Senator and presidential candidate Rand Paul (R-KY) declared that there “absolutely” should be an investigation into the Clinton Foundation and “you have to have trust in your commander-in-chief that they wouldn’t actually sell the country” on Monday’s “Fox & Friends” on the Fox News Channel.
Paul said, “the presidency is the commander-in-chief, you have to have trust in your commander-in-chief that they wouldn’t actually sell the country while they’re the commander-in-chief. Secretary of State is an incredibly important position, she got to be on the approval of whether or not a uranium company was sold to Russia, and she allowed it to happen while receiving money from the shareholders.”
When asked if there should be an investigation into the Clinton Foundation’s dealings, Paul responded, “absolutely, and I’ve talked to people within the Senate about whether there will be an investigation. I favor an investigation of this, because we need to know that. If you’re going to elect someone to President of the United States, whether they’ve been accepting gifts that might influence their opinion.”
Earlier, he stated, “I think it’s worrisome that the Russians now own a uranium company that does 20% of the mining of uranium in our country. There are a few companies and few industries where I think the government should have some kind of regulatory role. But, definitely in a national security industry like uranium, the government has some control. So, in order for the Russians to buy this group, it had been to be approved by Hillary Clinton. Now, she says ‘well, I didn’t actually do anything.’ But it has to be a unanimous vote, had she stood up and objected, the sale wouldn’t have gone through. But now, the Russians own 20% of our mining. And then it turns out that the people who own the mining company were giving over a hundred million dollars to the Clinton Foundation.” And “she had agreed, and told President Obama she would release the donors. Now, it turns out the reason they didn’t release these donors, is they were set up sort of a dummy or a shell corporation of the foundation that’s Canadian. They said, ‘oh, we only agreed to do the US foundation, not the Canadian foundation.’ Do you think they might have done that because they were worried about these shareholders, and this uranium company?”
Paul also commented on the drone strike that killed two Al Qaeda hostages, saying, “I do think there’s a valuable use for drones, and as much as I’m seen as this opponent as drones, I think in military and in warfare they do have some value. I think this is a difficult situation. You have hostages being held there, some of them American, you also have the people holding the hostages, some of them are American. I’ve been an opponent of using drones about people not involved in combat. However, if you’re holding hostages, you kind of are involved in combat. So, I look at it the way it is in the United States, if there’s a kidnapping in New York, the police don’t have to have a warrant to go in, you see what I mean? So, really you don’t get due process or anything like that if you’re in a war zone. So, these people were in a war zone, and probably got what was coming to them, the captors. Unfortunately, some innocent people lost their lives, the hostages. But, I guess I tend to — the world is so partisan, that I tend not to want to blame the president for the loss of life here. I think he was trying to do the right thing.”
(h/t Washington Times)
Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett