(National Sentinel) Tightening Noose: FBI agents in the Little Rock, Ark., office have reportedly interviewed William Campbell, a key witness in the Uranium One deal, as they continue investigating alleged corruption involving Bill and Hillary’ Clinton’s foundation.
According to investigative reporter Sara A. Carter, Victoria Toensing, an attorney representing Williams — who spent more than six years undercover collecting information about the Russian energy and uranium market — disclosed the information in a letter seeking retraction of an article by The Hill on Thursday that was based solely on a Democrat memo that attacked Williams’ credibility.
Democrats said that Campbell had not provided any evidence to congressional committees of “quid pro quo” arrangements regarding the Clinton Foundation and Russian figures.
Carter said that Toensing was never contacted prior to publication by The Hill for fair comment in the story.
The paper’s article has since been followed up in The Washington Post, The Washington Examiner, CNN, Reuters, Yahoo, “and other numerous outlets, none of which contacted Toensing for fair comment,” Carter explained.
On Friday, The Hill updated the story, but only after receiving a call from Toensing asking for a retraction.
In a formal letter, Toensing condemned the Democratic memo and The Hill for making false allegations against her client and not contacting her for comment. The Hill did not retract the story but updated it instead.
“The reporter told me they were leaving in the accusations because she said, that’s what the Democrats told her,” said Toensing. “This is a new journalistic standard.”
The Hill noted that correspondents have reported extensively on the Uranium One deal. The paper also said that reporters attempted to contact Republican lawmakers for comment but that none responded.
However, Carter noted that neither Reps. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, or Mark Meadows, R-N.C., who were both actively involved in calling for an investigation into the Uranium One matter, told her they were never contacted.
As for Campbell’s FBI interview, Toensing said her client was contacted by agents from Little Rock in December after the bureau considered evidence he previously provided regarding the Uranium One deal significant enough to enlist his help with the Clinton Foundation probe.
Reports last fall noted that Campbell said he was made to sign an “illegal” non-disclosure agreement (NDA) by Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch. He also claimed to have video evidence showing Russian agents with briefcases full of bribe money in relation to the Uranium One scandal.
Earlier reporting also noted that Campbell told Congress that Russian operatives involved in the Uranium One deal were convinced that the Clintons could be manipulated into helping them “seal” the agreement with the Obama administration.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions ordered a fresh investigation into the Uranium One deal in December. According to multiple law enforcement sources, interviews with FBI agents are part of the Justice Department’s efforts to fulfill a pledge that an assistant attorney general gave to Congress in November.
The assistant AG promised that the department would determine whether a special counsel is warranted to look into the Uranium One deal, according to a senior Justice Department official.
The Democratic memorandum “falsely accuses Mr. Campbell of criminal conduct, alleging that he had taken “kickbacks from [the Russian] firm before he was authorized to do so,” Toensing said in her letter.
“Mr. Campbell never took one kickback, not a one,” she noted further. “He paid for the kickbacks, under FBI direction, out of the salary he received. In fact, these payments, totaling about $500,000, were the bases for his requesting repayment from the government.”
“I am appalled that The Hill would publish a defamatory story about my client without ever contacting him or his lawyer, ” Toensing, a former federal prosecutor, said.
“The article was based solely on Democratic sources and a Democratic memo. Republicans’ comments were cited only in stale, months-old statements indicating there was evidence of a Clinton connection to the Russian purchase of Uranium One. As such, they were included to establish a context that such evidence was not provided by my client. That is false. The publication of this false and misleading story was done purposefully to malign and discredit him. I demand a retraction.”
We need your help to fight social media censorship! Find out how by clicking here!