Joe Biden announced a deliberate sabotage of our national interests similar to what Bill Clinton did. On September 18, 1996, Bill Clinton spoke from the south rim of “Arizona’s Grand Canyon and declared 1.7 million acres in southern Utah as the Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument. He gave a moving speech, very similar to what Biden gave recently. He used the same law, the Antiquities Act of 1906 Biden cited to support his decision. Clinton gave away an enormous reserve of coal that was uniquely capable of suppling our energy needs with much less pollution. Joe blocked our access to uranium.
1996: Clinton takes a 1.7 million-acre stand in Utah — High Country News – Know the West (hcn.org)
Here is what the MSM refused to cover. “For six years, Kanab, pop. 3,000, has eagerly awaited coal development by Andalex, a Dutch-owned company that would tap into a mother lode of coal – 62 billion tons according to a recent federal analysis – under the remote, grassy Kaiparowits Plateau. The 50-year project was to provide locals with hundreds of decent-paying jobs and billions of dollars in state and local taxes. Now, with one simple proclamation, Clinton had derailed the plan.”
“62 BILLION TONS OF COAL”
For the record, I am not exactly a fan of coal mining. While there is a serious and legitimate dispute regarding whether oil is even a fossil fuel, coal absolutely is a fossil fuel and coal mines indisputably leave behind a gigantic mess. I just think these kinds of decisions should be made by congress, after reasoned debate, and not by a President grandstanding for environmental extremists.
One again a Democratic President unilaterally made a decision that has significant national security implications. Joe Biden announced recently a new national monument in Arizona, called “Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni.” This included the largest uranium reserves in the U.S.
Biden announces new national monument in Arizona (msn.com)
At least MSN reported on the Uranium. In 1996, few noticed the coal reserves and mining coal is not that popular. But this time, the cover-up may not work. It is hard to imagine any U.S. President doing something so likely to help our most feared enemies, like China, and Russia, at the worst possible time. While coal is abundant, uranium is not.
This is a reminder of when Hillary Clinton was involved in the transfer of 20% of our uranium reserves out of the U.S. to Canada where it was shipped overseas. The following article from Snopes.com, which is a website designed to discredit legitimate criticisms about Democrats, documented exactly why this transaction was a problem.
Snopes admitted that the Clinton Foundation got $145 million from Uranium One investors. Then tries to explain why this shouldn’t be suspicious, documenting instead why it stinks to high heaven.
“Of the $145 million allegedly contributed to the Clinton Foundation by Uranium One investors, the lion’s share — $131.3 million — came from a single donor, Frank Giustra, the company’s Canadian founder. But Giustra sold off his entire stake in the company in 2007, three years before the Russia deal and at least 18 months before Clinton became secretary of state.
Of the remaining individuals connected with Uranium One who donated to the Clinton Foundation, only one was found to have contributed during the same time frame that the deal was taking place, according to The New York Times — Ian Telfer (also a Canadian), the company’s chairman:?
Can you imagine the MSM ignoring something like this involving Trump?
All this begs the question: “which is more important, someone who allegedly conspired to get elected by preventing Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden from being President of the United States? Or people like Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden who, when in positions of power, literally blocked the U.S. from access to what is arguably our most important mineral asset?” At times it may be difficult to be sure who is really our friend, but it is often easy to discern who is most definitely our enemy. Is there seriously anyone who does not understand the importance of preserving our access to uranium? Anyone? (Other than Hillary and Joe)
This should be obvious, even to liberal Democrats. If you give away National Security, what else, exactly, matters.
TDM