There's yet another Trump administration scandal brewing. And it's a doozy.
*We begin with a company called IP3 International, described as “a private company that has assembled a consortium of U.S. companies to build nuclear plants in Saudi Arabia.” IP3, which has an all-star team of former generals and federal officials on its staff and board, was pushing hard on the Trump administration to approve its plan to build these reactors despite the lengthy process required to transfer nuclear technology abroad. And according to the Oversight Committee’s report, they had help:'>>>
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/20/theres-yet-another-trump-administration-scandal-brewing-its-doozy/?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Clearly they are too busy chasing screwball actor stunts to worry about , oh, i don't know...
Whose state-owned industry in turn has very strong relations with Westinghouse, who are the premier world-wide builders of nuclear power plants. Makes sense they would, after all.
And then there's this:
"Rita Baranwal, a former executive at Westinghouse Electric Corp., is the White House’s pick to head the Energy Department’s Office of Nuclear Energy."
BTW, Ukraine, Russia, and Uzbekistan (iirc) are also I believe top 10 World Uranium exporters ...
Coincidence?
Note I don't have WaPo access, so if this is all in the article, forgive me. This is just shit I already researched 
the Trump administration's desire to profit from it with little regard for the dangers of nuclear proliferation:
No to a permissive US-Saudi nuclear deal
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
By Victor Gilinsky, Henry Sokolski, February 22, 2018
Link: https://thebulletin.org/2018/02/no-to-a-permissive-us-saudi-nuclear-deal/
(snips)
More disappointing, although perhaps not surprising, is that the proposed agreement has the support of more than a few nuclear policy experts outside government. They make a familiar argument regarding nuclear exports: If the United States insists on stricter terms—terms that bar enrichment and reprocessing—the Saudis will turn to Russia or China for nuclear technology, granting these countries greater influence in the Middle East. The United States has been down this road before, in the cases of Iran and India, and it didn’t turn out well. A permissive US-Saudi nuclear agreement would be strategically dangerous for the United States and the region. Congress should not approve such a deal.
What’s driving the administration to cut such an agreement? Let’s set aside the Energy Department’s claims that the Saudis need nuclear power plants and that Westinghouse has a chance to get the business for the United States. First, the Saudis have cheaper energy options—natural gas and renewables. This is clear from the decision of the similarly situated United Arab Emirates not to build more nuclear plants beyond four reactors already planned or under construction. Second, Westinghouse—now bankrupt—has no chance to get the business, and in any case it is no longer a US-owned company. The Saudis, if they did go forward with developing nuclear energy, would do business with the South Koreans, who are successfully completing a proven reactor design next door in the United Arab Emirates.
Also see this article and associated links at end of article:
The Khashoggi murder raises questions about a Saudi Bomb
By John Mecklin, November 23, 2018
Link: https://thebulletin.org/2018/11/the-khashoggi-murder-raises-questions-about-a-saudi-bomb/
Trump's cabinet is playing some extremely dangerous games IMO.......
........
