New Scrutiny on Clinton Foundation’s Uranium One Ties
Recently declassified records from the FBI and the Justice Department are casting new light on the Clinton Foundation’s connections to the Uranium One deal. This issue, which has been explored in-depth previously, gained traction due to the investigative work of Peter Schweizer, a senior contributor at Breitbart News.
An internal memo mentioned that discussions around Uranium One appeared in Schweizer’s 2015 book, *Clinton Cash*. Investigators thought they had “substantial evidence related to criminal activity” that warranted further examination. However, it has come to light that officials from the Obama administration halted the probe.
The Senate Judiciary Committee detailed that the investigation, initiated in January 2016, faced significant roadblocks from the Justice Department and FBI, particularly from Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. Although investigations began at field offices in Little Rock, New York, and Washington, leadership delays and internal disagreements caused the case to stall. Concerns about the expiry of the statute of limitations became a contentious issue, leading some to argue that flawed legal interpretations ended the investigation prematurely.
A 2018 email from Jonathan Ross, then a first assistant U.S. attorney, highlighted that payments to the Clinton Foundation had been ongoing from 2007 to 2014 and that there were “no legal barriers” to continuing the investigation. Ross noted a problematic opinion regarding the statute of limitations from a respected colleague that deterred local investigators from pushing forward. He expressed that the expiration date for legal actions was thought to be February 1, 2018, but was unaware of a provision that could extend it for wartime fraud cases.
Further declassified correspondence from the FBI suggested that Justice Department officials overlooked whether acts of concealment, such as deleting emails in 2015, could have extended the statute of limitations. They also potentially overlooked violations tied to racketeering and fraud against the U.S.
Cody Hyland, a federal prosecutor at the time, corroborated Ross’s concerns. He expressed frustration over the Justice Department’s 2018 stance that cast a “permanent cloud” over the investigation and called for further steps, including interviews with pertinent individuals like Frank Giustra and Ian Telfer to be taken before concluding the case. Giustra, a Canadian mining investor, donated over $100 million to the Clinton Foundation, while Telfer contributed $2.35 million.
As highlighted in the *New York Times*, during 2015, as the sale was being considered, donations to the Clinton Foundation were made by Uranium One officials. Additionally, Bill Clinton received a hefty speaking fee from a bank linked to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.
The Uranium One matter was a point of consideration during the Obama administration’s effort to improve relations with Russia. Yet, even while the sale was in progress, the FBI possessed evidence, including recordings and documents, indicating Russian officials were involved in bribery related to the U.S. uranium market. One significant informant, Douglas Campbell, revealed that Russian nuclear executives had plans to funnel millions of dollars to associates of Bill Clinton during the review process.
U.S. Attorney John Hoover was assigned in 2017 by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions to assess the allegations surrounding Uranium One, but his investigation did not reach the level of a special counsel’s inquiry. Documents indicate that the investigation was quietly closed by 2020, even while disagreements remained concerning unresolved leads. A report by Special Counsel John Durham in 2023 specified that his office did not consider Uranium One part of their mission.
Meanwhile, the ramifications of the Uranium One deal continue to impact U.S. energy policy, fostering reliance on Russian-enriched uranium. In November 2024, Russia imposed new restrictions on uranium exports to the U.S., showcasing the vulnerability created by this dependency. Subsequently, Congress enacted a law banning uranium imports from Russia.
Schweizer consistently frames the Uranium One affair around critical questions about whether donors made substantial contributions to the Clinton Foundation to gain favorable treatment from Hillary Clinton’s State Department. He renownedly stated the Clintons established “a system where individuals receive compensation while in office.” Uniquely, unlike typical corruption cases, there is no statute of limitations for actions that exploit non-profit organizations for personal gain.
The Clinton Foundation has yet to comment on these latest developments. Internal documents reveal that investigators have voiced concerns about delays and complications regarding the statute of limitations, yet the public records do not provide any explanation from the Justice Department or FBI leadership on why the investigation was stopped.
