Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Yamcha on April 03, 2017, 07:43:41 AM
-
Top Obama Adviser Sought Names of Trump Associates in Intel
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-03/top-obama-adviser-sought-names-of-trump-associates-in-intel?t=1s (https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-03/top-obama-adviser-sought-names-of-trump-associates-in-intel?t=1s)
White House lawyers last month discovered that the former national security adviser Susan Rice requested the identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump transition and campaign, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.
The pattern of Rice's requests was discovered in a National Security Council review of the government's policy on "unmasking" the identities of individuals in the U.S. who are not targets of electronic eavesdropping, but whose communications are collected incidentally. Normally those names are redacted from summaries of monitored conversations and appear in reports as something like "U.S. Person One."
The National Security Council's senior director for intelligence, Ezra Cohen-Watnick, was conducting the review, according to two U.S. officials who spoke with Bloomberg View on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly. In February Cohen-Watnick discovered Rice's multiple requests to unmask U.S. persons in intelligence reports that related to Trump transition activities. He brought this to the attention of the White House General Counsel's office, who reviewed more of Rice's requests and instructed him to end his own research into the unmasking policy.
The intelligence reports were summaries of monitored conversations -- primarily between foreign officials discussing the Trump transition, but also in some cases direct contact between members of the Trump team and monitored foreign officials. One U.S. official familiar with the reports said they contained valuable political information on the Trump transition such as whom the Trump team was meeting, the views of Trump associates on foreign policy matters and plans for the incoming administration.
Rice did not respond to an email seeking comment on Monday morning. Her role in requesting the identities of Trump transition officials adds an important element to the dueling investigations surrounding the Trump White House since the president's inauguration.
-
Just saw this come out.
-
Let's see how the left on here will spin this.
-
Susan Rice tried to ‘unmask’ Trump associates in intelligence reports
http://nypost.com/2017/04/03/susan-rice-tried-to-unmask-trump-associates-in-intelligence-reports/ (http://nypost.com/2017/04/03/susan-rice-tried-to-unmask-trump-associates-in-intelligence-reports/)
Former President Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice asked for the identities of Americans in intelligence reports that are connected to officials on President Trump’s campaign and transition teams, according to a report Monday citing US officials.
A National Security Council review of the government’s policy on “unmasking” the identities of Americans caught up in incidental surveillance revealed Rice’s requests, Bloomberg reported.
The identities of citizens collected are normally redacted from the intelligence reports and are designated as something like “US Person One,” Bloomberg reported.
Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the NSC’s senior director for intelligence, uncovered Rice’s multiple requests related to the Trump transition in February while conducting the review and alerted the White House General Counsel’s office, which undertook another review of Rice and told him to stop his investigation into the unmasking, the website reported.
The intelligence documents contained summaries of conversations monitored between foreign officials talking about the Trump transition. They also contained some instances of communication between Trump associates and foreign officials, the report said.
The data, according to a US official, included sensitive information about who the Trump associates were meeting and their views on foreign policy issues.
Rice did not respond to an email seeking comment, the website said.
-
Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the NSC’s senior director for intelligence, uncovered Rice’s multiple requests related to the Trump transition in February while conducting the review and alerted the White House General Counsel’s office, which undertook another review of Rice and told him to stop his investigation into the unmasking, the website reported.
I actually want to weigh in on this, but I'm a little busy with work right now. Suffice it to say, I don't think this is some sort of smoking gun and OP's article doesn't suggest Susan Rice did anything illegal, so I don't really get the title. I have a few thoughts on this, I'll get to them later, but for now I'll just say that the part I quoted is something that jumped out at me.
-
3/22/17 - "No knowledge" EDIT- If it truly isn't illegal, and happens all the time, why did she deny it on 3/22?
(https://i.redd.it/9nnme15hzcpy.jpg)
-
Interesting that, as of now, there is no mention of this on CNN.
Will Susan Rice be investigated to determine if she, or someone else, was the one that leaked the unmasked names?
-
I smell trouble.
Susan Rice requested to unmask names of Trump transition officials, sources say
By Adam Housley
Published April 03, 2017
FoxNews.com
Multiple sources tell Fox News that Susan Rice, former national security adviser under then-President Barack Obama, requested to unmask the names of Trump transition officials caught up in surveillance.
The unmasked names, of people associated with Donald Trump, were then sent to all those at the National Security Council, some at the Defense Department, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and then-CIA Director John Brennan – essentially, the officials at the top, including former Rice deputy Ben Rhodes.
The names were part of incidental electronic surveillance of candidate and President-elect Trump and people close to him, including family members, for up to a year before he took office.
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer, asked about the revelations at Monday’s briefing, declined to comment specifically on what role Rice may have played or officials’ motives.
“I’m not going to comment on this any further until [congressional] committees have come to a conclusion,” he said, while contrasting the media’s alleged “lack” of interest in these revelations with the intense coverage of suspected Trump-Russia links.
When names of Americans are incidentally collected, they are supposed to be masked, meaning the name or names are redacted from reports – whether it is international or domestic collection, unless it is an issue of national security, crime or if their security is threatened in any way. There are loopholes and ways to unmask through backchannels, but Americans are supposed to be protected from incidental collection. Sources told Fox News that in this case, they were not.
This comes in the wake of Evelyn Farkas’ television interview last month in which the former Obama deputy secretary of defense said in part: “I was urging my former colleagues and, frankly speaking, the people on the Hill – it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people, get as much information as you can, get as much intelligence as you can, before President Obama leaves the administration.”
Meanwhile, Fox News also is told that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes knew about unmasking and leaking back in January, well before President Trump’s tweet in March alleging wiretapping.
Nunes has faced criticism from Democrats for viewing pertinent documents on White House grounds and announcing their contents to the press. But sources said “the intelligence agencies slow-rolled Nunes. He could have seen the logs at other places besides the White House SCIF [secure facility], but it had already been a few weeks. So he went to the White House because he could protect his sources and he could get to the logs.”
As the Obama administration left office, it also approved new rules that gave the NSA much broader powers by relaxing the rules about sharing intercepted personal communications and the ability to share those with 16 other intelligence agencies.
Rice is no stranger to controversy. As the U.S. Ambassador to the UN, she appeared on several Sunday news shows to defend the adminstration's later debunked claim that the Sept. 11, 2012 attacks on a U.S. consulate in Libya was triggered by an Internet video.
Rice also told ABC News in 2014 that Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl "served the United States with honor and distinction" and that he "wasn't simply a hostage; he was an American prisoner of war captured on the battlefield."
Bergdahl is currently facing court-martial on charges of desertion and misbehavior before the enemy for allegedly walking off his post in Afghanistan.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/03/susan-rice-requested-to-unmask-names-trump-transition-officials-sources-say.html
-
Interesting that, as of now, there is no mention of this on CNN.
Will Susan Rice be investigated to determine if she, or someone else, was the one that leaked the unmasked names?
No mention on auite a few of the larger networks/companies... (Rice is actually married to an executive producer at ABC) Must be waiting on a coordinated response from the PowersThatBe.
At this point, the media is practically asking why it smells like someone is cooking rabbit:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-idmgcoqtX3g/U1b-_1Ev5EI/AAAAAAAAJKA/FiZe-US3EoQ/s1600/1339345060183-bugs_bunny_cooking_himself_gif.jpg)
Spicer said today that this will be included in the House Oversight investigation. That's about it... :-\
-
Here comes the coordinated narrative:
An 'effort to divert attention' from the Trump-Russia probe
Pillar, who is now a nonresident senior fellow at Georgetown University's Center for Security Studies, said Rice may have even been motivated to request identities in order to constrain her own communications.
"If Ms. Rice was communicating with members of Trump's team regarding transition matters and she learns from intelligence that some such members also are communicating with the Russians, she would want to know exactly who is doing that so she can be extra careful in her own talks, lest something she says gets relayed to Moscow," Pillar said.
http://www.businessinsider.com/susan-rice-trump-unmask-intelligence-wiretap-2017-4 (http://www.businessinsider.com/susan-rice-trump-unmask-intelligence-wiretap-2017-4)
-
Fucking creepy:
-
Apparently a reporter (maggie haberman) with the NYT's got this story a week ago and sat on it. Go figure...
Also, "The information was disseminated to everyone at the top. More reports coming throughout the day on @FoxNews"
https://twitter.com/adamhousley/status/849001160547553280 (https://twitter.com/adamhousley/status/849001160547553280)
-
Always cracks me up when our right wingers get all excited before having any info
Very likely that Susan Rice did absolutely nothing wrong.
If this were any kind of smoking gun it much more likely the White House would have given the full documents to the committees.
-
Always cracks me up when our right wingers get all excited before having any info
Very likely that Susan Rice did absolutely nothing wrong.
If this were any kind of smoking gun it much more likely the White House would have given the full documents to the committees.
(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2016/08/05/us/05onfire1_xp/05onfire1_xp-master768-v2.jpg)
-
(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2016/08/05/us/05onfire1_xp/05onfire1_xp-master768-v2.jpg)
can you summarize what you think Susan Rice did ?
-
can you summarize what you think Susan Rice did ?
Can you read the various articles posted all over this site and the internet? I am not your errand boy.
-
Can you read the various articles posted all over this site and the internet? I am not your errand boy.
I want to know what your perception is of the articles you're reading
just sum it up in a few sentences
-
I want to know what your perception is of the articles you're reading
just sum it up in a few sentences
The title of this thread is sufficient.
-
The title of this thread is sufficient.
