[Conservative Tribune] Thanks to the national fever over the Kavanaugh hearings, a report that the FBI is holding onto documents that are potentially damning for the Clintons has been able to slip under the radar of the establishment media.In a recent bombshell report by The Hill, investigative journalist John Solomon wrote that the FBI has identified 37 pages of documents that may offer information about what FBI agents told the Obama administration preceding the Uranium One deal about the criminal wrongdoing found in Russia’s nuclear Industry.
Those suspicious of the deal pointed to evidence that bribery may have been at play in the deal. For example, the fact that Russians paid former President Bill Clinton $500,000 to give a speech at a Russian bank that was promoting Uranium One stock a few weeks before then-secretary of state Hillary Clinton had to vote on the acquisition.
Or you could bring up the $145 million that went to the Clinton Foundation from interests linked to Uranium One. Or the fact that Tony Podesta, the brother of Hillary Clinton’s former campaign manager, was paid $180,000 by Uranium One to encourage Clinton’s approval of the deal.
And more evidence of Clinton-Russia collusion may exist in these FBI documents. At least, there is reason to believe that the documents would inform the American people about what information the Obama administration was working with before the Obama-led Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States made the highly controversial deal with Russia.
That said, neither of the two possible outcomes of this information is great. Either the Obama administration knew about the corruption involved and chose to give American assets to Russia anyway, or the FBI hid their findings and failed to alert the president, the secretary of state and the CFIUS board. Both options give serious indications about the corruption that compromised national security.
However, according to Solomon, the American people won’t be privy to this info, as the FBI is keeping the documents secret from the public. They claim that they must not disclose the info in order to protect national security and law enforcement, or that they are guarding the privacy of American citizens, or that they must protect the ability of government agencies to communicate among themselves. Pick one.
And as Solomon pointed out, these sound like the same reasons that the FBI originally gave for why they couldn’t publish documents about the Russia collusion investigation ‐ documents which gave information about former FBI agent Peter Strzok’s anti-Trump texts, or documents on Clinton and other Democrats funding the fraudulent Steele dossier to take down Trump.
The bureau did release a few documents under the title "Uranium One Transaction" in its Freedom of Information Act online vault, but these were just public letters from members of Congress calling for answers about the Uranium One case.