Happy Friday morning. Mark Davis is guest hosting the show for Bill this morning and we’ve got some big, big stories to discuss. I’ll be updating this post as the morning progresses. Right now we’ve got Peter Kirsanow of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights lined up at 8:30am EST to discuss Loretta Lynch’s nomination and why he thinks Republicans should have opposed it. Hillary Clinton: God bless Peter Schweizer. His investigation into the Clinton Foundation, as detailed in his forthcoming book “Clinton Cash,” has unveiled another stunning revelation: the highly questionable – one might say scandalous – connection between donations to the Clinton Foundation and a simultaneous uranium deal with Russia. Schweizer provided the information to the New York Times which published it along with its own investigation into the Clinton Foundation and the timing of the uranium deal. Here’s the easy-to-read breakdown of the timeline and deals and below is a link to the full story. It’s well worth your time to read. Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal The headline on the website Pravda trumpeted President Vladimir V. Putin’s latest coup, its nationalistic fervor recalling an era when its precursor served as the official mouthpiece of the Kremlin: “Russian Nuclear Energy Conquers the World.” The article, in January 2013, detailed how the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain. But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one… Fallout: A few points to make about the story: 1. Rosatom’s takeover of Uranium One was subject to review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, which includes Hillary Clinton’s State Department. The deal itself, disregarding the Clinton controversy for now, was terrible. Hillary Clinton handed Putin control of about 20 percent of America’s uranium production. She gave away a large chunk of America’s energy security to one of its enemies and she must be made to answer for that decision. Furthermore, if Hillary thought this deal would placate or appease Russia, she was wrong about that too. Over the past year, Russia has been busy trying to hack the State Department. How’s that for a quid pro quo? 2. Congress must hold hearings about the State Department’s role in approving the Rosatom takeover. As Hugh Hewitt said on his radio show last night, if the State Department could manufacture such a deal with Russia how do we know that it didn’t do the same with Iran? 3. With each new revelation into the Clinton Foundation we keep discovering more reasons for why Hillary kept her own email server and deleted her emails as she saw fit. Any Republican running against Hillary must constantly demand that she release all the Clinton Foundation records and donations as well as turn her personal email server over to a third party for investigation. 4. I guess this is what Hillary really meant when she gave the Russians a “reset button.” Drone Apologies: Yesterday, Pres. Obama held a press conference to apologize for a January drone strike on Al Qaeda targets in Pakistan which killed an American and Italian hostage. The death of these two hostages is tragic and thoroughly deserving of remarks by the president. However, not in the manner, content, and style in which he did so. First, here’s the New York Times‘s sympathetic take: Obama Apologizes After Drone Kills American and Italian Held by Al Qaeda An American aid worker and another man held hostage by Al Qaeda were killed in an American drone strike in Pakistan in January, government officials disclosed on Thursday, underscoring the perils of a largely invisible, long-distance war waged through video screens, joysticks and sometimes incomplete intelligence… The violent death of an American at the hands of his own government proved a searing moment in a drone war that has come to define the nation’s battle with Al Qaeda, especially since President Obama took office. Visibly upset, Mr. Obama came to the White House briefing room shortly after his staff issued a written statement announcing the deaths to make a rare personal apology. “As president and as commander in chief, I take full responsibility for all our counterterrorism operations,” the grim-faced president told reporters as television cameras broadcast his words. “I profoundly regret what happened,” he added. “On behalf of the United States government, I offer our deepest apologies to the families.” Now, read the actual remarks by the president and a few things will jump out to you. First, the president didn’t emphasize that this drone strike in Pakistan also killed Al Qaeda leader Ahmed Farouq and a separate strike in the same region killed Adam Gadahn, the notorious American-turned-Al Qaeda propagandist. For many years, Gadahn was Al Qaeda’s primary means for reaching English speaking audiences and it was believed that he was in Osama bin Laden’s inner circle. He was the first American indicted for treason since World War II and the FBI placed him on their “Most Wanted Terrorists” list with a million dollar reward for information leading to his arrest. Here’s a good profile on him from the Daily Beast. One can understand the president expressing his condolences to the families of the hostages who were killed in the strike. However, how can he neglect to mention and celebrate the killing of two prominent Al Qaeda leaders! The death of Gadahn is a victory in the war on terror that should be lauded. The U.S. military should be praised and thanked. Yet, the president spent his remarks groveling and wringing his hands about America’s mistaken killing of the two hostages. Second, Pres. Obama explained that the reason he called the press conference was “because the Weinstein and Lo Porto families deserve to know the truth. And I did so because even as certain aspects of our national security efforts have to remain secret in order to succeed, the United States is a democracy committed to openness in good times and in bad.” Does anyone else notice the obvious inconsistency here? What about the death of four Americans in Benghazi? Don’t their families deserve to know the truth as well? Loretta Lynch: In other news, yesterday Loretta Lynch was confirmed to replace Eric Holder as attorney general. I think Republicans who voted for her nomination made a big mistake. We have Peter Kirsanow on the program this morning to explain why. Here’s a brief preview: First, in Senate testimony, Lynch told Sen. Jeff Sessions that she would uphold Pres. Obama’s unlawful executive actions. That alone should have disqualified her. Second, she also had this exchange with Sen. Sessions in which she said that illegal immigrants have the same right to a job as legal immigrants: SESSIONS: Let me ask you this: In the workplace of America today when we have a high number of unemployed, we’ve had declining wages for many years, we have the lowest of Americans working, who has more right to a job in this country? A lawful immigrant who’s here, a green-card holder or a citizen, or a person who entered the country unlawfully? LYNCH: Well, Senator, I believe that the right and the obligation to work is one that’s shared by everyone in this country regardless of how they came here. And certainly, if someone here, regardless of status, I would prefer that they be participating in the workplace than not participating in the workplace… One of the reasons Republicans were reelected was to fight Pres. Obama’s executive actions on immigration. And yet, when given the chance to block the nomination of a key implementer and defender of his actions, they folded. Loretta Lynch confirmed as attorney general Federal prosecutor Loretta Lynch won confirmation to serve as attorney general Thursday from a Senate that forced her to wait more than five months for the title and remained divided to the end. The 56-43 vote installs Lynch, 55, now U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, as the first black woman in the nation’s top law enforcement post. She will replace Eric Holder, a perennial lightning rod for conservatives who was once held in contempt of Congress. The vote total for Lynch was the lowest for any attorney general since Michael Mukasey won confirmation with 53 votes in 2007 after Democrats decried his refusal to describe waterboarding as torture. Photo credit: http://tinyurl.com/n3e4tw5 Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Your email address will not be published.CommentName* Email* Website Notify me of follow-up comments by email. Notify me of new posts by email.