All that (and your current answer) tells me is that you have no clue what she did or whether it was wrong
-
All that (and your current answer) tells me is that you have no clue what she did or whether it was wrong
::)
Against my better judgement, I'll entertain you - From everything I have seen, it is not looking good for Rice. There is proof that she requested names be unmasked in the Trump circle dozens of times. When did these occur? Some sources are saying all the way before Trump was nominated. Is it illegal? Who knows, but it sure as hell isn't ethical - especially when the same sources are saying that the unmasked names/information was disseminated to "everyone at the top". Is this illegal? who knows, but a lot of people have denied knowing anything about Trump surveillance. SHE unmasked the information, and SHE disseminated it across many agencies.
Take into account that Nunes said that the information he has seen does not even include Russia. Why would those names be unmasked? Even if incidental, these names should be masked. And if we are talking about the same information (which I suspect we are), why in the hell would Rice share this information?
Why would Rice go on national television on 3/23 and deny knowing anything about this entire "surveillance" issue?
So right now, there is a whirlwind of "sources" and until the documents are publicly available, my opinion should mean nothing.
-
::)
Against my better judgement, I'll entertain you - From everything I have seen, it is not looking good for Rice. There is proof that she requested names be unmasked in the Trump circle dozens of times. When did these occur? Some sources are saying all the way before Trump was nominated. Is it illegal? Who knows, but it sure as hell isn't ethical - especially when the same sources are saying that the unmasked names/information was disseminated to "everyone at the top". Is this illegal? who knows, but a lot of people have denied knowing anything about Trump surveillance. SHE unmasked the information, and SHE disseminated it across many agencies.
Take into account that Nunes said that the information he has seen does not even include Russia. Why would those names be unmasked? Even if incidental, these names should be masked. And if we are talking about the same information (which I suspect we are), why in the hell would Rice share this information?
Why would Rice go on national television on 3/23 and deny knowing anything about this entire "surveillance" issue?
So right now, there is a whirlwind of "sources" and until the documents are publicly available, my opinion should mean nothing.
you asked more questions than you gave answers
Here are a few simple questions of my own
Is it unethical or illegal to request to "unmask" individuals ??
Do we know when it occurred, how and why (under what circumstances and for what reason)
Plenty of unanswered questions and speculation but somehow you've decided to skip over all that and start drawing conclusions
-
you asked more questions than you gave answers
Here are a few simple questions of my own
Is it unethical or illegal to request to "unmask" individuals ??
Do we know when it occurred, how and why (under what circumstances and for what reason)
Plenty of unanswered questions and speculation but somehow you've decided to skip over all that and start drawing conclusions
I am not a lawyer, I cannot speak the legality of the situation.
Various sources give various date ranges
I asked these questions in my statement. I gave you my opinions on what I think is going on.
It doesn't look good for Rice to go on TV a week earlier and lie about not knowing anything about the Nunes/surveillance situation. Especially when there are logs showing that Rice requested the unmasking of Trump associates.
-
Guy who broke the story just dropped this tidbit:
(https://i.redd.it/sacjepdk5fpy.jpg)
-
Ordinarily, such references to Americans would be redacted or minimized by the NSA before being shared with outside intelligence sources, but in these cases, names were sometimes unmasked at the request of Rice or the intelligence reports were specific enough that the American’s identity was easily ascertained, the sources said.
The exact national security justifications for Rice accessing the reports isn’t clear and may require additional documentation that the House and Senate intelligence committees have requested from the NSA, America’s lead agency in spying on foreign powers.
How the information was disseminated beyond Rice will also be a potential focus of congressional oversight, since lawmakers may want to know if it was briefed to Obama or shared with members of her larger circle of advisers, like deputy Ben Rhodes.
Rice has not returned repeated calls for comment from Circa. But in an interview with PBS recently, she said she had no idea what House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes was talking about when he said Obama officials were monitoring Trump associates after the election.
http://circa.com/politics/accountability/white-house-logs-indicate-susan-rice-consumed-unmasked-intel-on-trump-associates (http://circa.com/politics/accountability/white-house-logs-indicate-susan-rice-consumed-unmasked-intel-on-trump-associates)
-
Report–White House Computer Logs: Susan Rice Accessed Intel Reports Re Trump Associates
by Neil W. McCabe
3 Apr 2017
Circa News reported Monday that White House staffers found logs that document and date stamp President Barack Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice accessing intelligence reports that included associates of the Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign:
Intelligence sources said the logs discovered by National Security Council staff suggested Rice’s interest in the NSA materials, some of which included unmasked Americans’ identities, appeared to begin last July around the time Trump secured the GOP nomination and accelerated after Trump’s election in November launched a transition that continued through January.
The intelligence reports included some intercepts of Americans talking to foreigners and many more involving foreign leaders talking about the future president, his campaign associates or his transition, the sources said. Most if not all had nothing to do with the Russian election interference scandal, the sources said, speaking only on condition of anonymity given the sensitive nature of the materials.
When intelligence or law enforcement agencies accidentally gather information related to American citizens, outside their legally sanctioned collection mission, the data appears in reports with simple labels, such as American 1 or American 2. However, when the reports were circulated inside the Obama administration, the actual names were used, or unmasked, or labelled in a way that made the speaker’s identity obvious.
The report written by Sara Carter and John Solomon also quotes an intelligence source, who said it is the common practice to step up surveillance of foreign governments after an election and that after Trump’s surprise victory Nov. 8 this ramped up intelligence gathering provided more opportunities for incidental collection of Trump associates, as the transition team reached out to foreign governments to prepare for the new administration.
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2017/04/03/report-white-house-computer-logs-betray-susan-rice-accessing-intel-reports-related-to-trump-associates/
-
(https://i.redd.it/w99d2ecimfpy.png)
So if this really is a big "nothing", can Trump use this tactic to his advantage in 2020?
-
I want to know what your perception is of the articles you're reading
just sum it up in a few sentences
A fat, black, ignorant, law breaking stooge for the former president will be found innocent no matter how many laws she broke just because she is black.
And the Dems will watch the demise of their party never understanding that it's not the Russians....its YOU!
-
Will believe it when I see it. Not that they don't have proof....just that no perp walk is going to happen.
If you can't prosecute Hillary for obvious security issues/tax fraud then Rice will walk as well. Trump takes the beating and keeps on is my guess.
-
Multiple sources tell Fox News that Susan Rice, former national security adviser under then-President Barack Obama, requested to unmask the names of Trump transition officials caught up in surveillance.
The unmasked names, of people associated with Donald Trump, were then sent to all those at the National Security Council, some at the Defense Department, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and then-CIA Director John Brennan – essentially, the officials at the top, including former Rice deputy Ben Rhodes.
The names were part of incidental electronic surveillance of candidate and President-elect Trump and people close to him, including family members, for up to a year before he took office.
:-\
-
Susan Rice - same slob and corrupt hack who covered for the lies on Benghazi
-
Susan Rice - same slob and corrupt hack who covered for the lies on Benghazi
Loretta Lynch twin.
Obese neegul who got her entire career from being a neegul.
Lock her up!!!!
-
Is it illegal? Who knows, but it sure as hell isn't ethical
What would be unethical about that? She was the national security adviser. Even if you interpreted it as a joke, trump did encourage a foreign government to hack his opponent's email during the presidential election campaign. Multiple members of his team were in contact with russian entities. We know one of those people lied about the nature of that contact, was fired and was seeking immunity to testify.
These ARE matters of national security. On the previous page, someone posted an article -from Breitbart of all places- that discussed how foreign surveillance escalates during a presidential transition. Just a few days ago, you started this thread (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=627953.0) in which it was revealed that the Obama administration nixed the idea of Comey writing an op-ed about Russian influence of the election until a stronger case could be made, which,in my opinion, does not support the idea that this was a flimsy witch hunt.
-
(https://i.redd.it/p8zp2g414kpy.jpg)
-
What would be unethical about that? She was the national security adviser. Even if you interpreted it as a joke, trump did encourage a foreign government to hack his opponent's email during the presidential election campaign. Multiple members of his team were in contact with russian entities. We know one of those people lied about the nature of that contact, was fired and was seeking immunity to testify.
There would have been no intelligence need for Susan Rice to ask for identities to be unmasked. If there had been a real need to reveal the identities - an intelligence need based on American interests - the unmasking would have been done by the investigating agencies.
The national-security advisor is not an investigator. She is a White House staffer. The president's staff is a consumer of intelligence, not a generator or collector of it. If Susan Rice was unmasking Americans, it wasn't to fulfill an intelligence need based on American Interests; it was to fulfill a political desire based on White House/Democrat interests.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446415/susan-rice-unmasking-trump-campaign-members-obama-administration-fbi-cia-nsa (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446415/susan-rice-unmasking-trump-campaign-members-obama-administration-fbi-cia-nsa)
-
Former President Barack Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice ordered U.S. spy agencies to produce “detailed spreadsheets” of legal phone calls involving Donald Trump and his aides when he was running for president, according to former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova.
“What was produced by the intelligence community at the request of Ms. Rice were detailed spreadsheets of intercepted phone calls with unmasked Trump associates in perfectly legal conversations with individuals,” diGenova told The Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group Monday.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/03/susan-rice-ordered-spy-agencies-to-produce-detailed-spreadsheets-involving-trump/#ixzz4dIoRkgVK (http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/03/susan-rice-ordered-spy-agencies-to-produce-detailed-spreadsheets-involving-trump/#ixzz4dIoRkgVK)
-
There would have been no intelligence need for Susan Rice to ask for identities to be unmasked. If there had been a real need to reveal the identities - an intelligence need based on American interests - the unmasking would have been done by the investigating agencies.
