it by-passes the ‘important’ stuff: he’s a corrupt leftist commie loon who can’t make a living any other way than suckling at the teet of corrupt politicians bleeding our government.

    So, like a good commie tool: cheat steal, kill or make an ass out yourself on a blog – anything to achieve the ends.

I’m sure the “Federal Bureau of I-don’t-want-to-know-the-truth” is on top of it

I just think Yellow should give the LI staff a cut of what Soros is paying him.

Chelsea Clinton wore the most expensive wedding dress in human history. You go girl!

Breaking: Hillary Clinton sold nuclear launch codes to Russia to fund new jaccuzi for house #3

YellowSnake: But what about Trump U?

Who in the hell is UrineSnake and why does he keep coming back here???

I love the ABC pic of Hillary from about 90 years ago.

Not intending to troll him here, just an honest question.

I wonder if Milhouse is still of the opinion that the Clintons did not personally benefit in any way, shape or form from the uranium deal.

    Milhouse in reply to murkyv. | February 11, 2018 at 2:17 pm

    The Clintons had no input to the Rosatom takeover of Uranium One. There simply wasn’t anything to bribe them for. Bill’s earlier assistance, when Guistra still had the company and bought the Kazakh mines, is irrelevant. At that time the company was working against Putin, not with him, and Guistra was chairman and a major shareholder. By the time the Rosatom takeover came along Guistra had no connection to the company, and therefore no interest in what happened to it, and Rosatom was a friendly biddder.

Snake Oil is effectively staking out the claim that the Russians had to benefit from the deal for this to be a “thing.” He is arguing that if the deal wasn’t good for the Russians, then there’s nothing to see here. He may be smarter than most give him credit for, as he’s fairly good at misdirection.

If the Russians were about to shoot themselves in the foot, and Hillary Clinton was in a position to stop them, and the Russians paid her off so she would not stop them, that’s still bribery. It doesn’t matter if the Russians made a good deal or a bad deal. If they paid money to influence the decisions of an official of the United States government, that official has broken the law by merely accepting the money, whether or not the bribing party actually realizes any benefit from the deal. We’re not talking about treason, we’re talking about accepting a bribe. (And it’s accepting a bribe even if the decision would have been the same without the bribe – that is, the bribe doesn’t have to actually influence the official.)

And yet there’s no possible doubt in the world that Hillary Clinton has accepted bribes. Let’s start with the earliest case we know, the Cattle Futures scandal. There is only one possible explanation of that incident — she was caught laundering her husband’s bribes. Surely not even YellowSnake could come up with another explanation, one that doesn’t mean she ought to have gone to prison decades ago. Go on, try, I dare you.

It is almost ” Laughable,” that the ” Clinton Crime Family,” is having our President investigated for doing business with Russia, When the Clintons are ” Documated,” as having done so. They use their Friends to investigate. ( How Crass ), ” Money NO Object.”