Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The totally phony Susan Rice story, explained
Another right-wing conspiracy theory debunked. NaziCons owe Dr. Rice an apology.
As soon as Rice Brings Back The Benghazi Dead, she can have the apology of my back hand across her Lying Face.
And that would be an apology considering what she actually deserves.
Don't think so.she admitted it. and the reason it is a felony is based on the Foreign Intelligence Act, fool.I just posted it. Foreign Intelligence ACTthe facts.
Post them up.
That Rice did it , idiot.
Rice admitted that she was the leaker?
Link? Rice didn't need a warrant to request unmasking.something!yeppers!!! way to go.. Now you got it.You still don't know what you're saying or how it possibly relates to this thread.
Are you telling me that Rice would need a warrant to unmask those names?
I don't believe that's correct. Post up something.
Nothing.
Whomever said you need a warrant to unmask incidental targets of Surveillance was wrong.
You Need Authorization.
That could be in the form of a Subpoena. Or it could be done by A Lawful and Public Order to do the unmasking by An Intelligence Official who has that Authority, but to do that, he or she has to Cite a Criminal Violation, and also has to have The Classified Information Declassified and have this approved by a Civilian Authority who has oversight over his or her Department, and has to cite why.
There are hurdles and checks and balances in place that you have to overcome to Unmask an Incidental Target of Surveillance, and NO ONE ACCOMPLISHED THAT!
In other words The Unmasking was Illegal because there was No Legal Authorization Ordering any Unmasking to take place. Therefore a Felony was Committed.
It does not matter if you argue over whether or not The Surveillance was Legal or Not. There was no Authorization to Unmask which means The Intelligence was still Classified, and was not Legally Declassified.
This then becomes a Felony Espionage Case and is a violation of The Espionage Act which subjects The Leaker to Sedition, and Treason Charges as well.
For the sake of Brevity, let me put it in these words.
"Your Goose Is Cooked!"
the intel Nunes received was american to american. ooopppsssDon't think so.she admitted it. and the reason it is a felony is based on the Foreign Intelligence Act, fool.I just posted it. Foreign Intelligence ACTPost them up.
That Rice did it , idiot.
Rice admitted that she was the leaker?
Link? Rice didn't need a warrant to request unmasking.something!yeppers!!! way to go.. Now you got it.
I don't believe that's correct. Post up something.
Nothing.
Whomever said you need a warrant to unmask incidental targets of Surveillance was wrong.
You Need Authorization.
That could be in the form of a Subpoena. Or it could be done by A Lawful and Public Order to do the unmasking by An Intelligence Official who has that Authority, but to do that, he or she has to Cite a Criminal Violation, and also has to have The Classified Information Declassified and have this approved by a Civilian Authority who has oversight over his or her Department, and has to cite why.
There are hurdles and checks and balances in place that you have to overcome to Unmask an Incidental Target of Surveillance, and NO ONE ACCOMPLISHED THAT!
In other words The Unmasking was Illegal because there was No Legal Authorization Ordering any Unmasking to take place. Therefore a Felony was Committed.
It does not matter if you argue over whether or not The Surveillance was Legal or Not. There was no Authorization to Unmask which means The Intelligence was still Classified, and was not Legally Declassified.
This then becomes a Felony Espionage Case and is a violation of The Espionage Act which subjects The Leaker to Sedition, and Treason Charges as well.
For the sake of Brevity, let me put it in these words.
"Your Goose Is Cooked!"
The standard for senior officials to learn the names of U.S. persons incidentally collected is that it must have some foreign intelligence value, a standard that can apply to almost anything. This suggests Rice's unmasking requests were likely within the law.
The news about Rice also sheds light on the strange behavior of Nunes in the last two weeks. It emerged last week that he traveled to the White House last month, the night before he made an explosive allegation about Trump transition officials caught up in incidental surveillance. At the time he said he needed to go to the White House because the reports were only on a database for the executive branch. It now appears that he needed to view computer systems within the National Security Council that would include the logs of Rice's requests to unmask U.S. persons.