The national-security advisor is not an investigator. She is a White House staffer. The president's staff is a consumer of intelligence, not a generator or collector of it. If Susan Rice was unmasking Americans, it wasn't to fulfill an intelligence need based on American Interests; it was to fulfill a political desire based on White House/Democrat interests.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446415/susan-rice-unmasking-trump-campaign-members-obama-administration-fbi-cia-nsa (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446415/susan-rice-unmasking-trump-campaign-members-obama-administration-fbi-cia-nsa)
This is just not accurate. I'm not a lawyer,either, and even if I was a lot of this stuff would be up for interpretation, but basically every single thing written on this is in agreement that American citizens' names are redacted as a matter of practice. If there is an intelligence need, authorized persons request the name, which is why the system is in place.
And, of course the job of national security advisor would require some level of investigation and deduction. Your opening post is an article about trump's nsc director allegedly conducting a review of the unmasking policy. If being "just" a white house staffer limited your duties to consuming intelligence, why was that task being performed?
That excerpt is just not a fact based analysis.
-
This is just not accurate. I'm not a lawyer,either, and even if I was a lot of this stuff would be up for interpretation, but basically every single thing written on this is in agreement that American citizens' names are redacted as a matter of practice. If there is an intelligence need, authorized persons request the name, which is why the system is in place.
And, of course the job of national security advisor would require some level of investigation and deduction. Your opening post is an article about trump's nsc director allegedly conducting a review of the unmasking policy. If being "just" a white house staffer limited your duties to consuming intelligence, why was that task being performed?
That excerpt is just not a fact based analysis.
you should be aware by now that Republicans make up their own facts
you know, Alternative Facts
heck if it weren't for alternative facts most of our right wing posters would have nothing to talk about
-
The names were part of incidental electronic surveillance of candidate and President-elect Trump and people close to him, including family members, for up to a year before he took office.
:-\
Former Trump adviser admits to 2015 communication with Russian spy
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/former-trump-adviser-admits-to-2015-communication-with-russian-spy/2017/04/04/a09d7384-193b-11e7-9887-1a5314b56a08_story.html?utm_term=.c7314472ad86
Carter Page, who served briefly as a foreign policy adviser to Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, made an appearance in a federal espionage case several years ago because he communicated with a Russian intelligence agent under surveillance by the FBI.
In a statement released Tuesday, Page confirmed his role in the 2015 Justice Department spy case, adding another twist to the still unfolding story of Trump’s peculiar and expanding ties to people connected to Russia.
-
the Rice is boiled.
-
This is one dishonest woman. Didn't she just say last month that she had no idea what folks were talking about?
Susan Rice defiant amid growing calls for her to testify under oath
By Alex Diaz
Published April 04, 2017
FoxNews.com
As Susan Rice faces growing calls to testify under oath, the former Obama administration official now accused of ordering the unmasking of Trump officials under surveillance is suggesting that she never did so for political purposes, and that it is sometimes "necessary" for investigative purposes.
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, a member of both the Senate Judiciary and Select Committee on Intelligence, suggested in a tweet earlier Tuesday that Rice "needs to testify under oath."
He included a link to a Wall Street Journal piece "Susan Rice Unmasked," a report that suggests Rice had sought the name of at least one Trump official in intelligence reports at a time when reports on Russia were reportedly being circulated broadly, according to a former intelligence official.
Responding to the accusation, Rice suggested in an interview on Tuesday that she "absolutely" did not order the unmasking of individuals for political purposes, and suggested that sometimes such a request would be necessary for an investigation.
"The allegation is that somehow Obama administration officials utilized intelligence for political purposes," Rice told MSNBC, "that is absolutely false.”
She said there were times she reviewed a report that referred to an American who was unnamed.
“And sometimes, in that context, in order to understand the importance of the report and assess its significance, it was necessary to find out, or request the information as to find out who that U.S. official was,” Rice said.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who also serves on the Judiciary Committee, told Fox News earlier that while he doesn't know whether Rice acted improperly, “when it comes to Susan Rice, you need to verify, not trust.”
He said he does not want to form an opinion – just yet.
"There's a way to find out,” Graham said. “I intend to find out.”
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., took things one step further, suggesting Rice "ought to be under subpoena," adding that the stories emerging about Rice are "actually eerily similar to what Trump accused them of, which is eavesdropping on conversations for political reasons."
Paul also suggested Rice needs to be asked whether she communicated with President Obama directly about the surveillance information.
In a tweet earlier today, Fox News contributor Katie Pavlich also pointed out what she sees as the irony in the situation.
"Democrats have gone from: Trump is insane for suggesting Obama admin spied on him,” the tweet said, “[to] Susan Rice was just doing her job."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/04/susan-rice-defiant-amid-growing-calls-for-her-to-testify-under-oath.html
-
She will lie just like Benghazi.
This is one dishonest woman. Didn't she just say last month that she had no idea what folks were talking about?
Susan Rice defiant amid growing calls for her to testify under oath
By Alex Diaz
Published April 04, 2017
FoxNews.com
As Susan Rice faces growing calls to testify under oath, the former Obama administration official now accused of ordering the unmasking of Trump officials under surveillance is suggesting that she never did so for political purposes, and that it is sometimes "necessary" for investigative purposes.
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, a member of both the Senate Judiciary and Select Committee on Intelligence, suggested in a tweet earlier Tuesday that Rice "needs to testify under oath."
He included a link to a Wall Street Journal piece "Susan Rice Unmasked," a report that suggests Rice had sought the name of at least one Trump official in intelligence reports at a time when reports on Russia were reportedly being circulated broadly, according to a former intelligence official.
Responding to the accusation, Rice suggested in an interview on Tuesday that she "absolutely" did not order the unmasking of individuals for political purposes, and suggested that sometimes such a request would be necessary for an investigation.
"The allegation is that somehow Obama administration officials utilized intelligence for political purposes," Rice told MSNBC, "that is absolutely false.”
She said there were times she reviewed a report that referred to an American who was unnamed.
“And sometimes, in that context, in order to understand the importance of the report and assess its significance, it was necessary to find out, or request the information as to find out who that U.S. official was,” Rice said.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who also serves on the Judiciary Committee, told Fox News earlier that while he doesn't know whether Rice acted improperly, “when it comes to Susan Rice, you need to verify, not trust.”
He said he does not want to form an opinion – just yet.
"There's a way to find out,” Graham said. “I intend to find out.”
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., took things one step further, suggesting Rice "ought to be under subpoena," adding that the stories emerging about Rice are "actually eerily similar to what Trump accused them of, which is eavesdropping on conversations for political reasons."
Paul also suggested Rice needs to be asked whether she communicated with President Obama directly about the surveillance information.
In a tweet earlier today, Fox News contributor Katie Pavlich also pointed out what she sees as the irony in the situation.
"Democrats have gone from: Trump is insane for suggesting Obama admin spied on him,” the tweet said, “[to] Susan Rice was just doing her job."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/04/susan-rice-defiant-amid-growing-calls-for-her-to-testify-under-oath.html
-
She will lie just like Benghazi.
Or like the time she said Bergdahl "served the United States with honor and distinction."
-
Or like the time she said Bergdahl "served the United States with honor and distinction."
She will cry racism and morons like Option Fat, andre, and Straw will eat it up and tune in to Madcow for talking points.
-
Dow Jones: House Intelligence Panel Asks Former Obama Adviser Susan Rice to Testify in Ongoing Probe, Officials Say
-
Gregg Jarrett: Did Susan Rice break the law?
By Gregg Jarrett
Published April 04, 2017
FoxNews.com
It is a tired, but apropos, joke: how do you know when a politician is lying? When his/her lips move.
Tuesday, Susan Rice was flapping her lips like a loose sail in a stiff breeze. She should have known better. Whenever she talks, trouble is sure to follow. For her.
Rice chose a benign venue in appearing on "Andrea Mitchell Reports" on MSNBC, but even that didn’t help.
The story she peddled was blatantly self-serving and punctuated with a glaring contradiction.
All of which invites the question, did she break the law in the waning days of the Obama administration when she served as National Security Adviser?
Rice denied leaking intelligence information about President Trump’s associates, yet she defended her requests to unmask the identities of U.S. citizens caught up in surveillance operations.
Here is how the law applies to Rice’s conduct. Or at least her version of it.
Unmasking Names
Rice acknowledged in the interview with Mitchell that she requested that names be unmasked, but she insists she did not do it for political purposes. It is an important distinction.
Under the U.S. Signals Intelligence Directive (section 18), Rice was authorized to unmask the names of U.S. citizens, as long as it was essential to national security. Sure enough, Rice claims that national security was her reason.
Here is the rub. It would be difficult for a prosecutor to prove otherwise. Likely, only Rice knows her true intent, and it is doubtful she authored a smoking-gun memo that reads, “let’s unmask these names so we can use their identities for political gain.”
But if such an email exists or if someone were to come forward to allege that Rice verbally confided her motivation was for political reasons, then she would be looking at a serious felony punishable by up to 5 years behind bars.
Rice could face an additional problem. If she requested that a name be unmasked in a document that had nothing whatsoever to do with foreign surveillance involving national security, an argument could be made that she created a false statement in her unmasking request, which is a crime under 18 USC 1001.
Leaking Names
Whoever leaked Michael Flynn’s name or any other names collected incidentally during surveillance, committed multiple crimes because those names are classified information.
Under 18 USC 798, it is a felony to knowingly and willfully communicate classified material to an unauthorized person.
A similar law, 50 USC 1809, forbids the unauthorized disclosure of national security information. Three other statutes may also have been violated.
The Washington Post reporter who received Flynn’s name described his source in a January 12, 2017 column as “a senior U.S. government official.” That would be a description of many people in Washington, Rice included. But she was in a unique position to have had access to what was supposed to be classified material.
