As Twitchy has reported, there hasn’t been much in the headlines about a story broken by The Hill on Tuesday that essentially confirmed something Donald Trump suggested throughout his campaign; that is, Russian nuclear officials routed millions to the Clintons’ charitable foundation and ended up capturing 20 percent of America’s uranium supply during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state.

The Hill reported:

Federal agents used a confidential U.S. witness working inside the Russian nuclear industry to gather extensive financial records, make secret recordings and intercept emails as early as 2009 that showed Moscow had compromised an American uranium trucking firm with bribes and kickbacks in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, FBI and court documents show.

They also obtained an eyewitness account — backed by documents — indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow, sources told The Hill.

The president weighed in on the story Thursday, which led CNN to at least mention it in passing.

Uranium deal to Russia, with Clinton help and Obama Administration knowledge, is the biggest story that Fake Media doesn't want to follow!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 19, 2017

Twitter pundit and blogger Brian Cates put a question out to some of the biggest names in journalism, and it’s worth repeating: where were all the leakers on this Russia-centric story? There certainly has been no shortage of leaks from the White House in 2017.

1) Here's a question for all the reporters out there: @jaketapper @BecketAdams @olivianuzzi @woodruffbets @daveweigel

— Brian Cates (@drawandstrike) October 21, 2017

2) In a White House supposedly RIDDLED with leakers, why didn't the reopening of investigation into #UraniumOneScandal leak beforehand?

— Brian Cates (@drawandstrike) October 21, 2017

3) Why was there no forewarning that the #UraniumOne Russian bribery scandal investigation was again underway the past 10 months?

— Brian Cates (@drawandstrike) October 21, 2017

4) How come nobody knows the DOJ has been quietly, surreptitiously gathering evidence for this case UNTIL @TheHill's reporters published?

— Brian Cates (@drawandstrike) October 21, 2017

5) A DOJ investigation into millions paid in bribes to the US officials – including the Clintons! – & not a WORD of it leaks out in months?

— Brian Cates (@drawandstrike) October 21, 2017

6) Nobody in the media has a clue this is going on UNTIL the DOJ calls in @TheHill's reporters & puts the documentary evidence before them.

— Brian Cates (@drawandstrike) October 21, 2017

7) How was this missed? Why does not a single source in either the WH or DOJ alert the media the Trump admin. is investigating the Clintons?

— Brian Cates (@drawandstrike) October 21, 2017

8) Were reporters so fixated on a Trump/Russia narrative sources DID try to tell them, but were discounted?

— Brian Cates (@drawandstrike) October 21, 2017

9) Or could it be news of this epic investigation never leaked because most of the leaks coming out of WH/DOJ are fake to begin with?

— Brian Cates (@drawandstrike) October 21, 2017

10) Nobody could tell the media because all the leakers are either making stuff up or being fed deliberate disinformation to keep media busy

— Brian Cates (@drawandstrike) October 21, 2017

11) Either way, it's clear that this is something you would EXPECT to have leaked long ago. And yet it did not. Is it time to ask why?
/end

— Brian Cates (@drawandstrike) October 21, 2017

ADDENDUM: I seem to recall some guy telling the media this directly: "The leaks are real; the news is fake."