NEWS

THE RUSSIAN DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY IN WASHINGTON, DC

THE RUSSIAN DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY IN WASHINGTON, DC

 

Or

 

Who needs spies when a few bribes will do?

 

John Doerr, of Kleiner Perkins, is one of the top financial backers of Obama and Hillary, the top recipients of cash and contracts from Obama and Hillary in the Cleantech Crash and the biggest player in Russian deals with America’s sworn enemy. Why? Greed? Hubris?

 

The Clinton Foundation, State and Kremlin Connections

 

Why did Hillary’s State Department urge U.S. investors to fund Russian research for military uses?

 

 

 

Hillary Clinton and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Geneva, 2009. Photo: AFP/Getty Images

By

Peter Schweizer

541 COMMENTS

Hillary Clinton touts her tenure as secretary of state as a time of hardheaded realism and “commercial diplomacy” that advanced American national and commercial interests. But her handling of a major technology transfer initiative at the heart of Washington’s effort to “reset” relations with Russia raises serious questions about her record. Far from enhancing American national interests, Mrs. Clinton’s efforts in this area may have substantially undermined U.S. national security.

Consider Skolkovo, an “innovation city” of 30,000 people on the outskirts of Moscow, billed as Russia’s version of Silicon Valley—and a core piece of Mrs. Clinton’s quarterbacking of the Russian reset.

Following his 2009 visit to Moscow, President Obama announced the creation of the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission. Mrs. Clinton as secretary of state directed the American side, and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov represented the Russians. The stated goal at the time: “identifying areas of cooperation and pursuing joint projects and actions that strengthen strategic stability, international security, economic well-being, and the development of ties between the Russian and American people.”

The Kremlin committed $5 billion over three years to fund Skolkovo. Mrs. Clinton’s State Department worked aggressively to attract U.S. investment partners and helped the Russian State Investment Fund, Rusnano, identify American tech companies worthy of Russian investment. Rusnano, which a scientific adviser to President Vladimir Putin called “Putin’s child,” was created in 2007 and relies entirely on Russian state funding.

What could possibly go wrong?

Related Articles

Soon, dozens of U.S. tech firms, including top Clinton Foundation donors like Google, Inteland Cisco,made major financial contributions to Skolkovo, with Cisco committing a cool $1 billion. In May 2010, the State Department facilitated a Moscow visit by 22 of the biggest names in U.S. venture capital—and weeks later the first memorandums of understanding were signed by Skolkovo and American companies.

 

 

By 2012 the vice president of the Skolkovo Foundation, Conor Lenihan—who had previously partnered with the Clinton Foundation—recorded that Skolkovo had assembled 28 Russian, American and European “Key Partners.” Of the 28 “partners,” 17, or 60%, have made financial commitments to the Clinton Foundation, totaling tens of millions of dollars, or sponsored speeches by Bill Clinton.

Russians tied to Skolkovo also flowed funds to the Clinton Foundation. Andrey Vavilov, the chairman of SuperOx, which is part of Skolkovo’s nuclear-research cluster, donated between $10,000 and $25,000 (donations are reported in ranges, not exact amounts) to the Clinton’s family charity. Skolkovo Foundation chief and billionaire Putin confidant Viktor Vekselberg also gave to the Clinton Foundation through his company, Renova Group.

Amid all the sloshing of Russia rubles and American dollars, however, the state-of-the-art technological research coming out of Skolkovo raised alarms among U.S. military experts and federal law-enforcement officials. Research conducted in 2012 on Skolkovo by the U.S. Army Foreign Military Studies Program at Fort Leavenworth declared that the purpose of Skolkovo was to serve as a “vehicle for world-wide technology transfer to Russia in the areas of information technology, biomedicine, energy, satellite and space technology, and nuclear technology.”

Moreover, the report said: “the Skolkovo Foundation has, in fact, been involved in defense-related activities since December 2011, when it approved the first weapons-related project—the development of a hypersonic cruise missile engine. . . . Not all of the center’s efforts are civilian in nature.”

Technology can have multiple uses—civilian and military. But in 2014 the Boston Business Journal ran an op-ed placed by the FBI, and noted that the agency had sent warnings to technology and other companies approached by Russian venture-capital firms. The op-ed—under the byline of Lucia Ziobro, an assistant special agent at the FBI’s Boston office—said that “The FBI believes the true motives of the Russian partners, who are often funded by their government, is to gain access to classified, sensitive, and emerging technology from the companies.”

Ms. Ziobro also wrote that “The [Skolkovo] foundation may be a means for the Russian government to access our nation’s sensitive or classified research development facilities and dual-use technologies with military and commercial application.”

To anyone who was paying attention, the FBI’s warnings should have come as little surprise. A State Department cable sent to then-Secretary Clinton (and obtained via WikiLeaks) mentioned possible “dual use and export control concerns” related to research and development technology ventures with Moscow. And in its own promotional literature Skolkovo heralded the success of its development of the Atlant hybrid airship.