Nevertheless, Rice insists she did not leak any names. Absent some proof that she is lying, she cannot be prosecuted. However, there is ample reason for people to suspect Rice is not telling the truth.
Rice’s Changing Story
In the course of less than 2 weeks, the story Rice has told seems to have changed significantly.
On March 22, she was asked by Judy Woodruff on PBS' "NewsHour” if she knew whether “Trump transition officials, including the president, may have been swept up in surveillance of foreigners at the end of the Obama administration”. In other words, incidental collection.
Rice responded, “I know nothing about this.”
Yet Tuesday she reversed herself completely, claiming she knew all about it. That is, she knew of the incidental collection and, further, she is the one who requested that names be unmasked. Yes, she spoke in generalities, but is there any doubt she was referring to Trump associates?
It is an understatement to say that Susan Rice lacks credibility. And this would not be the first time she conjured up a false narrative.
She infamously hustled the deception that a videotape triggered the Benghazi attack in September 2012. Later, when incriminating emails surfaced, she admitted the story was untrue.
She further tarnished her reputation when she said that Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, who faces charges of desertion and consorting with the enemy, served with “honor and distinction.”
Susan Rice has an abysmal track record of telling the truth. Her remarks Tuesday about the unmasking of surveillance may be another example.
Never Leaked Anything?
Rice seems to have taken her denials one step too far. During her MSNBC interview she declared, “I leaked nothing to nobody, and never have.” Really?
That’s next to impossible. Is there a person in Washington who hasn’t leaked something at some time to someone? If you can find that person, we should throw a parade.
So, when Rice makes a ludicrous statement like that, there is even more reason to doubt her veracity.
When asked if she would testify before Congress, Rice refused to answer. I hope she has good counsel. She would be testifying under oath. It is a serious crime to lie to Congress.
My guess is she’ll do everything she can to avoid raising her right hand.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/04/04/gregg-jarrett-did-susan-rice-break-law.html
-
She specifically asked for the names of Trump's transition team to be unmasked. I suspect she will be taking the Fifth. . . .
11 Highlights of Susan Rice’s MSNBC Interview with Andrea Mitchell
by Joel B. Pollak
4 Apr 2017
On Tuesday afternoon, President Barack Obama’s former National Security Advisor Susan Rice appeared on MSNBC with host Andrea Mitchell to answer questions about allegations that had emerged earlier in the week to suggest that she requested the “unmasking” of the names of Donald Trump’s campaign and transition teams in intelligence reports, which allegedly had nothing to do with national security, and that she had compiled spreadsheets of those names.
Here are the highlights of Mitchell’s interview with Rice, which took up the first quarter-hour of Mitchell’s show.
1.Rice admitted asking for the names of U.S. citizens in intelligence reports to be “unmasked.” Rice said: “There were occasions when I would receive a report in which a U.S. person was referred to. Name not provided, just U.S. person. And sometimes in that context, in order to understand the importance of the report, and assess its significance, it was necessary to find out, or request, the information as to who that U.S. official was.” Rice argued it was necessary for her and other officials to request that information, on occasion, to “do our jobs” to protect national security.
2.Rice admitted asking specifically for the names of members of Donald Trump’s transition team. She argued that she had not done so for political purposes, however. Mitchell asked: “Did you seek the names of people involved in — to unmask the names of people involved in the Trump transition, the people surrounding the president-elect in order to spy on them and expose them?” Rice answered: “Absolutely not for any political purposes to spy, expose, anything.”
3.Rice denied leaking the name of former General Michael Flynn. “I leaked nothing to nobody, and never have, and never would.” She added that to discuss particular targets would be to reveal classified information. She later walked back her denial. Mitchell: “The allegation is that you were leaking the fact that he spoke to the [Russian] ambassador and perhaps to others.” Rice: “I can’t get into any specific reports … what I can say is there is an established process.”
4.Rice denied reports that she prepared a “spreadsheet” of Trump transition staff under surveillance. Mitchell asked specifically about the Daily Caller story Tuesday: “They allege there was a spreadsheet you put out of all of these names and circulated it.” Rice: “Absolutely false. No spreadsheet, no nothing of the sort.” She said that unmasked names “was not then typically broadly disseminated throughout the national security community or the government.”
5.Rice said that even if she did request the names of citizens to be unmasked, that did not mean she leaked them. “The notion … that by asking for the identity of an American person, that is the same as leaking it, is completely false.”
6.Rice admitted that the pace of intelligence reports accelerated throughout the election. She said she could not say whether the pace of her “unmasking” requests accelerated, but she said there was increasing concern, as well as increasing information, relating to the possibility of Russian interference in the election, particularly after August 2016.
7.Rice implied that President Obama himself ordered the compilation of intelligence reports on Trump officials. “…the president requested the compliation of the intelligence, which was ultimately provided in January [2017].”
8.Rice said that she was unaware, even while working with Flynn during the transition, that he was working for the Turkish government. Mitchell asked: “When did you learn that?” Rice answered: “In the press, as everybody else did.” Mitchell, incredulously: “You didn’t know that, when you were National Security Advisor?” Rice: “I did not.”
9.Rice reiterated that President Obama never tapped Trump’s phone. “Absolutely false … there was no such collection [or] surveillance on Trump Tower or Trump individuals … directed by the White House or targeted at Trump individuals.” She did not deny that there might have been some surveillance by other agencies, however. She said it was impossible for the White House to order such surveillance, but that the Department of Justice could have done so.
10.Rice seemed aggrieved by Trump’s claims. “It wasn’t typical of the way presidents treat their predecessors.”
11.Rice would not say whether she would be willing to testify on Capitol Hill before Congress. “Let’s see what comes. I’m not going to sit here and prejudge,” she said. But she insisted that the investigations into Russian interference in the presidential election were of interest to every American citizen, and should be followed wherever the evidence leads.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/04/04/susan-rice-msnbc-interview-andrea-mitchell/
-
She specifically asked for the names of Trump's transition team to be unmasked. I suspect she will be taking the Fifth. . . .
11 Highlights of Susan Rice’s MSNBC Interview with Andrea Mitchell
by Joel B. Pollak
4 Apr 2017
On Tuesday afternoon, President Barack Obama’s former National Security Advisor Susan Rice appeared on MSNBC with host Andrea Mitchell to answer questions about allegations that had emerged earlier in the week to suggest that she requested the “unmasking” of the names of Donald Trump’s campaign and transition teams in intelligence reports, which allegedly had nothing to do with national security, and that she had compiled spreadsheets of those names.
Here are the highlights of Mitchell’s interview with Rice, which took up the first quarter-hour of Mitchell’s show.
1.Rice admitted asking for the names of U.S. citizens in intelligence reports to be “unmasked.” Rice said: “There were occasions when I would receive a report in which a U.S. person was referred to. Name not provided, just U.S. person. And sometimes in that context, in order to understand the importance of the report, and assess its significance, it was necessary to find out, or request, the information as to who that U.S. official was.” Rice argued it was necessary for her and other officials to request that information, on occasion, to “do our jobs” to protect national security.
2.Rice admitted asking specifically for the names of members of Donald Trump’s transition team. She argued that she had not done so for political purposes, however. Mitchell asked: “Did you seek the names of people involved in — to unmask the names of people involved in the Trump transition, the people surrounding the president-elect in order to spy on them and expose them?” Rice answered: “Absolutely not for any political purposes to spy, expose, anything.”
3.Rice denied leaking the name of former General Michael Flynn. “I leaked nothing to nobody, and never have, and never would.” She added that to discuss particular targets would be to reveal classified information. She later walked back her denial. Mitchell: “The allegation is that you were leaking the fact that he spoke to the [Russian] ambassador and perhaps to others.” Rice: “I can’t get into any specific reports … what I can say is there is an established process.”
4.Rice denied reports that she prepared a “spreadsheet” of Trump transition staff under surveillance. Mitchell asked specifically about the Daily Caller story Tuesday: “They allege there was a spreadsheet you put out of all of these names and circulated it.” Rice: “Absolutely false. No spreadsheet, no nothing of the sort.” She said that unmasked names “was not then typically broadly disseminated throughout the national security community or the government.”
5.Rice said that even if she did request the names of citizens to be unmasked, that did not mean she leaked them. “The notion … that by asking for the identity of an American person, that is the same as leaking it, is completely false.”
6.Rice admitted that the pace of intelligence reports accelerated throughout the election. She said she could not say whether the pace of her “unmasking” requests accelerated, but she said there was increasing concern, as well as increasing information, relating to the possibility of Russian interference in the election, particularly after August 2016.
7.Rice implied that President Obama himself ordered the compilation of intelligence reports on Trump officials. “…the president requested the compliation of the intelligence, which was ultimately provided in January [2017].”
8.Rice said that she was unaware, even while working with Flynn during the transition, that he was working for the Turkish government. Mitchell asked: “When did you learn that?” Rice answered: “In the press, as everybody else did.” Mitchell, incredulously: “You didn’t know that, when you were National Security Advisor?” Rice: “I did not.”
9.Rice reiterated that President Obama never tapped Trump’s phone. “Absolutely false … there was no such collection [or] surveillance on Trump Tower or Trump individuals … directed by the White House or targeted at Trump individuals.” She did not deny that there might have been some surveillance by other agencies, however. She said it was impossible for the White House to order such surveillance, but that the Department of Justice could have done so.
10.Rice seemed aggrieved by Trump’s claims. “It wasn’t typical of the way presidents treat their predecessors.”