Susan Rice Sought Names of Trump Associates in Intel
something!yeppers!!! way to go.. Now you got it.
I don't believe that's correct. Post up something.
Nothing.
Whomever said you need a warrant to unmask incidental targets of Surveillance was wrong.
You Need Authorization. That could be in the form of a Subpoena. Or it could be done by A Lawful and Public Order to do the unmasking by An Intelligence Official who has that Authority, but to do that, he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation, and also has to have The Classified Information Declassified and have this approved, and has to cite why.
There are hurdles and checks and balances in place that you have to overcome to unmask an Incidental Target of Surveillance, and NO ONE ACCOMPLISHED THAT!
In other words The Unmasking was Illegal because there was No Legal Authorization Ordering any Unmasking to take place.
It does not matter if you argue over whether or not The Surveillance was Legal or Not. There was no Authorization to Unmask which means The Intelligence was still Classified, and was not Legally Declassified.
This then become a Felony Espionage Case and is a violation of The Espionage Act which subjects The Leaker to Sedition, and Treason Charges as well.
It was JC who foolishly said a warrant was required.
he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation,
No true. It must have foreign intelligence value. As Trump's people are part of a counterintelligence investigation that is attempting to determine the nature of their relationships with foreign officials, it certainly appears that any intercept from any Trump associate can fit that description.
what was the criminal activity? And where did any information come from?something!I don't believe that's correct. Post up something.
Nothing.
Whomever said you need a warrant to unmask incidental targets of Surveillance was wrong.
You Need Authorization. That could be in the form of a Subpoena. Or it could be done by A Lawful and Public Order to do the unmasking by An Intelligence Official who has that Authority, but to do that, he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation, and also has to have The Classified Information Declassified and have this approved, and has to cite why.
There are hurdles and checks and balances in place that you have to overcome to unmask an Incidental Target of Surveillance, and NO ONE ACCOMPLISHED THAT!
In other words The Unmasking was Illegal because there was No Legal Authorization Ordering any Unmasking to take place.
It does not matter if you argue over whether or not The Surveillance was Legal or Not. There was no Authorization to Unmask which means The Intelligence was still Classified, and was not Legally Declassified.
This then become a Felony Espionage Case and is a violation of The Espionage Act which subjects The Leaker to Sedition, and Treason Charges as well.
It was JC who foolishly said a warrant was required.
he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation,
No true. It must have foreign intelligence value. As Trump's people are part of a counterintelligence investigation that is attempting to determine the nature of their relationships with foreign officials, it certainly appears that any intercept from any Trump associate can fit that description.
something!I don't believe that's correct. Post up something.
Nothing.
Whomever said you need a warrant to unmask incidental targets of Surveillance was wrong.
You Need Authorization. That could be in the form of a Subpoena. Or it could be done by A Lawful and Public Order to do the unmasking by An Intelligence Official who has that Authority, but to do that, he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation, and also has to have The Classified Information Declassified and have this approved, and has to cite why.
There are hurdles and checks and balances in place that you have to overcome to unmask an Incidental Target of Surveillance, and NO ONE ACCOMPLISHED THAT!
In other words The Unmasking was Illegal because there was No Legal Authorization Ordering any Unmasking to take place.
It does not matter if you argue over whether or not The Surveillance was Legal or Not. There was no Authorization to Unmask which means The Intelligence was still Classified, and was not Legally Declassified.
This then become a Felony Espionage Case and is a violation of The Espionage Act which subjects The Leaker to Sedition, and Treason Charges as well.
It was JC who foolishly said a warrant was required.
he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation,
No true. It must have foreign intelligence value. As Trump's people are part of a counterintelligence investigation that is attempting to determine the nature of their relationships with foreign officials, it certainly appears that any intercept from any Trump associate can fit that description.
There was no Foreign Intelligence Value first of all, and secondly, that is not The Standard Even. Using that standard all conversations with any Foreign National is of Foreign Intelligence Value and by Proxy this means that All Incidental Targets of Surveillance Must Be Unmasked.