Particularly noteworthy is Atlant’s ability to deliver military cargoes,” boasts the Made in Skolkovo publication: “The introduction of this unique vehicle is fully consistent with the concept of creating a mobile army and opens up new possibilities for mobile use of the means of radar surveillance, air and missile defense, and delivery of airborne troops.”

Even if it could be proven that these tens of millions of dollars in Clinton Foundation donations by Skolkovo’s key partners played no role in the Clinton State Department’s missing or ignoring obvious red flags about the Russian enterprise, the perception would still be problematic. (Neither the Clinton campaign nor the Clinton Foundation responded to requests for comment.) What is known is that the State Department recruited and facilitated the commitment of billions of American dollars in the creation of a Russian “Silicon Valley” whose technological innovations include Russian hypersonic cruise-missile engines, radar surveillance equipment, and vehicles capable of delivering airborne Russian troops.

A Russian reset, indeed.

Mr. Schweizer is president of the Government Accountability Institute and the author of “ Clinton Cash.” A larger report on the subject of this article is available at Cronyism.com.

 

 

 

Report: Hillary Clinton’s Campaign Mgr John Podesta Sat on Board of Company that Bagged $35 Million from Putin-Connected Russian Govt Fund

 

80

 

 

Justin Sullivan, Drew Angerer / Getty Images

 

by Stephen K. Bannon & Peter Schweizer

 

Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta sat on the board of a small energy company alongside Russian officials that received $35 million from a Putin-connected Russian government fund, a relationship Podesta failed to fully disclose on his federal financial disclosures as required by law.

 

That’s one of the many revelations from a 56-page report released late Sunday titled “From Russia with Money: Hillary Clinton, the Russian Reset, and Cronyism” by the non-partisan government watchdog group, the Government Accountability Institute (GAI). Breitbart Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon holds the same title in GAI and Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large Peter Schweizer serves as GAI’s president.

 

Both the New York Post and the Wall Street Journal ran stories on the newly released report late Sunday evening.

 

As part of her duties during the so-called Russian reset, then-Sec. of State Hillary Clinton led the way on U.S. involvement in a Russian government technology initiative that was intended to be the Russian equivalent of America’s Silicon Valley known as Skolkovo. The “innovation city,” located outside Moscow, has some 30,000 workers in state-of-the-art facilities under strict government control. As Slate described it in 2013, “In some ways, Skolkovo is eerily reminiscent of Soviet utopian city-building projects.”

 

According to the GAI report, Clinton’s State Dept. recruited U.S. tech giants like Google, Cisco, Intel. Indeed, out of 28 U.S., European, and Russian companies that participated in Skolkovo, 17 of them were Clinton Foundation donors or paid for speeches by Bill Clinton.

 

However, as involvement in Skolkovo by Clinton cronies increased, so, too, did the danger for the technology coming out of the Russian tech mecca to be used for Russian military purposes.

 

In 2014, the FBI issued what it called “an extraordinary warning” to several technology companies involved with Skolkovo. “The [Skolkovo] foundation may be a means for the Russian government to access our nation’s sensitive or classified research development facilities and dual-use technologies with military and commercial application,” warned Lucia Ziobro, the assistant special agent at the FBI’s Boston office. She added: “The FBI believes the true motives of the Russian partners, who are often funded by the government, is to gain access to classified, sensitive, and emerging technology from the companies.”

 

Still, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta sat on the executive board of a small energy company called Joule Unlimited. Joule, too, received the FBI letter warning about Skolkovo. Other Joule board members included senior Russian officials. According to the GAI report: “Two months after Podesta joined the board, Vladimir Putin’s Rusnano announced that it would invest up to one billion rubles into Joule Unlimited, which amounts to $35 million. That represents one-fifth of the entire amount of investment dollars Joule collected from 2007 to 2013.”

 

Rusnano, which former Russian education and science minister and current science advisor to Vladmir Putin Andrei Fursenko describes as “Putin’s child,” was founded by Putin in 2007.

 

The GAI investigative report says it’s unclear how much, if any, money Podesta made. The reason: Podesta was on the board of three Joule entities, but only listed two on his disclosure; the most important entity, Joule Stichting, he did not list. “Podesta’s compensation by Joule cannot be fully determined,” reads the report. “In his 2014 federal government disclosure filing, Podesta lists that he divested stock options from Joule. However, the disclosure does not cover the years 2011-2012.”

 

Why Podesta failed to reveal, as required by law on his federal financial disclosures, his membership on the board of this offshore company is presently unknown.

 

But the flows of funds from Russia during the ‘reset’ to Podesta-connected entities apparently didn’t end with Joule Energy,” the report states. According to the GAI report, Podesta’s far-left think tank, Center for American Progress (CAP), took in $5.25 million from the Sea Change Foundation between 2010-2013.