11.Rice would not say whether she would be willing to testify on Capitol Hill before Congress. “Let’s see what comes. I’m not going to sit here and prejudge,” she said. But she insisted that the investigations into Russian interference in the presidential election were of interest to every American citizen, and should be followed wherever the evidence leads.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/04/04/susan-rice-msnbc-interview-andrea-mitchell/
Will she be subpoenaed to testify under oath? If so, I think she will keep pleading the fifth and stating "I can't recall" (like Hillary when she replied "I don't recall" in 21 out of 25 times). More likely than not she will be called "extremely careless", unfortunately. It's very unlikely that political crime and corruption at such a high level will be punished. Laws seem to be only for mere citizens.
-
Will she be subpoenaed to testify under oath? If so, I think she will keep pleading the fifth and stating "I can't recall" (like Hillary when she replied "I don't recall" in 21 out of 25 times). More likely than not she will be called "extremely careless", unfortunately. It's very unlikely that political crime and corruption at such a high level will be punished. Laws seem to be only for mere citizens.
Yes, she will be brought before the House/Senate Intelligence Committees, and nothing will fucking happen. I hope someone proves me wrong.
Susan Rice on Trump’s wiretapping claim: ‘Nothing of the sort occurred.’
http://archive.is/rVA3a#selection-1899.0-1915.220 (http://archive.is/rVA3a#selection-1899.0-1915.220)
Former National Security Adviser Susan Rice pushed back Wednesday against President Donald Trump’s claim that he was wiretapped by the Obama administration during the 2016 election.
“Nothing of the sort occurred,” Rice told PBS NewsHour’s Judy Woodruff, in her first interview since stepping down as national security adviser when President Barack Obama left office.
Rice also took aim at the Trump White House in a Washington Post op-ed Wednesday. “False statements from the White House are part of a disturbing pattern of behavior that poses real and potentially profound dangers to U.S. national security,” Rice wrote.
In the PBS NewsHour interview, Rice, who served as the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations during Obama’s first term, said the world was watching Trump’s presidency closely.
“I think the world is not impervious to what happens here in the United States,” Rice said. “On the contrary, they watch it very, very carefully.”
Her remarks came shortly after House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) met with Trump at the White House to discuss the panel’s investigation into Russia’s influence on last year’s presidential race.
Nunes told reporters after the meeting that Trump and some of his campaign officials were the subjects of ‘incidental collection’ during legal U.S. surveillance efforts of foreign targets in the months following the election.
Congressional Democrats criticized Nunes’ decision to meet with Trump. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said the meeting raised doubts about the House Intelligence chairman’s ability to conduct an independent investigation into potential ties between Russia and the Trump campaign.
Rice also responded to Trump’s claims that the Obama administration failed to weaken ISIS.
“I think the facts don’t bear that out,” Rice said. She argued that since ISIS reached its peak in 2014, the group has lost control of 60 percent of the land it occupied in Iraq, and 30 percent of its territory in Syria.
-
Will she be subpoenaed to testify under oath? If so, I think she will keep pleading the fifth and stating "I can't recall" (like Hillary when she replied "I don't recall" in 21 out of 25 times). More likely than not she will be called "extremely careless", unfortunately. It's very unlikely that political crime and corruption at such a high level will be punished. Laws seem to be only for mere citizens.
I would be shocked if she or anyone else is held accountable. The rules do not apply to everyone equally, unfortunately.
-
(https://i.redd.it/kcw0p6kuimpy.jpg)
-
Given how the Obama Administration used the IRS to target political opponents, it would not surprise me one bit if his minions have their fingerprints all over this, with plausible deniability for President Obama of course.
Fox reporter: Rice may have been told to request Trump team records
Published April 04, 2017
FoxNews.com
A Fox reporter investigating the "unmasking" of Trump transition officials by former national security adviser Susan Rice told "The O'Reilly Factor" Tuesday that they were examining whether Rice was told to request records about the president's associates.
FoxNews.com investigative reporter Malia Zimmerman told host Bill O'Reilly that she and Adam Housely were investigating whether "somebody from the [National Security Agency], for example, would have told [Rice] to ask for those reports, to ask for those names to be unmasked.
"That is what we’ve heard from some of our sources and so we’re looking into that angle as a possibility," she said.
Zimmerman and Housely reported Monday that the names were part of incidental electronic surveillance of candidate and President-elect Trump and people close to him, including family members, for up to a year before he took office.
"It’s just so vast, because we don’t know so many things," Zimmerman told O'Reilly. "We don’t know why they were surveilled – why they came up in the surveillance as incidental communications ... And we have to think about this in terms of this was going on for at least a year, according to our sources, possibly longer."
As national security adviser, Rice had the authority to request unmasking of names, a request which would have gone through the NSA.
The unmasked names were sent to the National Security Council, the Defense Department, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and then-CIA Director John Brennan. It was not immediately whether those people received it on a "need to know basis."
Late Tuesday, a former senior intelligence official told Fox News' Catherine Herridge that the finished intelligence products Rice was given about the Trump team included transcripts, which should never have been included.
The former official said Rice would have understood that an extensive paper trail would be generated and show who requested the unmasking, on what basis, and whether it was granted. This raises more questions about the motivation for Rice's request, her motivation and whether it was authorized higher-up in the Obama administration.
When O'Reilly asked Zimmerman if she believed the unmasking broke any laws, the reporter answered, "It’s pretty clear they were broken because the names were released to the media. So I believe that’s the case, but whether or not it was Susan Rice or someone else, we have no evidence to show who that person was that leaked."
However, Zimmerman added, "There’s a lot more to it, and we believe there’s more people involved."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/04/fox-reporter-rice-may-have-been-told-to-request-trump-team-records.html
-
There's nothing to the story. Susan Rice already testified in Congress that she never did anything of the sort. Its a dead end
-
There's nothing to the story. Susan Rice already testified in Congress that she never did anything of the sort. Its a dead end
You're trolling, you have to be. No one is this misinformed and admits it.
-
There's nothing to the story. Susan Rice already testified in Congress that she never did anything of the sort. Its a dead end
No she didn't.
For chrissakes.
-
There's nothing to the story. Susan Rice already testified in Congress that she never did anything of the sort. Its a dead end
She also blamed Beghazi on a fake video - her claims are worthless.
-
Former CIA Analyst: Susan Rice's NSA Demasking Denials Don't Add Up
Fox News ^ | April 04, 2017 | Fred Fleitz
Posted on 4/4/2017, 5:23:13 PM by Helicondelta
In an interview with Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC Tuesday, former National Security Adviser Susan Rice broke her silence over this week’s stunning reports that she requested the names of Trump campaign and transition officials be “demasked” from National Security Agency (NSA) intercepts.
It was an awkward interview. Rice confirmed that she requested the demasking of Americans while she was National Security Adviser. While Rice would not deny that she asked that names of Trump officials be demasked, she insisted the Obama administration did not spy on Mr. Trump or his staff for political purposes.
As a former CIA analyst who has handled requests for demasking the names of American citizens for a U.S. policymaker, I thought Rice’s claims in her interview did not add up.
The names of U.S. citizens “incidentally” mentioned in NSA reports are masked to preserve their identities because America’s intelligence agencies are barred from spying on American citizens except in extraordinary circumstances with court approval.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
-
The pursuit of Trump may have caught the Obama White House
The Washington Post ^ | April 4, 2017 | By Ed Rogers
Posted on 4/4/2017, 6:00:04 PM by Oldeconomybuyer
It is said that Watergate wasn’t about the crime, but about the coverup. Well, at least in the Watergate scandal, there was a proper crime — specifically, the break-in and wiretapping. The frenzy has created a scandal without perpetrators or a crime. There is a sense that Washington is on the brink, but no one can say on the brink of what.
Rice has a history of a strained relationship with the truth, and for a national security adviser, she has, at times, flown close to the partisan political flame. So, what was going on? Why did she do it? And with whom, in the government and the media, did she share the information?
Multiple senators are now demanding her testimony. There could have been crimes committed and a real scandal could develop, so you can bet the full story will be slow to emerge. It appears that Rice has issued the standard denials. And her defenders on Capitol Hill and in the media will do all they can to distract and demand that there is nothing to see here. Democrats and their media allies will continue to make baseless allegations, hoping that the Russia investigations will somehow deliver for them and become this president’s Watergate.
The result so far? Competing outrage. Just as Democrats are pursuing L-TACs (links, ties, associations or contacts) in search of a crime, the Obama White House’s national security adviser has now landed as one of the ones who will have to answer for her actions under oath. Washington is as scandal-primed as I’ve ever seen it — there is a lot of smoke right now, but no clear fire. So the noise and finger-pointing will continue. And I have no idea who is winning.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
-
(https://i.redd.it/uvct2mbbfqpy.jpg)
(https://i.redd.it/gfx50g88stpy.jpg)
-
Let's see how the left on here will spin this.
Incredible
-
You're trolling, you have to be. No one is this misinformed and admits it.
She adamantly said no. That's says a lot because no one is crazy enough to lie at a congressional hearing. You can end up in prison for it. If there was anything to it, she would have said no comment.
Seems like they are just throwing anything at the wall to cover for Trump's silly allegations.
-
She adamantly said no. That's says a lot because no one is crazy enough to lie at a congressional hearing. You can end up in prison for it. If there was anything to it, she would have said no comment.
Seems like they are just throwing anything at the wall to cover for Trump's silly allegations.
Congressional hearing? I think you mean PBS... MSNBC... CBS...
-
He just cannot keep his mouth shut. Trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. He should just be quiet and let this play out.
Trump to NY Times: Susan Rice May Have Committed a Crime
By Jason Devaney | Wednesday, 05 Apr 2017
President Donald Trump Wednesday told The New York Times that former President Barack Obama's national security adviser Susan Rice may have committed a crime by requesting the identities of his associates mentioned in communications intercepted by security agencies.
