Thiessen: An Impartial Russian Influence Peddling Investigation Must Include the Clintons

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton sits with her husband former President B
AP Photo/Mel Evans

Marc Thiessen argues in an Washington Post op-ed that “[a]ny impartial investigation of Russia’s efforts to meddle in our democratic process needs to include a full inquiry of the Russian money flowing into Clinton world.”

From Thiessen’s Washington Post op-ed:

The New York Times reported in 2015 that “shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, [former President Bill] Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.” In total, $145 million went to the Clinton Foundation from interests linked to Uranium One, which was acquired by the Russian government nuclear agency Rosatum.

Think that was just a coincidence? As former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy points out, the Uranium One deal is not a national security scandal, it is a corruption scandal involving “Clinton family self-dealing.” Ask yourself: How many half-a-million-dollar speeches has Bill Clinton given to Kremlin-linked banks since Hillary Clinton was defeated? How much Russian money is flowing into the Clinton Foundation’s coffers today? If Donald Trump had given a $500,000 speech paid for by a Kremlin bank, and his private foundation had accepted $145 million from Vladimir Putin-linked oligarchs and their Western business partners, do you think that his critics would be insisting there was nothing to see here?

We should all be deeply by concerned how much Russian cash was sloshing around Washington, and how much of it found its way into the bank accounts of the Clintons and those around them. And we should all, Democrats and Republicans alike, want to get to the bottom of it.

Read the rest here.

COMMENTS

Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.