Reported: Susan Rice unmasked names caught up in surveillance

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1. The sources of this information in the IC have said unmasking like this is highly unusual.

2. If the unmasking was done by Susan Rice (and it is appearing more and more like it was), why did she claim last month that she “knows nothing about this?”

And, note that she has remained silent since this information has been revealed.

3. What was the reason for the unmasking? Because, if it was purely political, she could be in deep trouble. She has some ‘splainin’ to do.

4. And, the million dollar question - Who leaked names to the press? This is a felony. And, I am sure if they identify that person or persons, he/she/they will be prosecuted.

Posted earlier but this applies to you:

The PERFECT analogy in all of this whining about "leaking" and "unmasking" would be if Donald Trump actually DID shoot someone to death on Times Square in broad daylight and someone caught video of it with their camera phone and posting it via an anonymous Twitter account.

The Trump supporters would all be whining about the person with the camera phone disclosing it rather than having any concern about the murder that just happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No names have been published. Maybe the media has names but the public doesn't.

And a presidential candidate's team having policy talks with Russia is not political, it's a matter of national security.

Flynn’s name was leaked.
Others have not been, to my knowledge, but judging from what has been said about this story, names do appear in the documents that Nunes and others have seen.

You're assuming that the leaks may have come from the American IC or someone from the Obama administration. That would be a bad assumption. We know for a fact that multiple European intelligence agencies tipped off the U.S. IC and have copies of phone calls and emails. Anything that is crossing the undersea cables or satellites are getting sucked by GCHQ. Small Baltic states also have communications (they are really adept with computers, ya know).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No names have been published. Maybe the media has names but the public doesn't.

And a presidential candidate's team having policy talks with Russia is not political, it's a matter of national security.

Flynn’s name was leaked.
Others have not been, to my knowledge, but judging from what has been said about this story, names do appear in the documents that Nunes and others have seen.

You're assuming that the leaks may have come from the American IC or someone from the Obama administration. That would be a bad assumption. We know for a fact that multiple European intelligence agencies tipped off the U.S. IC and have copies of phone calls and emails. Anything that is crossing the undersea cables or satellites are getting sucked by GCHQ. Small Baltic states also have communications (they are really adept with computers, ya know).

The question remains.... why were the names unmasked? What was the reason? And, why did Rice claim ignorance when asked about it?
Rice has yet to respond to requests for comment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No names have been published. Maybe the media has names but the public doesn't.

And a presidential candidate's team having policy talks with Russia is not political, it's a matter of national security.

Flynn’s name was leaked.
Others have not been, to my knowledge, but judging from what has been said about this story, names do appear in the documents that Nunes and others have seen.

This is factually wrong. Nunes recognized himself in transcripts that were masked and freaked out. He unmasked himself.

And frankly, I am more concerned about the collusion between the Trump Team and Russia than I am about this petty BS. Treason and the integrity of our democracy are more important. Were you this concerned about the wikileaks over the summer and how the information was stolen, or were you ok with that as long as it burned the DNC?

You can't have it both ways without being a hypocrite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No names have been published. Maybe the media has names but the public doesn't.

And a presidential candidate's team having policy talks with Russia is not political, it's a matter of national security.

Flynn’s name was leaked.
Others have not been, to my knowledge, but judging from what has been said about this story, names do appear in the documents that Nunes and others have seen.

You're assuming that the leaks may have come from the American IC or someone from the Obama administration. That would be a bad assumption. We know for a fact that multiple European intelligence agencies tipped off the U.S. IC and have copies of phone calls and emails. Anything that is crossing the undersea cables or satellites are getting sucked by GCHQ. Small Baltic states also have communications (they are really adept with computers, ya know).

The question remains.... why were the names unmasked? What was the reason? And, why did Rice claim ignorance when asked about it?
Rice has yet to respond to requests for comment.

You do realize it is completely illegal to discuss FISA warrants, right? Rice would be incredibly stupid to say anything about them. She can't say much more than that. Plus, she's not under oath....not sure why you expect her to say anything on national TV.

[Anonymous]

Meet the guy behind the "Susan Rice Illegally Unmasked US Citizens" claim that's now being circulated:

Total wackjob and pathological liar. Big Pizzagate nutcase, et cetera.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No names have been published. Maybe the media has names but the public doesn't.

And a presidential candidate's team having policy talks with Russia is not political, it's a matter of national security.

Flynn’s name was leaked.
Others have not been, to my knowledge, but judging from what has been said about this story, names do appear in the documents that Nunes and others have seen.