"I think it's going to be the biggest story," Trump said in an Oval Office interview published under the bylines of Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Glenn Thrush. He repeatedly declined to provide evidence, the report said.
"It's such an important story for our country and the world," Trump added. "It is one of the big stories of our time."
Asked if Rice, who denied leaking any information, had committed a crime, the president told the Times, "Do I think? Yes, I think."
Trump said he would explain himself "at the right time."
It was reported on Monday that Rice unmasked the names of several U.S. citizens who had connections to Trump's campaign and transition teams. She went on MSNBC the following day to explain her actions.
Rice told Andrea Mitchell she unmasked Americans' names but "not for any political purposes."
Rice also denied leaking anything to the media, and she said people in Trump's inner circle and/or those who worked in Trump Tower were not specifically targeted for any surveillance operations during the Obama administration.
"There was no such collection or surveillance on Trump Tower or Trump individuals," she said. "The president of the United States and people in the White House do not have the ability to order such collection."
During the Times interview, Trump called out that newspaper and other media outlets for what he said was a failure to cover the Rice story this week.
CNN's Chris Cuomo labeled the Rice story "a fake scandal" during his Tuesday show.
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/trump-rice-crime-new-york-times/2017/04/05/id/782698/
-
:o
-
:o
Reports in unmasking controversy were detailed, had info about 'everyday lives'
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8sGSWHXgAEovsS.jpg)
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/05/reports-in-unmasking-controversy-were-detailed-had-info-about-everyday-lives.html (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/05/reports-in-unmasking-controversy-were-detailed-had-info-about-everyday-lives.html)
The intelligence reports at the center of the Susan Rice unmasking controversy were detailed, and almost resembled a private investigator’s file, according to a Republican congressman familiar with the documents.
"This is information about their everyday lives," Rep. Peter King of New York, a member of the House Intelligence committee said. "Sort of like in a divorce case where lawyers are hired, investigators are hired just to find out what the other person is doing from morning until night and then you try to piece it together later on.”
On the House Intelligence Committee, only the Republican chairman, Devin Nunes of California, and the ranking Democrat Adam Schiff, also of California, have personally reviewed the intelligence reports. Some members were given broad outlines.
Nunes has consistently stated that the files caused him deep concern because the unmasking went beyond the former national security adviser Mike Flynn, and the information was not related to Moscow.
Schiff said in a statement, “I cannot comment on the content of these materials or any other classified documents, and nothing should be inferred from the fact that I am treating classified materials the way they should be treated - by refusing to comment on them. Only the Administration has the power to declassify the information and make it available to the public."
Former National Security Adviser Rice is under scrutiny after allegations she sought to unmask the identities of Trump associates caught up in surveillance - such as phone calls between foreign intelligence targets. Rice denies ever having sought such information for political purposes and has defended her requests as routine.
But the most recent government data shows that unmasking or identifying Americans happens in a limited number of cases. The Office for the Director of National Intelligence, which oversees the 17 intelligence agencies, said "...in 2015, NSA disseminated 4,290 FAA Section 702 intelligence reports that included U.S. person information. Of those 4,290 reports, the U.S. person information was masked in 3,168 reports and unmasked in 1,122 reports."
The report said "NSA is allowed to unmask the identity for the specific requesting recipient only under certain conditions and where specific additional controls are in place" and those conditions were met for "654 U.S. person identities" in 2015.
That means Americans were identified in 26 percent of the cases, or roughly one in four intelligence reports.
-
Lawmakers say intel agencies stonewalling on surveillance probe
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/05/lawmakers-say-intel-agencies-stonewalling-on-surveillance-probe.html (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/05/lawmakers-say-intel-agencies-stonewalling-on-surveillance-probe.html)
Lawmakers probing the surveillance of key officials in the Trump campaign and administration say the intelligence agencies now nominally under the president’s control are stonewalling efforts to get to the bottom of who revealed names and leaked protected information to the press.
The House and Senate Intelligence Committees are currently investigating allegations the Obama administration spied on Trump associates – and possibly Trump himself – for as long as the year preceding his inauguration. And while former Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice has been implicated as at least one of the officials who sought redacted names from surveillance transcripts, multiple lawmakers and investigators for the panel told Fox News the CIA, FBI and National Security Agency - all agencies in position to aid the probe – are not cooperating.
“Our requests are simply not being answered,” said one House Intelligence committee source about the lack of responsiveness. "The agencies are not really helping at all and there is truly a massive web for us to try and wade through.”
A Senate Intelligence Committee source said the upper chamber had the same experience.
-
Trump supporters are on a whole other level of retarded.
-
Of course they are stalling. It's their jobs/pensions at stake.
-
Trump supporters are on a whole other level of retarded.
Yet still not dumb enough to get caught in a bald-faced lie on national TV twice.
Susan Rice is Loretta Lynch without the cankles
-
Trump supporters are on a whole other level of retarded.
WTF?! I love weaponizing the intelligence communities for political reasons now!!! ::)
You know if this was Dick Cheney, and not Susan Rice, you'd be all over it (and so would the MSM).
-
WTF?! I love weaponizing the intelligence communities for political reasons now!!! ::)
You know if this was Dick Cheney, and not Susan Rice, you'd be all over it (and so would the MSM).
There's no indication that that's what happened, though. I keep asking myself would this story be a bigger deal to me if it had happened following Obama's inauguration, but the thing is you cannot separate team trump's activities from the subsequent incidental surveillance.
From an article posted above:
But the most recent government data shows that unmasking or identifying Americans happens in a limited number of cases. The Office for the Director of National Intelligence, which oversees the 17 intelligence agencies, said "...in 2015, NSA disseminated 4,290 FAA Section 702 intelligence reports that included U.S. person information. Of those 4,290 reports, the U.S. person information was masked in 3,168 reports and unmasked in 1,122 reports."
This does not make unmasking sound like a limited procedure. If you work 5 days a week, this is roughly every report you receive on friday and half of the ones you get on thursday in the afternoon. It's not something that almost never happens and if you think about it logically, it couldn't be. If a report deals with several Americans, it would be almost incomprehensible without the names being unmasked.
-
Susan Rice, Obama colleagues take heat for past claims on Syria chemical weapons purge
By Barnini Chakraborty
Published April 07, 2017
FoxNews.com
Susan Rice and other former Obama administration officials are taking heat for past claims that their 2013 Syria agreement successfully led to the Assad regime purging its entire chemical weapons stockpile -- in the wake of this week's alleged sarin gas attack.
On Thursday, President Trump launched a targeted strike at a Syrian airfield in response to what he called a barbaric chemical attack on innocent civilians at the hand of Syrian President Bashar Assad.
“There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons, violated its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention and ignored the urging of the U.N. Security Council,” Trump said.
Video footage from the chemical attack scene immediately raised credibility problems for claims made by members of the Obama administration that the prior agreement had rid the war-torn country of chemical agents.
During an interview this past January with National Public Radio, former National Security Adviser Rice touted the “success” in Syria, in striking a deal with Russia's help that resulted in the prior administration dropping the threat of military action.
“We were able to find a solution that didn’t necessitate the use of force that actually removed the chemical weapons that were known from Syria, in a way that the use of force would never have accomplished,” she boasted. “We were able to get the Syrian government to voluntarily and verifiably give up its chemical weapons stockpile.”
Rice has come under fire for making misleading comments in the past. Most recently, she grabbed headlines for allegedly being tied to allegations of improper surveillance of the Trump team prior to his inauguration.
Rice isn’t the only Obama-era official who made self-congratulatory statements about removing chemical weapons from Syria.
In July 2014, then-Secretary of State John Kerry went on NBC’s “Meet the Press” to discuss the September 2013 deal that resulted in Russia agreeing to help confiscate and then destroy Syria’s stockpile.
“We struck a deal where we got 100 percent of the chemical weapons out,” Kerry claimed.
At the time, the fact-checking website PolitiFact found Kerry’s comments to be “mostly true.” However, given new evidence that Assad had recently used chemical weapons against his own people, PolitiFact was forced to revisit and revise its assessment of Kerry’s claims.
“We don’t know key details about the reported chemical attack in Syria on April 4, 2017, but it raises two clear possibilities: Either Syria never fulling complied with its 2013 promise to reveal all of its chemical weapons; or it did, but then converted otherwise non-lethal chemicals to military uses.
“One way or another, subsequent events have proved Kerry wrong,” the site ruled.
In August 2016, a U.N. report revealed that Assad had used chlorine gas against civilians on two separate occasions since the 2013 deal – a clear violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention. Despite that report, members of the Obama administration continued to claim they had been successful in disarming Assad’s chemical weapons arsenal.
They routinely touted the diplomatic nature of the joint U.S.-and-Russia brokered deal.
Obama issued his infamous “red line” warning to Syria’s leader in 2012 not to use chemical weapons. In 2013, when reports surfaced that Assad used sarin gas to kill his people, the deal to remove chemical weapons was intended to avert military action.
The president himself on Aug. 18. 2014 said that “the most lethal declared chemical weapons possessed by the Syrian regime were destroyed by dedicated U.S. civilian and military professionals” and that it had been done “several weeks ahead of schedule.”
On Jan. 6, 2015, then-White House Press Secretary John Earnest praised Russia for its role in destroying the chemical weapons stockpile of the Assad regime.
“That was an important step, because it reduced, or essentially eliminated, the proliferation risk from that declared chemical weapons stockpile, that we could essentially destroy those chemical weapons and ensure that terrorists would not be able to get their hands on them and use them in other places.”
Five months later on June 17, 2015, Earnest said that the “declared chemical weapons stockpile that Assad previously denied existed has now been acknowledged, rounded up, removed from the country and destroyed precisely because of the work of this administration and our successful efforts to work with the Russians to accomplish that goal.”
