Reported: Susan Rice unmasked names caught up in surveillance

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That was her job. Stop embarrassing yourself, OP. Are you the same poster who thinks the VP passes laws?

What is her job? To conduct surveillance of the private AmCit? Based on what?

...on the fact that those American citizens were speaking with foreign spies and adversaries? Duh.

^ This is the far bigger problem and potential threat to national security. Whining about Rice is just shooting the messenger and missing the point.

As far as I know, American citizens are not prohibited in any way to interact with foreign nationals. So far, the administration produced no evidence that foreign nationals were spies. Just because you have relations (business or personal) with a foreign nationals, does not automatically mean that American government can spy on you.

This!

Navy Adm. Michael Rogers, director of the National Security Agency, testified during a hearing last month that unmasking would occur only if there is a “national security implication,” or if a “criminal activity” was being discussed.

Rice would have made any unmasking before she left office on January 20. But by then, Obama’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told NBC News on March 5 that there was no evidence of any collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.

Still, Flynn’s name and the contents of his conversation with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak — which were classified — were leaked to the Washington Post and published in a February 9 article.

Someone is in a shitload of trouble.

The cover up is worse than the crime. Flynn was fired because he lied. Sessions lied. The WH lies every day.

You just hate Trump. Fess up.

He hired a Russian mole. What's to love?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That was her job. Stop embarrassing yourself, OP. Are you the same poster who thinks the VP passes laws?

What is her job? To conduct surveillance of the private AmCit? Based on what?

...on the fact that those American citizens were speaking with foreign spies and adversaries? Duh.

^ This is the far bigger problem and potential threat to national security. Whining about Rice is just shooting the messenger and missing the point.

As far as I know, American citizens are not prohibited in any way to interact with foreign nationals. So far, the administration produced no evidence that foreign nationals were spies. Just because you have relations (business or personal) with a foreign nationals, does not automatically mean that American government can spy on you.

This!

Navy Adm. Michael Rogers, director of the National Security Agency, testified during a hearing last month that unmasking would occur only if there is a “national security implication,” or if a “criminal activity” was being discussed.

Rice would have made any unmasking before she left office on January 20. But by then, Obama’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told NBC News on March 5 that there was no evidence of any collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.

Still, Flynn’s name and the contents of his conversation with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak — which were classified — were leaked to the Washington Post and published in a February 9 article.

If Rice did request "unmasking" the decision to do that is not unilateral - it has to be approved by the NSA, Adm. Rogers' agency. So, as you just admitted, there must have been a “national security implication,” or if a “criminal activity” was being discussed.

Secondly, Mike Flynn's name was leaked after many people, including Congress, was briefed on this. It's ridiculous to believe that Susan Rice was leaker, except for the fact that she's become one of the bogeymen of the Benghazi-obsessed crowd.

Keep deflecting guys - every time you do more gets leaked (ie: Erik Prince's meeting in the Seychelles).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That was her job. Stop embarrassing yourself, OP. Are you the same poster who thinks the VP passes laws?

What is her job? To conduct surveillance of the private AmCit? Based on what?

...on the fact that those American citizens were speaking with foreign spies and adversaries? Duh.

^ This is the far bigger problem and potential threat to national security. Whining about Rice is just shooting the messenger and missing the point.

As far as I know, American citizens are not prohibited in any way to interact with foreign nationals. So far, the administration produced no evidence that foreign nationals were spies. Just because you have relations (business or personal) with a foreign nationals, does not automatically mean that American government can spy on you.

If you work for DoD they want to know about all your associations with foreign nationals. Heck, we have to report when we go abroad and the intent for the travel. Failure to report can lead to investigation and termination.

[Anonymous]

Drop the euphemisms. Monitoring the co versatility me of your political opponents isn't incidental collection. It's corrupt and it's spying...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That was her job. Stop embarrassing yourself, OP. Are you the same poster who thinks the VP passes laws?

What is her job? To conduct surveillance of the private AmCit? Based on what?

...on the fact that those American citizens were speaking with foreign spies and adversaries? Duh.

^ This is the far bigger problem and potential threat to national security. Whining about Rice is just shooting the messenger and missing the point.

