[Smerconish:] Welcome back. There was a major development in the 2016 campaign this week. Hillary Clinton has just announced her candidacy, but already it's embroiled in controversy. This week, the "New York Times" reported Clinton State Department approved the sale of uranium mines in America to a Russian company whose principal donated $2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation. That's a contribution which was not disclosed by the Clintons despite an agreement reached between Hillary Clinton and the Obama White House. The transaction allowed Russia to control one-fifth of uranium production here in the U.S., which at the time raised alarm bells with one member of the United States Senate with whom I've just spoken. Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming. Senator, I have your December 21, 2010 letter to the president where you're expressing concerns about the sale of American uranium reserves to the Russian government. Why were you so troubled by this transaction?
[Sen. John Barrasso , Wyoming:] Well, I was concerned about America energy security and national security. We know that the Russians had been providing uranium to people across the world who are not necessarily our friends, including Iran and people in Wyoming, which is an area where significant amounts of this uranium were coming from. I was hearing from them that they wanted to make sure that this uranium did not go overseas. After all, we in continued to import a significant amount of the uranium we use for nuclear power in the United States.
[Smerconish:] Did you get a reply?
[Barrasso:] Well, it took about three months and I heard from the chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and he said, "oh, yes, we're all making sure we will make sure that no uranium leaves the country. No uranium, U.S. uranium goes overseas because we want to make sure we get reporting, if any of that, if any of that happens." Well, now we're finding out four and a half years later that that that uranium is now controlled by the Russians and is going overseas, leaving our country.
[Smerconish:] My understanding is that this transaction gave the Russians control of one-fifth of the uranium production in the United States. Are you surprised in retrospect that the administration was not more concerned about the deal that was taking place?
[Barrasso:] Well, I would have expected more concern by the administration. We didn't get it. When you consider the fact that almost 80 percent of the uranium we use in the United States is imported and now we see that the Russians are controlling about 20 percent of our U.S. uranium supplies. I think it continues to be even more worrisome today than it was back in 2010 when I wrote the letter to President Obama.
[Smerconish:] When you wrote the letter, you were expressing concerns given the approval of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Were you aware of the fact that the State Department was also signing off on this deal?
[Barrasso:] Well, I wasn't aware of any of that component of it. I wanted to go right to the president with my concerns and the response I got was from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission three months after I wrote to the president. Now we hear the other issues and what the State Department has done, what contributions may have been made to both former President Clinton, as well as to the Clinton Foundation, which is now raising so much additional interest and concern and on those issues we're still trying to connect the dots.
[Smerconish:] Given your knowledge of the way that government functions, do you believe that this sort of approval, if necessary from the State Department, is the kind of thing that would have gotten to the desk of Secretary Clinton?
[Barrasso:] Well, I would have expected that the secretary of State would have approved such an arrangement where we could see that Russia would control 20 percent of the uranium in the United States. A product that we have to import significantly when 20 percent of all our electricity, our energy comes from nuclear power. So, yes, I would have thought that this would have raised to that level. My concern primarily was for national security and energy security for our country, especially when we see the way Russia uses energy as an instrument, a weapon, a power in international activities. So, I was very concerned about Russia getting U.S. uranium, especially knowing that they do send that product to people who are not our friends and especially Iran.
[Smerconish:] What came to light this week by virtue of coverage in the "New York Times" is the fact that the uranium one chair made a $2.35 million contribution to the Clinton Foundation, which apparently was not publicly disclosed by the Clintons. Your reaction to that is what?
[Barrasso:] Well, Secretary Clinton had promised the White House that she would disclose contributions that came into the foundation, like this one, and now we know that those were not disclosed. So, the secretary has not been forth right and forthcoming in things she promised the White House. I think we're still connecting the dots, but it's a great concern and specifically with Russia where Secretary Clinton early on in her term pressed the reset button with Russia to say we'd have a new arrangement, a new, a new day with Russia. Well now we see what's happened with Russia and with Putin and taking over Crimea and incursions into Ukraine, selling weaponry recently to Iran and now we know that Vladimir Putin controls 20 percent of the uranium in the United States and has a relationship with Iran at a time that we're trying to do the president is trying to do an arrangement with Iran with regard to nuclear weapons.
[Smerconish:] "The Times" coverage also put on the front page the fact that former President Bill Clinton close in time to the transaction that you were objecting to received a $500,000 speaking fee for going to Moscow and speaking at the behest of an investment bank that had ties to this deal. Your reaction to that is what?
[Barrasso:] Well, when you look at that, that's much higher than the speaking fees that President Clinton was getting up until that point. So, it was a quantum leap in the amount of money that former President Clinton was receiving for giving his speech.
[Smerconish:] I know that you closely read that story that broke Thursday on "The New York Times" Web site. It was a lengthy piece based in part on some original reporting by a forthcoming book and then a lot of independent reporting by "The Times." What was your big takeaway?
