2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 112,220
- 52,455
Yep........this is going to be huge....and there is a papertrail....
Susan Rice’s Unmasking -- Intelligence Agencies Alone Can Make That Call | National Review
The thing to bear in mind is that the White House does not do investigations. Not criminal investigations, not intelligence investigations. Remember that.
Why is that so important in the context of explosive revelations that Susan Rice, President Obama’s national-security adviser, confidant, and chief dissembler, called for the “unmasking” of Trump campaign and transition officials whose identities and communications were captured in the collection of U.S. intelligence on foreign targets?
---------------
Understand: 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 adviser 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 was not to fulfill an intelligence need based on American interests; it was to fulfill a political desire based on Democratic-party interests.
-------------
Those three collecting agencies — FBI, CIA, and NSA — must be distinguished from other components of the government, such as the White House.
Those other components, Comey elaborated, “are consumers of our products.” T
hat is, they do not collect raw intelligence and refine it into useful reports — i.e., reports that balance informational value and required privacy protections. They read those reports and make policy recommendations based on them. White House staffers are not supposed to be in the business of controlling the content of the reports; they merely act on the reports.
---
To summarize: At a high level, officials like Susan Rice had names unmasked that would not ordinarily be unmasked.
That information was then being pushed widely throughout the intelligence community in unmasked form . . . particularly after Obama, toward the end of his presidency, suddenly — and seemingly apropos of nothing — changed the rules so that all of the intelligence agencies (not just the collecting agencies) could have access to raw intelligence information.
Read more at: Susan Rice’s Unmasking -- Intelligence Agencies Alone Can Make That Call | National Review
Susan Rice’s Unmasking -- Intelligence Agencies Alone Can Make That Call | National Review
The thing to bear in mind is that the White House does not do investigations. Not criminal investigations, not intelligence investigations. Remember that.
Why is that so important in the context of explosive revelations that Susan Rice, President Obama’s national-security adviser, confidant, and chief dissembler, called for the “unmasking” of Trump campaign and transition officials whose identities and communications were captured in the collection of U.S. intelligence on foreign targets?
---------------
Understand: 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 adviser 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 was not to fulfill an intelligence need based on American interests; it was to fulfill a political desire based on Democratic-party interests.
-------------
Those three collecting agencies — FBI, CIA, and NSA — must be distinguished from other components of the government, such as the White House.
Those other components, Comey elaborated, “are consumers of our products.” T
hat is, they do not collect raw intelligence and refine it into useful reports — i.e., reports that balance informational value and required privacy protections. They read those reports and make policy recommendations based on them. White House staffers are not supposed to be in the business of controlling the content of the reports; they merely act on the reports.
---
To summarize: At a high level, officials like Susan Rice had names unmasked that would not ordinarily be unmasked.
That information was then being pushed widely throughout the intelligence community in unmasked form . . . particularly after Obama, toward the end of his presidency, suddenly — and seemingly apropos of nothing — changed the rules so that all of the intelligence agencies (not just the collecting agencies) could have access to raw intelligence information.
Read more at: Susan Rice’s Unmasking -- Intelligence Agencies Alone Can Make That Call | National Review
Last edited:
