Reported: Susan Rice unmasked names caught up in surveillance

[Anonymous]

And for those of you who said Susan Rice acted inappropriately in the unmasking, I am going to leave this right here:

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/susan-rice-did-nothing-wrong-say-both-dems-republicans-n747406

Susan Rice Did Nothing Wrong, Say Both Dems and Republicans

A review of the surveillance material flagged by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes shows no inappropriate action by Susan Rice or any other Obama administration official, Republican and Democratic Congressional aides who have been briefed on the matter told NBC News.

[Anonymous]

PP, why bother? Trumpites will deny facts even when confronted with irrefutable evidence. They'll argue for Trump's innocence even when he's convicted and behind bars, alongside his daughter, son-in-law, Guiliani, Manafort, etc.

Truth means nothing to these people. They've already drunk the Trump Kool-Aid, and they see only Trump-Truth, that plastic alternative bubble that Trump lives in, where it never rains on the largest inauguration crowd in history. Trump is mentally ill, and his supporters are happy to join him in the crazy-house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP, why bother? Trumpites will deny facts even when confronted with irrefutable evidence. They'll argue for Trump's innocence even when he's convicted and behind bars, alongside his daughter, son-in-law, Guiliani, Manafort, etc.

Truth means nothing to these people. They've already drunk the Trump Kool-Aid, and they see only Trump-Truth, that plastic alternative bubble that Trump lives in, where it never rains on the largest inauguration crowd in history. Trump is mentally ill, and his supporters are happy to join him in the crazy-house.

Each chance we get to show the supporters that the arguments they are making are based off of incorrect facts, I am hoping more and more (on both sides of the aisle) will realize that they need to expand their choice of 'news'. Slowly, the approval ratings are going down and disapproval ratings are surging. Slowly, people are starting to realize that there might be some truth to this. I am not asking people to chose between right and left. I am asking people to open up their eyes and chose between US and Russia. This isn't a Dem or GOP issue. This is an American issue.

[Anonymous]

I think this puts and end to the manufactured controversy

http://www.newyorker.com/news/ryan-lizza/the-continuing-fallout-from-trump-and-nuness-fake-scandal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Susan Rice. Yep, the same one that lied about Benghazi.
Now, let’s see if she was also the one who leaked the names to the press.

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.

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.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/03/susan-rice-requested-to-unmask-names-trump-transition-officials-sources-say.html

Yeah, Susan Rice is too afraid to testify. Shame on her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Susan Rice. Yep, the same one that lied about Benghazi.
Now, let’s see if she was also the one who leaked the names to the press.

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.

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.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/03/susan-rice-requested-to-unmask-names-trump-transition-officials-sources-say.html

Yeah, Susan Rice is too afraid to testify. Shame on her.

Thats so funny because both Republicans and Democrats on the House Inteligence Committee looking into Susan Rice said she did nothing improper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Susan Rice. Yep, the same one that lied about Benghazi.
Now, let’s see if she was also the one who leaked the names to the press.

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.

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.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/03/susan-rice-requested-to-unmask-names-trump-transition-officials-sources-say.html

Yeah, Susan Rice is too afraid to testify. Shame on her.

Thats so funny because both Republicans and Democrats on the House Inteligence Committee looking into Susan Rice said she did nothing improper.

She isn't afraid. The issue is that the request to have her testify was supposed to be bipartisan and it's Congress that's holding things up.

[Anonymous]

Those who heard James Comey's testimony today should note that he said the National Security Advisor is absolutely allowed to request unmasking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Those who heard James Comey's testimony today should note that he said the National Security Advisor is absolutely allowed to request unmasking.

but not for political reasons.........and, she is not an investigator--why did she need to know?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Thats so funny because both Republicans and Democrats on the House Inteligence Committee looking into Susan Rice said she did nothing improper.

What Republicans? Name names.

They unhid the name of a US person under a FISA warrant and it was leaked to the public. Don't tell me she did nothing improper.

Trump's name in conjunction with an investigation by DOJ in the public IS prima facie evidence of wrong doing. If you don't get it, it's like water is wet by the fact that it's wet.


BTW, just because his name was unmasked doesn't mean the "fact of" the investigation with his name was not classified.


So HOW did his name get leaked given an ongoing investigation? Maybe by the same people who were actually "negotiating" with Hillary to give up her server(s) containing classified information?
I mean, how does this happen? Have you EVER heard of the FBI/DOJ "negotiating" with someone to give up evidence in a criminal investigation? NO. They come and TAKE it, with NO discussion. They're the FBI/DOJ for chrissake!

This whole political use of government to prosecute enemies stinks to high heaven.

[Anonymous]

This whole thread really is about democrats twisting themselves in pretzels to prove 1+1 does not equal 2.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thats so funny because both Republicans and Democrats on the House Inteligence Committee looking into Susan Rice said she did nothing improper.

What Republicans? Name names.

They unhid the name of a US person under a FISA warrant and it was leaked to the public. Don't tell me she did nothing improper.

Trump's name in conjunction with an investigation by DOJ in the public IS prima facie evidence of wrong doing. If you don't get it, it's like water is wet by the fact that it's wet.


BTW, just because his name was unmasked doesn't mean the "fact of" the investigation with his name was not classified.


So HOW did his name get leaked given an ongoing investigation? Maybe by the same people who were actually "negotiating" with Hillary to give up her server(s) containing classified information?
I mean, how does this happen? Have you EVER heard of the FBI/DOJ "negotiating" with someone to give up evidence in a criminal investigation? NO. They come and TAKE it, with NO discussion. They're the FBI/DOJ for chrissake!

This whole political use of government to prosecute enemies stinks to high heaven.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/11/politics/intelligence-contradicts-nunes-unmasking-claims/index.html

[Anonymous]

What does that CNN report do for me?

"Both republican and democrat lawmakers"...OK, name names. Not this anonymous stuff.

Is a low level staffer in one of the 400+ offices of capital hill a "lawmaker".

When it comes to CNN, you really have to doubt them. After all, Chris Cuomo stated on camera that "We couldn't help her (Hillary) anymore than we have...", so you know where CNN stands. Why would you even post stuff from CNN? They're so irrelevant on the truth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9zMwOQMNYM

[Anonymous]

So let's revisit this. If you are Susan Rice, and you see intel reports that disclose that the Russian Ambassador, in a legally monitored communication, is communicating to the Kremlin that US Person K or US Person F is asking for a Russian SCIF for back channel communications, would it, or would it not, be prudent for Susan Rice to request a legal and authorized unmasking of either Person K or Person F or both?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread really is about democrats twisting themselves in pretzels to prove 1+1 does not equal 2.

Nope, this is about the GOP trying to claim, as Orwell wrote, that 2+2=5.