[Barrasso:] Well, my concern of this whole thing was rules that apply for the rest of the country don't seem to apply to the Clintons. They don't play by the rules the rest of the country plays in and the Democrats have put all their eggs into the Clinton basket it seems with the upcoming coronation of Hillary Clinton. And from a Republican standpoint, a conservative standpoint, we have an incredible number of qualified candidates ready to lead this country, ready to be the top of the ticket for 2016, and it's time to change direction in this country from what we've had under Hillary Clinton as secretary of state and under Barack Obama as president.
[Smerconish:] Thank you, Senator Barrasso. Appreciate your time.
[Barrasso:] Thanks, Michael.
[Smerconish:] Let's get another perspective on all of this. Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders is already positioning himself to be a progressive challenger in the 2016 presidential race and he joins me now. Senator John Barrasso was just here and he said that with regard to 2016, he thinks the Democrats put all their eggs in one basket and by now, virtue of these reports about the Clintons, the Clinton Foundation, uranium, the Russians, that basket has a hole in it which seemingly would benefit you. What's your reaction?
[Sen. Bernie Sanders , Vermont:] Well, my reaction is that the middle class of this country is disappearing and we have more wealth and income inequality than any time since the Great Depression. And my sense is that what we need is a strong, mass, grassroots movement in this country to stand up to the billionaire class to create the millions of jobs we need to demand the corporate America and the wealthy stop paying their fair share of taxes, that the Republicans finally recognize that climate change is real and that we have to address it, and that we create a government that works for all the people and not just a handful of billionaires.
[Smerconish:] OK. But respectfully the story of the week is "The New York Times" coverage about the Clinton Foundation, Secretary Clinton, uranium, the Russians and the fact that the Russian government now controls one-fifth of the American uranium supply. Surely, you have a reaction of that?
[Sanders:] Sure, it is of real concern. And I think the fact that you know, the Clintons have raised all kinds of money from people all over the world is something worth looking at. But, you know, Michael, to me it is not the story of the week or what the story of next week will be. The story of the last 40 years is a transfer of trillions of dollars for the middle class to the top 110 of 1 percent and as a result of Citizens United, a political system now where billionaires are able to buy elections, and we're seeing the results of that as a result in terms of the Republican budget, which is a total disaster for working people.
[Smerconish:] I hear you. But I think it fits the Bernie Sanders playbook to talk about someone who was perhaps able to obtain influence by making a $2.35 million contribution to a private foundation at the same time the State Department was approving a transaction allowing him and his entity to control so much of the American uranium supply.
[Sanders:] Well, if I decide to run for president, then I will make that decision shortly. That certainly will be one of the issues that I will be talking about.
[Smerconish:] All right, I promise you, I'll move on after this question. You are to help me understand Senator Bernie Sanders' mindset. I read all the clips where you hammered Senator Clinton, vis-a-vis her position on the trade deal. You are obviously making a conscious decision right now
[Sanders:] Right.
[Smerconish:] that you don't want to address this. And I don't understand why. It seems to me like it's legitimate fodder.
[Sanders:] I will address any and every issue, if I run for president.
[Smerconish:] Are you leaning toward getting in or staying out?
[Sanders:] We're going to make a decision shortly and the major impediment to me is trying to determine whether or not we can raise the kind of money that we need in this day in age, when billionaires are prepared to buy elections and it is likely that major candidates will be spending maybe as much as $2 billion. Can a candidate try and represent working families mount a serious and winning effort in that kind of climate where these candidates will have unlimited sums of money?
[Smerconish:] Does that include taking on the idea of a former president getting paid $500,000 by an investment bank to come to Moscow and give a speech while that investment bank is seeking to control the uranium supply in the United States?
[Sanders:] It will cover all issues, trust me. It will.
[Smerconish:] David Letterman is seeking to boost the Bernie Sanders campaign. Let me show you, Senator Sanders, what he aired on his program.
[David Letterman, Tv Host/comedian:] Nobody knows anything about Bernie Sanders. So here is a new segment we like to call this "Meet Bernie Sanders".
[Narrator:] Bernie Sanders is a political independent serving his second term as the junior senator from Vermont.
[Sanders:] It is called oligarchy and that is the system we are rapidly moving toward.
[Narrator:] He also stars on "Curb Your Enthusiasm" as Larry David.
[Larry David:] I'm not going to say anything. I'm going to keep my mouth shut and let you die.
[Narrator:] Thanks for watching "Meet Bernie Sanders."
[Smerconish:] I know you're a serious guy, but did you like the Letterman piece?
[Sanders:] I liked Larry David very much. He's a very funny guy.
[Smerconish:] Have you been told before have you been told before that your voices I want to see the two of you in the same room before you throw your hat into this ring.
[Sanders:] Well, that would be fun. He is I am a great admirer of him. I'm not a great fun of television in general, but his stuff is hysterical. I really do like him.
[Smerconish:] Agree with you on that. Senator Sanders, thank you so much.
[Sanders:] Thank you, Michael.
[Smerconish:] Coming up, 1.5 million African-American men are missing in America. Where they have gone and the implications will be explained by a noted American economist.