 

Who was funding Sea Change Foundation? According to tax records, Sea Change Foundation at the time was receiving a large infusion of funds from a mysterious Bermuda-based entity called ‘Klein, Ltd.’…Who owns Klein? It is impossible to say exactly, given corporate secrecy laws in Bermuda. But the registered agent and lawyers who set up the offshore entity are tied to a handful of Russian business entities including Troika Dialog, Ltd. Leadership includes Ruben Vardanyan, an ethnic Armenian who is a mega oligarch in Putin’s Russia. Vardanyan also served on the board of Joule Energy with John Podesta.

 

The FBI and U.S. Army sounded the alarm bells about Skolkovo being a threatening pathway for Russia to accelerate its military technological capabilities. Why Hillary Clinton’s State Dept and her campaign manager were tied up in this raises serious questions that demand answers and transparency.

 

 

 

Digital Sky Technologies

Status: Corporate Investor
Founded: 2005
Location: Moscow, London

Facebook stake: 5.4%
Value: $4.6 billion


Russian Internet holding company, Digital Sky, grabbed 1.96% of Facebook stock in May of 2009 when it spent $200 million at a $10 billion valuation. Digital Sky, which is largely backed by a wealthy Russian oligarch, is the owner of Facebook clone VKontakte, the largest social network in Russia. Under the direction of Managing Partner, Yuri Milner (pictured), Digital Sky has also amassed sizeable positions in Zynga and Groupon, and is reportedly in talks to buy a substantial stake in Twitter. DST followed its initial stake in Facebook with large block purchases of stock from existing Facebook shareholders and employees. Digitial Sky also joined Goldman Sachs in 2010 for the investment bank’s multi-hundred million investment round, with DST ponying up $50 million for yet another .1% of the firm (at a $50 billion valuation).

 

 

 

 

 

Goldman Sachs

Status: Corporate Investor
Founded: 1869
Location: New York, NY

Facebook stake: 1%
Value: $850 million


Sterling-plated investment bank, Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) appears to have the inside track underwriting a future Facebook IPO with its participation in a $1.5 billion capital raise. Finalized January of 2011, the transaction included a $450 million investment from Goldman Sachs, $50 million from DST, and $1 billion from unnamed foreign investors. The deal valued Facebook at $50 billion. The financing created controversy as it appeared to be a way for Facebook to sidestep U.S. securities laws forcing privately-held companies to make SEC filings once they reach a 500 shareholder threshold. Facebook stated it will begin disclosing financial information, or stage an initial public offering, by April 2012. Goldman Sachs pushed Russian mining deals involving over 40 Russian oligarchs and also ran almost every Steven Chu Department of Energy financing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kleiner Perkins
Caufield & Byers

Status: Venture Capital Investor
Founded: 1972
Location: Menlo Park, CA

Facebook stake: .073%
Value: $62 million


Founded in 1972, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers (KPCB) is considered to be one of the most successful and influential venture capital firms in the world. In early 2011, KPCB purchased $38 million in Facebook stock from other shareholders at a $52 billion valuation according to the Wall Street Journal. Although KPCB made its mark during the dot-com era with investments in Amazon.com and Google, the firm diddled with un-realized cleantech investments for most of the last decade. KPCB is now sipping from the social web Kool-Aid, and has purchased stakes in Groupon, Twitter, and Zynga, in addition to Facebook. The navigation towards social networking investments comes on the heels of KPCB’s recently announced sFund, a $250 million initiative to invest in entrepreneurs inventing social applications and services.

 

Let usw examine these russian connections at the following links:

 

How Russian Tycoon Yuri Milner Bought His Way Into …

 

How Russian Tycoon Yuri Milner Bought His Way Into Silicon Valley

 

http://www.wired.com/2011/10/mf_milner/

 

 

 

https://teslainvestigation.wordpress.com/2015/10/13/john-doerr-and-kleiner-perkins-under-investigation-for-dealings-with-questionable-russian-business-men/

 

 

 

Ellen Pao says she has been fired by Kleiner Perkins – Cambodian …

 

(Credit: Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers ) . … was given by Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev after his talks with the Vietnamese Prime …

 

http://www.cambodiantimes.com/index.ph%5B…%5Dhp/sid/209717056/scat/dacc71693d799f0c

 

 

 

Back to John Doerr, who recently re-emerged in the DNC and Clinton leaks. Doerr was one of the men who sponsored Steven Chu as Secretary of Energy. Chu has now been voted “one of the most corrupt bureaucrats in U.S. history because Chu handed federal emergency money exclusively to John Doerr and his Silicon Valley Cartel as payback for Doerr putting Chu in the position to give Doerr the kickbacks. Doerr also had Chu hand out money to Severstal, Ener1 and other companies owned by Doerr’s Russian billionaire friends.

 

 

 

<

p class=”western” style=”margin-bottom:0;line-height:100%;”>Why was Chu giving billions of dollars of taxpayer money, which was supposed to be used to save financially desperate American companies, to Russian billionaires?

 

Advertisements

Leave a news link, news story or tip:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s