[EL] Uranium One Deal

[Larry Levine]

I find this post somewhat offensive - the kind of thing that sets off
hypothetic speculation that takes hold as fact. Suppose we find out that
Jimmy Carter has been profiting by selling materials to the housing projects
he has been helping to build . actionable. Supposing we find out George W.
owned a refuse remove company that benefited greatly in the aftermath of
Katrina and that's why he was invested in letting things get worse before
sending in FEMA. Suppose . aw, never mind. 

What kind of serious legal discussion begins with "understanding that there
may be th there there?

Larry

 

 

From: Law-election [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On
Behalf Of Steven John Mulroy (smulroy)
Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2017 7:36 AM
To: law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
Subject: [EL] Uranium One Deal

 

 

Apologies if this was discussed previously

Understanding that there may be no there there , but what legal charges
could theoretically be brought against Hillary Clinton re the Uranium One
deal?

I know that the Clinton Foundation has failed to disclose some of its
donations from Uranium One investors. Was that potentially chargeable ?

Obviously, if there were any evidence of a link between Clinton Foundation
donations and HRC advocating to approve the deal (not that we know there was
such advocacy ), there could be bribery. Anything else ?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20171118/8f6e1f76/attachment.html>