On Thursday night, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson slammed Russia for failing to do its part in preventing the Syrian government from using chemical weapons, despite the 2013 agreement to remove weapons from the country.
“Either Russia has been complicit or Russia has been simply incompetent,” Tillerson said.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/07/susan-rice-obama-colleagues-take-heat-for-past-claims-on-syria-chemical-weapons-purge.html
-
Sooooo any movement on this?
-
Sooooo any movement on this?
How about Lois Lerner?
Our retarded phony coach was convinced that The House was going to file charges
I'm sure that happened and Faux News just forgot to report it
-
Sooooo any movement on this?
Haha
“I think it’s going to be the biggest story,” Trump said. “It’s such an important story for our country and the world. It is one of the big stories of our time.”
-
Sooooo any movement on this?
Not since Susan Rice proved herself to be a serial liar (again).
-
Not since Susan Rice proved herself to be a serial liar (again).
“I think it’s going to be the biggest story,” Trump said. “It’s such an important story for our country and the world. It is one of the big stories of our time.”
-
“I think it’s going to be the biggest story,” Trump said. “It’s such an important story for our country and the world. It is one of the big stories of our time.”
It might be. It might not be. Doesn't change the fact Susan Rice is a liar.
-
It might be. It might not be. Doesn't change the fact Susan Rice is a liar.
Doesn't change the fact that the President is a liar...you have no problem giving him a pass.
-
Doesn't change the fact that the President is a liar...you have no problem giving him a pass.
Moral equivalency fail. This is about Susan Rice and her repeated instances of deliberately misleading the public.
-
Moral equivalency fail. This is about Susan Rice and her repeated instances of deliberately misleading the public.
Deliberately misleading...you mean like the ruse Trump set up to single her out ?
-
Deliberately misleading...you mean like the ruse Trump set up to single her out ?
No I mean like saying she didn't know anything about spying on American citizens and unmasking their names, when she clearly did.
Or telling the public we got rid of all of Syria's chemical weapons.
Or telling the public, repeatedly, that Benghazi was caused by a youtube video.
Or saying Bergdhal served his country with honor and distinction.
-
Deliberately misleading...you mean like the ruse Trump set up to single her out ?
sounds like an episode of Maddow
-
sounds like an episode of Maddow
Haha may have been...
I called it out as a deflection the day Nunes was running around Washington trying to sell the fiasco to anyone who would listen.
-
So she proved herself a liar I see... so with the law and order president, surely this is a slam dunk to prosecute, with her being a proven liar and all.
-
https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2017/04/breaking-landmark-legal-seeks-surveillance-answers-from-fisa
-
So she proved herself a liar I see... so with the law and order president, surely this is a slam dunk to prosecute, with her being a proven liar and all.
She repeatedly lied about Benghazi to cover up for her POFS boss and Hillcunt remember?
-
So she proved herself a liar I see... so with the law and order president, surely this is a slam dunk to prosecute, with her being a proven liar and all.
So did Killary but since it's out of Trumps hands to make the decision to prosecute time will tell. Hopefully with all the proof out there, they will prosecute, Killary, Rice and Obama.
-
So did Killary but since it's out of Trumps hands to make the decision to prosecute time will tell. Hopefully with all the proof out there, they will prosecute, Killary, Rice and Obama.
If there is a mountain of evidence, what's taking the trump admin so long to bring charges?
-
So she proved herself a liar I see... so with the law and order president, surely this is a slam dunk to prosecute, with her being a proven liar and all.
Since when do proven liars in DC get routinely prosecuted??
-
If there is a mountain of evidence, what's taking the trump admin so long to bring charges?
Do you have a problem with her lack of integrity?
-
Do you have a problem with her lack of integrity?
She is a liberal black democrat. Of course she gets a pass for her lies
-
If there is a mountain of evidence, what's taking the trump admin so long to bring charges?
The Russians Hacked Democrats’ Plans to Cheat in the General Election
http://trib.al/YuRGSao
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/04/23/russians-hacked-democrats-plans-cheat-general-election/
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/22/us/politics/james-comey-election.html?_r=0&referer=https://www-breitbart-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/04/23/russians-hacked-democrats-plans-cheat-general-election/amp/?amp_js_v=9
-
Any movement on this whole Fly... I mean Rice issue? Asking for a friend.
-
If there is a mountain of evidence, what's taking the trump admin so long to bring charges?
Damn. Another 100 day campaign promise broken I suppose.
-
Damn. Another 100 day campaign promise broken I suppose.
100 days.... big deal to absolutely nobody.... except the crybaby dems who lost EVERYTHING in November... and the media outlets who nobody believes anyway... 100 days, 150 days, 197 days, as long as it gets done correctly, makes no difference to your average voter. Trump does what he says hes going to do... I cant wait until the wall starts going up.. itll be great to listen to these losers bitch over something stupid yet again... "o he didn't build a wall, its just a fence", "o the wall isn't as tall as he said it was going to be"... hahaha... losers.
-
100 days.... big deal to absolutely nobody.... except the crybaby dems who lost EVERYTHING in November... and the media outlets who nobody believes anyway... 100 days, 150 days, 197 days, as long as it gets done correctly, makes no difference to your average voter. Trump does what he says hes going to do... I cant wait until the wall starts going up.. itll be great to listen to these losers bitch over something stupid yet again... "o he didn't build a wall, its just a fence", "o the wall isn't as tall as he said it was going to be"... hahaha... losers.
It's a big deal to Trump. But only when he is using it against someone else. Doesn't count for him. Thanks for the contribution.
-
Sunday on CNN’s “Fareed Zakaria GPS,” while discussing the controversy over the unmasking of Trump campaign personnel, President Barack Obama’s former national security adviser Susan Rice said she didn’t do anything “untoward” with intelligence on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
ZAKARIA: One of the elements of fallout from Russia’s attempt to influence the American election was that there was a certain amount of intelligence work being done on Russia. Our intelligence agencies were listening to what Russian government officials or Russian intelligence officials were saying. Donald Trump has accused you of trying to unmask the Americans on the other end of those conversations in an attempt to implicate the Trump campaign or people associated with Trump in some kind of collusion with Russia. What is your reaction to that? It’s an extraordinary charge by the President of the United States.
RICE: Well Fareed, it’s absolutely false. I’ve addressed this previously. I think now we’ve had subsequently members of Congress on the intelligence committees on both sides of the aisle take a look at the information that apparently was the basis for Chairman Nunes’ concern and say publicly that they didn’t see anything that was unusual or untoward. I did my job, which was to protect the American people, and I did it faithfully and with― to the best of my ability, and never did I do anything that was untoward with respect to the intelligence I received.
-
Sunday on CNN’s “Fareed Zakaria GPS,” while discussing the controversy over the unmasking of Trump campaign personnel, President Barack Obama’s former national security adviser Susan Rice said she didn’t do anything “untoward” with intelligence on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
ZAKARIA: One of the elements of fallout from Russia’s attempt to influence the American election was that there was a certain amount of intelligence work being done on Russia. Our intelligence agencies were listening to what Russian government officials or Russian intelligence officials were saying. Donald Trump has accused you of trying to unmask the Americans on the other end of those conversations in an attempt to implicate the Trump campaign or people associated with Trump in some kind of collusion with Russia. What is your reaction to that? It’s an extraordinary charge by the President of the United States.
RICE: Well Fareed, it’s absolutely false. I’ve addressed this previously. I think now we’ve had subsequently members of Congress on the intelligence committees on both sides of the aisle take a look at the information that apparently was the basis for Chairman Nunes’ concern and say publicly that they didn’t see anything that was unusual or untoward. I did my job, which was to protect the American people, and I did it faithfully and with― to the best of my ability, and never did I do anything that was untoward with respect to the intelligence I received.
“I think it’s going to be the biggest story,” Trump said. “It’s such an important story for our country and the world. It is one of the big stories of our time.”
-
“I think it’s going to be the biggest story,” Trump said. “It’s such an important story for our country and the world. It is one of the big stories of our time.”
FBI balking on documents request from House Intelligence Committee
http://www.worldtribune.com/fbi-balking-on-documents-request-from-house-intelligence-committee/ (http://www.worldtribune.com/fbi-balking-on-documents-request-from-house-intelligence-committee/)
The FBI has thus far refused the House Intelligence Committee’s requests for documents that could explain the “unmasking” of Americans in a spying operation during the Trump transition, a report said.
FBI spokesman Andrew Ames would not say why the bureau has not met the House committee’s document request. “The FBI will continue to work with our congressional oversight committees on their requests,” he told The Washington Times’ Bill Gertz.
-
WASHINGTON (AP) — The identities of Americans swept up in U.S. government surveillance programs were included in more than 3,900 reports distributed last year by the National Security Agency.
That’s according to a report released Tuesday by the national intelligence director. The report did not state the number of Americans, only the number of reports in which the names appeared.
Revealing the identities of American citizens or legal permanent residents mentioned in intelligence reports is known as unmasking.
Recently, California Rep. Devin Nunes, the Republican chairman of the House intelligence committee, accused Obama White House officials of asking that the names of people with ties to President Donald Trump be unmasked.
-
2,000 unmasking requests granted by the NSA right before Obama administration left office
https://twitter.com/foxandfriends/status/859738080441323521 (https://twitter.com/foxandfriends/status/859738080441323521)
-
First on CNN: Rice refuses Senate request to testify on Russian hacking
Washington (CNN)Susan Rice, President Barack Obama's former national security adviser, on Wednesday declined Sen. Lindsey Graham's request to participate in a judiciary subcommittee hearing next week on Russian interference in the US election, CNN has learned.