Lastly it means you are an idiot, trapped on a hamster wheel going no where, but looking desperately for a way out of this mess your party created for you.
Sucks to be you....but don't feel bad.
You have me to entertain you, and fill up your water bottle once in a while....if I remember.
There was no Foreign Intelligence Value
something!yeppers!!! way to go.. Now you got it.
I don't believe that's correct. Post up something.
Nothing.
Whomever said you need a warrant to unmask incidental targets of Surveillance was wrong.
You Need Authorization. That could be in the form of a Subpoena. Or it could be done by A Lawful and Public Order to do the unmasking by An Intelligence Official who has that Authority, but to do that, he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation, and also has to have The Classified Information Declassified and have this approved, and has to cite why.
There are hurdles and checks and balances in place that you have to overcome to unmask an Incidental Target of Surveillance, and NO ONE ACCOMPLISHED THAT!
In other words The Unmasking was Illegal because there was No Legal Authorization Ordering any Unmasking to take place.
It does not matter if you argue over whether or not The Surveillance was Legal or Not. There was no Authorization to Unmask which means The Intelligence was still Classified, and was not Legally Declassified.
This then become a Felony Espionage Case and is a violation of The Espionage Act which subjects The Leaker to Sedition, and Treason Charges as well.
It was JC who foolishly said a warrant was required.
he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation,
No true. It must have foreign intelligence value. As Trump's people are part of a counterintelligence investigation that is attempting to determine the nature of their relationships with foreign officials, it certainly appears that any intercept from any Trump associate can fit that description.
the intel Nunes received was american to american. ooopppsss[/QUOTE]Don't think so.she admitted it. and the reason it is a felony is based on the Foreign Intelligence Act, fool.I just posted it. Foreign Intelligence ACT
That Rice did it , idiot.
Rice admitted that she was the leaker?
Link? Rice didn't need a warrant to request unmasking.something!I don't believe that's correct. Post up something.
Nothing.
Whomever said you need a warrant to unmask incidental targets of Surveillance was wrong.
You Need Authorization.
That could be in the form of a Subpoena. Or it could be done by A Lawful and Public Order to do the unmasking by An Intelligence Official who has that Authority, but to do that, he or she has to Cite a Criminal Violation, and also has to have The Classified Information Declassified and have this approved by a Civilian Authority who has oversight over his or her Department, and has to cite why.
There are hurdles and checks and balances in place that you have to overcome to Unmask an Incidental Target of Surveillance, and NO ONE ACCOMPLISHED THAT!
In other words The Unmasking was Illegal because there was No Legal Authorization Ordering any Unmasking to take place. Therefore a Felony was Committed.
It does not matter if you argue over whether or not The Surveillance was Legal or Not. There was no Authorization to Unmask which means The Intelligence was still Classified, and was not Legally Declassified.
This then becomes a Felony Espionage Case and is a violation of The Espionage Act which subjects The Leaker to Sedition, and Treason Charges as well.
For the sake of Brevity, let me put it in these words.
"Your Goose Is Cooked!"
The standard for senior officials to learn the names of U.S. persons incidentally collected is that it must have some foreign intelligence value, a standard that can apply to almost anything. This suggests Rice's unmasking requests were likely within the law.
The news about Rice also sheds light on the strange behavior of Nunes in the last two weeks. It emerged last week that he traveled to the White House last month, the night before he made an explosive allegation about Trump transition officials caught up in incidental surveillance. At the time he said he needed to go to the White House because the reports were only on a database for the executive branch. It now appears that he needed to view computer systems within the National Security Council that would include the logs of Rice's requests to unmask U.S. persons.
Susan Rice Sought Names of Trump Associates in Intel
It's legal, Frank. But the Trumpers colluding with the Russians was not.Translation: Nunes said it was legal.
Jake, tell them you want to go out for a breath of fresh air, then make your get away
Not "A" felony.....many, many felonies...I imagine each time she illegally unmasked a Trump aide she was committing a felony.....and she isn't going to be the only one....
and obama knew about this....you don't do this on your own....