Yet in Flynn's case it wasn't any great surprise because many in the media had already uncovered his Russian connections.

So moving on, who else are you concerned about having been "unmasked?"

[Anonymous]

And a presidential candidate's team having policy talks with Russia is not political, it's a matter of national security.

1. We do not know that policy talks were involved.

2. We are being told by Nunes that Russia was not involved.

3. This was going on during transition, as well. Trump was no longer a candidate.

4. This supports what Vargas implied on Morning Joe.

5. Rice is in trouble. Wonder if she will blow the whistle on Rhodes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No names have been published. Maybe the media has names but the public doesn't.

And a presidential candidate's team having policy talks with Russia is not political, it's a matter of national security.

Flynn’s name was leaked.
Others have not been, to my knowledge, but judging from what has been said about this story, names do appear in the documents that Nunes and others have seen.

This is factually wrong. Nunes recognized himself in transcripts that were masked and freaked out. He unmasked himself.

And frankly, I am more concerned about the collusion between the Trump Team and Russia than I am about this petty BS. Treason and the integrity of our democracy are more important. Were you this concerned about the wikileaks over the summer and how the information was stolen, or were you ok with that as long as it burned the DNC?

You can't have it both ways without being a hypocrite.

So, the Obama administration was collecting incidental information on the Trump campaign since last summer, if not before. And, you are still waiting for the evidence that Trump colluded with Russia. Don’t you think that if such evidence existed that we would know about it by now? Frankly, I think those of you who continue to hold out hopes about any collusion are a bit delusional. We would know about it long before now if it were true.
And, I am not factually wrong. After Adam Schiff looked at the documents that Nunes had seen, did Schiff come out and say, “Nothing to see here.” Nope. He complained about the process, again. He said nothing about the substance of the documents. That speaks volumes. Reports I have heard indicate multiple people were unmasked.

And... as to Wikileaks. I think they are horrible. I think they do more damage to our country than help. I feel the same way about Edward Snowden. Talk about treason.......
The DNC could have avoided this whole episode had they heeded the advice of the FBI and put better security measures on their system. And, Podesta could have avoided his emails being leaked had he not been so damned stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And a presidential candidate's team having policy talks with Russia is not political, it's a matter of national security.

1. We do not know that policy talks were involved.

2. We are being told by Nunes that Russia was not involved.

3. This was going on during transition, as well. Trump was no longer a candidate.

4. This supports what Vargas implied on Morning Joe.

5. Rice is in trouble. Wonder if she will blow the whistle on Rhodes.

Why anyone in their right mind would believe a thing Nunes says at this point is beyond me.

[Anonymous]

If it "wasn't about Russia" then what was it and why is it classified?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Meet the guy behind the "Susan Rice Illegally Unmasked US Citizens" claim that's now being circulated:



Total wackjob and pathological liar. Big Pizzagate nutcase, et cetera.

Actually, most of the reporting I have seen and heard has come from Adam Housley, a widely respected journalist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just goes to show you all this is just the Obama administration going after Trump. Talk about fake news.

This news gets no coverage on CNN, NY Times, Washington Post ...

No wonder people trust wikileaks more than the fake MSM.

If a political story isn't being covered by CNN, NYT or Washington Post...then it's not a story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1. The sources of this information in the IC have said unmasking like this is highly unusual.

2. If the unmasking was done by Susan Rice (and it is appearing more and more like it was), why did she claim last month that she “knows nothing about this?”

And, note that she has remained silent since this information has been revealed.

3. What was the reason for the unmasking? Because, if it was purely political, she could be in deep trouble. She has some ‘splainin’ to do.

4. And, the million dollar question - Who leaked names to the press? This is a felony. And, I am sure if they identify that person or persons, he/she/they will be prosecuted.

Agreed.

[Anonymous]

Wait, the whole thing started because members of Team Trump were communicating with Russian operatives and spies. Start with that fact and then go on to the whole discussion about unmasking and Obama.


The previous administration had an obligation to protect our country and our democracy. There was a call for a bi-partisan announcement about the Russian interference and McConnell (who has taken millions from the Russians and whose wife is now in the cabinet) refused.

So what was the IC supposed to do? Ignore the Russian influence?

Now, what is more important, that the Trump Campaign was colluding with Russians to take the election, or that Susan Rice made inquiries about unmasking those in the transcripts?

Seriously, people wake up. Yes, if Rice unmasked and then leaked names, that is illegal, but let's not excuse the treason involved with having thousands of Russian trolls working on behalf of the Trump campaign to provide disinformation to millions of US Citizens to sway votes and cast doubt on our society.