A letter obtained exclusively by CNN from Rice's lawyer, Kathryn Ruemmler, outlines the grounds for her decision not to appear. It was addressed to Graham, the Republican chairman of the judiciary subcommittee on crime and terrorism, which is holding the hearing, and senior Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse.
"Senator Whitehouse has informed us by letter that he did not agree to Chairman Graham's invitation to Ambassador Rice, a significant departure from the bipartisan invitations extended to other witnesses," Ruemmler wrote. "Under these circumstances, Ambassador Rice respectfully declines Senator Graham's invitation to testify."
A source familiar with Rice's discussions told CNN that when Graham invited her, Rice believed it was a bipartisan overture and was prepared to accept. However, Whitehouse indicated to her that the invitation was made without his agreement, as he believed her presence was not relevant to the topic of the hearing, according to the source.
Rice considered the invitation a "diversionary play" to distract attention from the investigation into Russian election interference, including contacts between Trump allies and Russians during the campaign, the source said.
-
First on CNN: Rice refuses Senate request to testify on Russian hacking
Washington (CNN)Susan Rice, President Barack Obama's former national security adviser, on Wednesday declined Sen. Lindsey Graham's request to participate in a judiciary subcommittee hearing next week on Russian interference in the US election, CNN has learned.
A letter obtained exclusively by CNN from Rice's lawyer, Kathryn Ruemmler, outlines the grounds for her decision not to appear. It was addressed to Graham, the Republican chairman of the judiciary subcommittee on crime and terrorism, which is holding the hearing, and senior Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse.
"Senator Whitehouse has informed us by letter that he did not agree to Chairman Graham's invitation to Ambassador Rice, a significant departure from the bipartisan invitations extended to other witnesses," Ruemmler wrote. "Under these circumstances, Ambassador Rice respectfully declines Senator Graham's invitation to testify."
A source familiar with Rice's discussions told CNN that when Graham invited her, Rice believed it was a bipartisan overture and was prepared to accept. However, Whitehouse indicated to her that the invitation was made without his agreement, as he believed her presence was not relevant to the topic of the hearing, according to the source.
Rice considered the invitation a "diversionary play" to distract attention from the investigation into Russian election interference, including contacts between Trump allies and Russians during the campaign, the source said.
She will probably take the Fifth anyway.
-
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.
Susan Rice Refuses To Testify In Senate Probe Of Russian Influence On 2016 Election
Washington Times ^ | 5-3-2017 | Victor Morton
Posted on 5/3/2017, 6:14:54 PM by blam
Former National Security Adviser Susan Rice has reportedly declined an invitation to testify before a Senate panel investigating Russian attempts to influence the U.S. election, walking back her earlier acceptance.
According to CNN, Ms. Rice’s initial acceptance of the invitation from Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, was based on the presupposition that it was a bipartisan request.
However, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism, reportedly told Ms. Rice that he did not approve of Mr. Graham’s invitation. According to a letter from Ms. Rice’s lawyer obtained by CNN, that scuppered her willingness to testify.
(snip)
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
-
http://circa.com/politics/president-obamas-team-sought-nsa-intel-on-thousands-of-americans-during-the-2016-election (http://circa.com/politics/president-obamas-team-sought-nsa-intel-on-thousands-of-americans-during-the-2016-election)
Pretty damning if true:
In all, government officials conducted 30,355 searches in 2016 seeking information about Americans in NSA intercept metadata, which include telephone numbers and email addresses. The activity amounted to a 27.5 percent increase over the prior year and more than triple the 9,500 such searches that occurred in 2013, the first year such data was kept.
The government in 2016 also scoured the actual contents of NSA intercepted calls and emails for 5,288 Americans, an increase of 13 percent over the prior year and a massive spike from the 198 names searched in 2013.
The searches ultimately resulted in 3,134 NSA intelligence reports with unredacted U.S. names being distributed across government in 2016, and another 3,354 reports in 2015. About half the time, U.S. identities were unredacted in the original reports while the other half were unmasked after the fact by special request of Obama administration officials.
Among those whose names were unmasked in 2016 or early 2017 were campaign or transition associates of President Donald Trump as well as members of Congress and their staffers, according to sources with direct knowledge.
The data kept by ODNI is missing some information from one of the largest consumers of NSA intelligence, the FBI, and officials acknowledge the numbers are likely much higher when the FBI’s activity is added.
"There is no doubt that there was a spike in the requests to search for Americans in the NSA database,” a U.S. official familiar with the intelligence told Circa, speaking only on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the data. “It’s simply easier for people to make requests. And while we have safeguards, there is always concern and vigilance about possible political or prurient motives that go beyond national security concerns.”
U.S. intelligence officials confirmed the growth in queries about Americans’ data held by the NSA but declined to explain the reasons, except to say the requests for access grew after intelligence agency officials became more comfortable with Obama's 2011 order.
They stressed the NSA has strict rules in place to govern when searches for Americans are being conducted and when a U.S. person’s identity can be unmasked. They also hailed the release of the new data as a step toward greater transparency."
Good ol' Patriot Act - You can't expect the people who made the mess, to clean the mess. :-X
-
Gowdy: "Important Fact Witness [Rice] will be subpoenaed"
-
Gowdy: "Important Fact Witness [Rice] will be subpoenaed"
"There are things called subpoenas. You shouldn't have to use them on National Security Advisers. But, if you do you do."
-
Subpoenas issued by House Intel Comm to 3 top Obama-era officials (Susan Rice ex-NSA, ex CIA Dir. John Brennan & ex UN Amb Samantha Power).
House intelligence committee approves subpoenas for Michael Flynn, Michael Cohen, others in Russia probe - AP
Subpoenas signed by House Intel Comm chair Rep. Devin Nunes served to FBI/CIA/NSA all reference "unmasking" which is part of Russia probe.
My prediction:
-
Always cracks me up when our right wingers get all excited before having any info
Very likely that Susan Rice did absolutely nothing wrong.
If this were any kind of smoking gun it much more likely the White House would have given the full documents to the committees.
I agree, but in fairness to the OP, it's a legit , current story on a high level ( former) WH operative.
-
(https://i.redd.it/gda029ca7x0z.jpg)
-
Gowdy: "Important Fact Witness [Rice] will be subpoenaed"
Yup, she got this along with Brannan and some other woman who was directly involved.
Now , it's serious.
-
Subpoenas issued by House Intel Comm to 3 top Obama-era officials (Susan Rice ex-NSA, ex CIA Dir. John Brennan & ex UN Amb Samantha Power).
House intelligence committee approves subpoenas for Michael Flynn, Michael Cohen, others in Russia probe - AP
Subpoenas signed by House Intel Comm chair Rep. Devin Nunes served to FBI/CIA/NSA all reference "unmasking" which is part of Russia probe.
My prediction:
I'll be surprised if she doesn't take the Fifth.
-
CNN: Susan Rice to Testify Before House Intel Committee
By Jason Devaney | Thursday, 29 Jun 2017
Former National Security Adviser Susan Rice will answer questions in front of the House Intelligence Committee next month regarding the Russia probe.
According to CNN, the session will be closed to the media and will occur before the House's August recess.
Rice has been accused by some of improperly requesting the names of Americans caught up in surveillance reports be unmasked. Rice continues to insist she did not do anything wrong or against protocol.
Committees in the House and Senate, along with the Department of Justice, are investigating Russia's interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and whether or not President Donald Trump's campaign had improper ties to Russians.
Rice's appearance in front of the House Intelligence Committee is part of that probe.
Many Republicans have called on Rice to testify in front of Congress about what she knows regarding unmasking. She declined an offer to appear before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee in May.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Susan-Rice-House-intelligence-committee/2017/06/29/id/799052/
-
CNN: Susan Rice to Testify Before House Intel Committee
By Jason Devaney | Thursday, 29 Jun 2017
Former National Security Adviser Susan Rice will answer questions in front of the House Intelligence Committee next month regarding the Russia probe.
According to CNN, the session will be closed to the media and will occur before the House's August recess.
Rice has been accused by some of improperly requesting the names of Americans caught up in surveillance reports be unmasked. Rice continues to insist she did not do anything wrong or against protocol.
Committees in the House and Senate, along with the Department of Justice, are investigating Russia's interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and whether or not President Donald Trump's campaign had improper ties to Russians.
Rice's appearance in front of the House Intelligence Committee is part of that probe.
Many Republicans have called on Rice to testify in front of Congress about what she knows regarding unmasking. She declined an offer to appear before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee in May.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Susan-Rice-House-intelligence-committee/2017/06/29/id/799052/
She will use the "I'm a poor black female" defense strategy....
-
Susan Rice sent herself an e-mail on the day of the Trump Inauguration saying, "Obama dindu nuffin'!" - thinking that would count as evidence!
-
Susan Rice sent herself an e-mail on the day of the Trump Inauguration saying, "Obama dindu nuffin'!" - thinking that would count as evidence!
https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-graham-uncover-unusual-email-sent-susan-rice-herself-president-trump-s (https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-graham-uncover-unusual-email-sent-susan-rice-herself-president-trump-s)
-
Susan Rice sent herself an e-mail on the day of the Trump Inauguration saying, "Obama dindu nuffin'!" - thinking that would count as evidence!
This can't be real. Ha ha ha
-
Susan Rice sent herself an e-mail on the day of the Trump Inauguration saying, "Obama dindu nuffin'!" - thinking that would count as evidence!
Catherine Herridge has always reminded me of Kathryn Hays.
(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/images/c/c6/Gem.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20090213213940&path-prefix=en)
-
Clearly a cya memo. Laughable.