Fox News anchor Shepard Smith was blasted by some of his network’s loudest viewers for fact-checking Republican talking points about Uranium One, which defenders of President Donald Trump have used to allege that it was actually Hillary Clinton who colluded with Russia.
“What are the facts? What is Uranium One?” Smith questioned.
Smith explained that Trump’s campaign line on Uranium One is “inaccurate in a number of ways.”
“First, the Clinton State Department had no power to veto or approve that transaction. It could do neither,” Smith noted.
“The accusation is predicated on the charge that Secretary Clinton approved the sale. She did not,” Smith concluded.
Explaining the facts was seen as a betrayal by Fox News viewers, who seemed to prefer the network parrot White House talking points absent journalistic examination.
7 Comments
newtboy@bobknight33, you've brought up this b.s. as proof Clinton colluded with Russia. Care to post an apologetic retraction?
I thought not.
siftbotMoving this video to newtboy's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.
newtboyOh, come on @bobknight33, aren't you going to tell us again how this is all libtard propaganda and Democratic sour grapes over losing the election, and go on to complain that the FBI is wasting all of it's time on a purely partisan investigation of Trump's non crimes of negotiating policy with our allies like Russia before taking office while ignoring this clear cut case of Clinton's treason of personally selling uranium to our enemy, Russia?
But you just keep us hanging. This was one of your (parroting Trump) accusations, be a man and own it, don't hide from it embarrassed.
newtboy*related=https://videosift.com/video/FBI-Implicates-Obama-Clinton-In-Russia-Bribery-Plot
siftbotFBI Implicates Obama & Clinton In Russia Bribery Plot has been added as a related post - related requested by newtboy.
bobknight33Selling 20% of our Uranium is a bad thing. We should not be selling any at all.
Is it worth investigating from a possible criminal POV? No but it is worth looking into it and seeing what went down. Sure.
Do I think something nefarious has happened. Seems like it.
Do you think the Clinton's are people above reproach? Do you think their foundation used solely as a foundation to help others and not themselves?
Oh, come on @bobknight33, aren't you going to tell us again how this is all libtard propaganda and Democratic sour grapes over losing the election, and go on to complain that the FBI is wasting all of it's time on a purely partisan investigation of Trump's non crimes of negotiating policy with our allies like Russia before taking office while ignoring this clear cut case of Clinton's treason of personally selling uranium to our enemy, Russia?
But you just keep us hanging. This was one of your (parroting Trump) accusations, be a man and own it, don't hide from it embarrassed.
newtboySo you didn't listen at all.
We didn't sell ANY uranium, we essentially sold stock in the company that mines it.
He just told you what went down, try listening.
Nefarious? Explain. Again, listen, she was barely involved in this normal transaction....but if doing business with Russia (in your official capacity, with full transparency, and in concert with multiple other agencies) is nefarious, Trump and his cabinet's multiple secret unauthorized and undisclosed back alley deals must be insanely worse, right?.
Above reproach, no one is. Is their charity head and shoulders above Trump's repeatedly sanctioned charity he uses like a personal bank account to buy himself portraits and fake Time covers? Absolutely. But that's a total misdirection red herring. Stay on target.
Selling 20% of our Uranium is a bad thing. We should not be selling any at all.
Is it worth investigating from a possible criminal POV? No but it is worth looking into it and seeing what went down. Sure.
Do I think something nefarious has happened. Seems like it.
Do you think the Clinton's are people above reproach? Do you think their foundation used solely as a foundation to help others and not themselves?
Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.