FBI ignored Russian bribery?

Tommy Tucker, WWL First News
Thursday, October 19th
Tommy talks with Bob Deitz, Professor of Public Policy at George Mason University, about a new report that the FBI may have withheld information that Russians were bribing US companies.

Transcript - Not for consumer use. Robot overlords only. Will not be accurate.

I so this a long complicated story as most things of substance are. Because I think the American public. And I do this reliving side little exclude myself what the blood. For the most part I think people are so busy bombarded with most messages if it can't be. As they say in certain industries a one sheet where you can put all the facts on one sheet and there reason to follow. Then the American public doesn't have the hub will power of the time whatever you wanna say the interest to follow it but I do think that sometimes those. Seven page stories of the one win the most money is involved Bob gates joins us right now professor of public policy. And George Mason university of former senior counselor to these CIA director. And a former General Counsel at the NSA good morning Bob good morning. An area is good to hear you and good thank you for coming back com. I even know where to start with this in New York Times had a story in April 2015. Bay hill comes out with a seven page investigative story yesterday. About the Clinton zinc uranium and the the Justice Department failing to do anything about it he can you try in some way. As a professor to condense this and make it so people can understand what happened. And that. Well good luck I think exactly good luck I'll probably finish in about an hour yeah exactly. That that there's been opens story is that the Russian Iranian interest uranium interest and its own uranium that was being extracted from the reduction. In nuclear weapons. Under a program called megatons to megawatts. In any event. The store the colonel's story is that usury interest came to the United States. And through bribery extortion and other and and other malevolent means. Are compromised a US trucking company to ship this stuff. And also made various payments. To the Clinton foundation. And the idea was that two to compromise the ability of the US government to decline. In a bit allowing you regime interest to work in this country through all eighteen page federal statute. We all used to calls sit he has senate committee. On foreign intelligence in the US. Any time a a foreign country wants to abide an abscess in the United States sometime at a company. It must go through this simply as procedure. And recipients to the committee is composed of representatives from treasury. DOT's state and so forth. Well this was at a time when Secretary Clinton was the secretary of state. And the idea is that that basically DOJ and and and stay kind of turned a blind. What was going on. The upshot was that there was I guess I was single conviction of erection for money laundering. But the underlying details. Of the sort of the reach of the corruption. Never came out until until story and I have to tell you I was aware of that of that that money laundering conviction a number of years ago I was never. That's what missiles story. It was brand new enemy. Let me go back to the guy that went to jail and a city mayors in his name I think and yeah. Maker and then he oversaw. Putin's nuclear expansion inside the United States yeah I don't know what that means what what it was Putin's nuclear expansion well US. The idea was to to gain control of sort if you hear that background you know I've got to a very old very noisy cat yeah it's only your good. The idea was to to gain control over some US uranium. The US has oddly enough has a very substantial uranium. Industry and and large sources of uranium in ground and the idea it was a Russians want to get some control of some of the. First off we'll what is Russia's ultimate goal limits what would blow with the reasoning be to do this. I I don't of course I don't know right I suspect. That their ultimate goal is to gain control of our at least parts of our domestic. I uranium production. I'd so what we talk about it is that a static number 30%. Of what existed then they're getting getter 30% going into the future. I would guess going to the future but again I do not know. Saying here's the thing against me and I'm not defending the clintons at all I just. Don't know how would somebody really sell out this country to the Russians you you've been around for a long time out out. No I don't I don't think so certainly not deliberately. They're two things I find. Important about this story. An effective primate may mention I assume the first is that the and so is this committee on foreign help of foreign investment in the US. The players are all depends upon what the answer is that that is proposed to be sold. In this particular case. And it didn't that the key players to me would be the Department of Energy. And Department of Defense. I doubt weather's. Whether state had much at stake in this and in fact you saw in the story that somebody claimed it does mrs. Clinton claimed she had no vote in the decision. And I find that credible. I'll only because I doubt this state really had much of the salient in at all but I don't think in this case national security was compromised. Having said that. What are the one of the problems here in the and the clintons have have dealt with these accusations for years. Is the sort of pay to play mentality. And you know the fact is that you know according to his article again I'm assuming the fact that this that this article sets forth. According to this Bill Clinton received hundreds of thousands of dollars for giving speeches and Russia and in addition. This group. Provided money to the Clinton foundation. Well that's just that this isn't that kind of big money. Should make all those skeptical that appear with big money from the laughter big money from the right this should make all of those worries some. So in terms of harm to the country. I'd say close to bill really yes. Because again. In that recipients committee would never approve this. DOT would have if the of these fellows or energy as a threat to national security data raised holy hell. And the fact that they didn't Els and their and and by the way DOT is is the big four in this committee. If they ask department Spencer people don't know so if for whatever reason and drug administration doesn't like it. Some things there were some bribery involved collusion one hand you and of course politics sectors and all of this can be re do that deal because the president. Has already said the Z do the redo the uranium deal. OPEC we have done. Anytime you can and I am I you know I I'm kind of waiting because you know mr. trump is often felt that he's been maligned and mrs. Clinton has been the beneficiary. We very basic view of the from administration does with his story because I doubt little like well. No he's already tweeted about it I don't have it open in front of me but is there anything Bob we're missing about this. Well you know. I have to say no but that's. Qualified only because this first heard for me I was really I was really taken aback when I read the article. Because again we're that one money laundering case and number of years ago. But that was just a tiny temple at the top this big body that we. I appreciate your time Bob Hurley deal and has a very complicated story but I think maybe you'll agree that the things that are really serious and involves the most money are and you gotta have a flow chart to almost understand this in the American public won't do it. I agree. I open talk to again thank you Bob. You too Bob did let the cat Bob Dietz professor of public policy George Mason University former. Senior counselor to the CIA director former counsel. At the NSA.