As far as I know, American citizens are not prohibited in any way to interact with foreign nationals. So far, the administration produced no evidence that foreign nationals were spies. Just because you have relations (business or personal) with a foreign nationals, does not automatically mean that American government can spy on you.

If you work for DoD they want to know about all your associations with foreign nationals. Heck, we have to report when we go abroad and the intent for the travel. Failure to report can lead to investigation and termination.

The dint soy in you though

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That was her job. Stop embarrassing yourself, OP. Are you the same poster who thinks the VP passes laws?

What is her job? To conduct surveillance of the private AmCit? Based on what?

...on the fact that those American citizens were speaking with foreign spies and adversaries? Duh.

^ This is the far bigger problem and potential threat to national security. Whining about Rice is just shooting the messenger and missing the point.

As far as I know, American citizens are not prohibited in any way to interact with foreign nationals. So far, the administration produced no evidence that foreign nationals were spies. Just because you have relations (business or personal) with a foreign nationals, does not automatically mean that American government can spy on you.

If you work for DoD they want to know about all your associations with foreign nationals. Heck, we have to report when we go abroad and the intent for the travel. Failure to report can lead to investigation and termination.

English please.
The dint soy in you though

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Drop the euphemisms. Monitoring the co versatility me of your political opponents isn't incidental collection. It's corrupt and it's spying...

It's not a euphemism, it's jargon. If you don't like the jargon, get a job in the IC and change it.

[Anonymous]

So, when an official asks for names to be unmasked, I assume that they need to give a reason for such a request. And, rationale for that reason.
Rice can clear all this up by testifying as to why such a request was made.
Will she testify? Or, will she take “the 5th" like Lois Lerner and others in this administration?

To be honest, Susan Rice has no credibility with me or millions of other Americans. Her lies regarding Benghazi and her words about Bergdahl have exposed her as untrustworthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That was her job. Stop embarrassing yourself, OP. Are you the same poster who thinks the VP passes laws?

What is her job? To conduct surveillance of the private AmCit? Based on what?

...on the fact that those American citizens were speaking with foreign spies and adversaries? Duh.

^ This is the far bigger problem and potential threat to national security. Whining about Rice is just shooting the messenger and missing the point.

As far as I know, American citizens are not prohibited in any way to interact with foreign nationals. So far, the administration produced no evidence that foreign nationals were spies. Just because you have relations (business or personal) with a foreign nationals, does not automatically mean that American government can spy on you.

If you work for DoD they want to know about all your associations with foreign nationals. Heck, we have to report when we go abroad and the intent for the travel. Failure to report can lead to investigation and termination.

We are talking about different things: yes, you have to report all your foreign contacts if you have a clearance. Rice unmasked the identities of private citizens.

[Anonymous]

She probably can't talk about it because the information is classified.

[Anonymous]

But but but.... Hillary! And what about Flynn's constitutional right to spy for Moscow?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She probably can't talk about it because the information is classified.

She can talk to the Congressional committees that oversee this type of activity.
But, will she?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, when an official asks for names to be unmasked, I assume that they need to give a reason for such a request. And, rationale for that reason.
Rice can clear all this up by testifying as to why such a request was made.
Will she testify? Or, will she take “the 5th" like Lois Lerner and others in this administration?

To be honest, Susan Rice has no credibility with me or millions of other Americans. Her lies regarding Benghazi and her words about Bergdahl have exposed her as untrustworthy.

Agree. I don't see any benefits from her testimony since she lost all her credibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She probably can't talk about it because the information is classified.

She can talk to the Congressional committees that oversee this type of activity.
But, will she?

She might talk to the Senate committee. The House committee has already shown that they are unable to keep classified information private.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, when an official asks for names to be unmasked, I assume that they need to give a reason for such a request. And, rationale for that reason.
Rice can clear all this up by testifying as to why such a request was made.
Will she testify? Or, will she take “the 5th" like Lois Lerner and others in this administration?

To be honest, Susan Rice has no credibility with me or millions of other Americans. Her lies regarding Benghazi and her words about Bergdahl have exposed her as untrustworthy.

Agree. I don't see any benefits from her testimony since she lost all her credibility.

She could explain a lot. I suspect the admin does not want her to. And she definitely has credibility with me.