Frank let me tell ya------> we can't be sure this is 100% accurate, but the Democrats better be on their proverbial knees hoping it is not!Top stories on DRUDGE now..................
NOT NICE: RICE 'UNMASKED'...
FLASHBACK: CLAIMED 'KNEW NOTHING' IN MARCH...
Interest in intel started in July, spiked after election...
the worm has officially turned on the Russia stuff as of today...............
"I know nothing about this," Rice responded at the time. "I was surprised to see reports from Chairman Nunes on that count today."
"So, today, I really don't know to what Chairman Nunes was referring, but he said that whatever he was referring to was a legal, lawful surveillance, and that it was potentially incidental collection on American citizens," added Rice, who went on to criticize Trump for his accusation that Obama wiretapped him during the presidential campaign."
Thank you Barack!
The totally phony Susan Rice story, explained
Another right-wing conspiracy theory debunked. NaziCons owe Dr. Rice an apology.
As soon as Rice Brings Back The Benghazi Dead, she can have the apology of my back hand across her Lying Face.
And that would be an apology considering what she actually deserves.
Why do you hate Dr. Rice? She had nothing to do with Benghazi. She even testified under oath before Congress.
It's legal, Frank. But the Trumpers colluding with the Russians was not.Translation: Nunes said it was legal.
Jake, tell them you want to go out for a breath of fresh air, then make your get away
something!I don't believe that's correct. Post up something.
Nothing.
Whomever said you need a warrant to unmask incidental targets of Surveillance was wrong.
You Need Authorization. That could be in the form of a Subpoena. Or it could be done by A Lawful and Public Order to do the unmasking by An Intelligence Official who has that Authority, but to do that, he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation, and also has to have The Classified Information Declassified and have this approved, and has to cite why.
There are hurdles and checks and balances in place that you have to overcome to unmask an Incidental Target of Surveillance, and NO ONE ACCOMPLISHED THAT!
In other words The Unmasking was Illegal because there was No Legal Authorization Ordering any Unmasking to take place.
It does not matter if you argue over whether or not The Surveillance was Legal or Not. There was no Authorization to Unmask which means The Intelligence was still Classified, and was not Legally Declassified.
This then become a Felony Espionage Case and is a violation of The Espionage Act which subjects The Leaker to Sedition, and Treason Charges as well.
It was JC who foolishly said a warrant was required.
he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation,
No true. It must have foreign intelligence value. As Trump's people are part of a counterintelligence investigation that is attempting to determine the nature of their relationships with foreign officials, it certainly appears that any intercept from any Trump associate can fit that description.
It's about foreign intelligence not so much because of Trump doing something wrong, but the Trump folks met with Russians as part of there working for Trump, and the Russians were helping Trump. If some Hillary person met with Russians, they could be unmasked too. But you have to think if someone gets unmasked and didn't have any suspicion of anything underhanded, the leaker would get disciplined. And, if you are a plumber or someone just hired to do your regular job job for some foreign govt , you shouldn't be unmasked/UOTE="jc456, post: 16947014, member: 46512"]the intel Nunes received was american to american. ooopppsssDon't think so.she admitted it. and the reason it is a felony is based on the Foreign Intelligence Act, fool.I just posted it. Foreign Intelligence ACT
That Rice did it , idiot.
Rice admitted that she was the leaker?
Link? Rice didn't need a warrant to request unmasking.something!I don't believe that's correct. Post up something.
Nothing.
Whomever said you need a warrant to unmask incidental targets of Surveillance was wrong.
You Need Authorization.
That could be in the form of a Subpoena. Or it could be done by A Lawful and Public Order to do the unmasking by An Intelligence Official who has that Authority, but to do that, he or she has to Cite a Criminal Violation, and also has to have The Classified Information Declassified and have this approved by a Civilian Authority who has oversight over his or her Department, and has to cite why.
There are hurdles and checks and balances in place that you have to overcome to Unmask an Incidental Target of Surveillance, and NO ONE ACCOMPLISHED THAT!
