Breitbart’s Incredibly Dishonest Reporting

I’m not surprised to see Warner Todd Huston working for Breitbart; long has he toiled in the bowels of the wingnutosphere, from at least the old days of that ridiculous Stop the ACLU site. Nor am I surprised to see how dishonest his and their reporting is on this “story” about Hillary Clinton and the Uranium One deal. But it’s instructive to look at how they tell their lies.

Lies550

“Associate in Hillary Clinton Uranium One Russian Bribery Case Indicted” is the screaming headline. Wow, one of Hillary Clinton’s associates was indicted in a case involving Uranium One? That’s certainly what they want you to think. Was it Huma Abedin? Another former aide at the State Department? Perhaps a former employee from when she was a senator or from the Clinton Foundation? Nope. It’s the president of an American company that transported nuclear material and had allegedly tried to bribe a Russian company to get a contract to do so for them.

There is absolutely nothing in the article or in the announcement of the indictment from the Department of Justice to suggest that Hillary Clinton even knew the guy, much less that they were “associates” of any kind. The only possible connection is that the company this guy was trying to bribe was also involved with the application by a Canadian company to allow them to buy an American uranium mining company after a Russian mining company — the one allegedly being bribed in this case — bought a 51% interest in them. And that’s where the lying comes in.

An 11-count indictment has been handed down from a grand jury investigating possible Russian bribery involving former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s Uranium One deal negotiated when she was part of the Obama administration, a report says.

The indictment was levied against Maryland resident Mark Lambert, a former co-president of a nuclear transportation company involved in Hillary Clinton’s deal to sell U.S. uranium interests to a Russian company.

I’ve added the bold lettering to show what is going on here. On Planet Wingnuttia, that whole thing was “Hillary Clinton’s uranium deal.” In the real world, that’s just a ridiculous lie. Clinton was one of 9 members of the cabinet with a seat on a committee, each of which gives a recommendation on whether to approve such a sale, with the president making the final determination based on those recommendations. So why is it her deal specifically and not any of the other cabinet secretaries? Why isn’t it Tim Geithner’s deal? Or Gary Locke’s deal? Or Ken Salazar’s deal? They all had precisely the same input into the decision that Clinton had.

There is not a shred of evidence that she was even involved in making the recommendation. The norm in such a situation is for the decision to be passed down to someone with specific expertise, in this case probably the highest-ranking State Department official who deals with nuclear proliferation or global energy policy. They would study it, write a report with a recommendation and that would, barring something extraordinary, be the decision of the Secretary of State.

It should also be kept in mind that under that deal, we didn’t give 20% of our uranium to a Russian company. Not one ounce of the uranium mined could leave the United States for any reason, and the regulation and tracking of every single gram of that stuff is, for obvious reasons, controlled very tightly. This entire conspiracy is based on absolutely nothing and propped up on lies — the kind of lies that Huston and Breitbart specialize in.

"Putin doesn't seem like a "buddy" type - puppeteer or master sure, but friend, amigo, ..."

What Color is the Sky in ..."
"I think it's implied in what he wrote. you don't say it's mental illness BUT, ..."

The Problem is Toxic Masculinity, Not ..."
"Where do the Zeta Reticulans fit in?"

Loomer and InfoWars On the Scene ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment