-
I can't say that I have picked up on widespread bias about it. The timescales don't line up, no uranium was sold to Russia, Clinton didn't decide the outcome.
At absolute worst, a handful of Russian shareholders might make some money the next time the USA buys uranium from a Canadian company. Which is even more of a non event when you consider that the USA buys a shit ton of uranium from Russia anyway.
EDIT: I think this article covers it fairly well https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/10/29/the-dossier-and-the-uranium-deal-a-guide-to-the-latest-allegations/?utm_term=.eed38885fa96
Stonehedge-
Cheers, that article and this one https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/10/26/the-facts-behind-trumps-repeated-claim-about-hillary-clintons-role-in-the-russian-uranium-deal/?utm_term=.3605386f3235 cleared a few things up.
I'd seen articles dismissing the accusations but nothing with a detailed rebuttal like the Washington Post ones.
aggi
Any suggestions for any unbiased reads on the uranium stuff and Clintons? Most articles have a fair bit of bias one way or the other.