In other words The Unmasking was Illegal because there was No Legal Authorization Ordering any Unmasking to take place. Therefore a Felony was Committed.
It does not matter if you argue over whether or not The Surveillance was Legal or Not. There was no Authorization to Unmask which means The Intelligence was still Classified, and was not Legally Declassified.
This then becomes a Felony Espionage Case and is a violation of The Espionage Act which subjects The Leaker to Sedition, and Treason Charges as well.
For the sake of Brevity, let me put it in these words.
"Your Goose Is Cooked!"
The standard for senior officials to learn the names of U.S. persons incidentally collected is that it must have some foreign intelligence value, a standard that can apply to almost anything. This suggests Rice's unmasking requests were likely within the law.
The news about Rice also sheds light on the strange behavior of Nunes in the last two weeks. It emerged last week that he traveled to the White House last month, the night before he made an explosive allegation about Trump transition officials caught up in incidental surveillance. At the time he said he needed to go to the White House because the reports were only on a database for the executive branch. It now appears that he needed to view computer systems within the National Security Council that would include the logs of Rice's requests to unmask U.S. persons.
Susan Rice Sought Names of Trump Associates in Intel
yep[/QUOTE]something!
Nothing.
Whomever said you need a warrant to unmask incidental targets of Surveillance was wrong.
You Need Authorization. That could be in the form of a Subpoena. Or it could be done by A Lawful and Public Order to do the unmasking by An Intelligence Official who has that Authority, but to do that, he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation, and also has to have The Classified Information Declassified and have this approved, and has to cite why.
There are hurdles and checks and balances in place that you have to overcome to unmask an Incidental Target of Surveillance, and NO ONE ACCOMPLISHED THAT!
In other words The Unmasking was Illegal because there was No Legal Authorization Ordering any Unmasking to take place.
It does not matter if you argue over whether or not The Surveillance was Legal or Not. There was no Authorization to Unmask which means The Intelligence was still Classified, and was not Legally Declassified.
This then become a Felony Espionage Case and is a violation of The Espionage Act which subjects The Leaker to Sedition, and Treason Charges as well.
It was JC who foolishly said a warrant was required.
he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation,
No true. It must have foreign intelligence value. As Trump's people are part of a counterintelligence investigation that is attempting to determine the nature of their relationships with foreign officials, it certainly appears that any intercept from any Trump associate can fit that description.
It's about foreign intelligence not so much because of Trump doing something wrong, but the Trump folks met with Russians as part of there working for Trump, and the Russians were helping Trump. If some Hillary person met with Russians, they could be unmasked too. But you have to think if someone gets unmasked and didn't have any suspicion of anything underhanded, the leaker would get disciplined. And, if you are a plumber or someone just hired to do your regular job job for some foreign govt , you shouldn't be unmasked/UOTE="jc456, post: 16947014, member: 46512"]the intel Nunes received was american to american. ooopppsssDon't think so.she admitted it. and the reason it is a felony is based on the Foreign Intelligence Act, fool.That Rice did it , idiot.
Rice admitted that she was the leaker?
Link? Rice didn't need a warrant to request unmasking.something!
Nothing.
Whomever said you need a warrant to unmask incidental targets of Surveillance was wrong.
You Need Authorization.
That could be in the form of a Subpoena. Or it could be done by A Lawful and Public Order to do the unmasking by An Intelligence Official who has that Authority, but to do that, he or she has to Cite a Criminal Violation, and also has to have The Classified Information Declassified and have this approved by a Civilian Authority who has oversight over his or her Department, and has to cite why.
There are hurdles and checks and balances in place that you have to overcome to Unmask an Incidental Target of Surveillance, and NO ONE ACCOMPLISHED THAT!
In other words The Unmasking was Illegal because there was No Legal Authorization Ordering any Unmasking to take place. Therefore a Felony was Committed.
It does not matter if you argue over whether or not The Surveillance was Legal or Not. There was no Authorization to Unmask which means The Intelligence was still Classified, and was not Legally Declassified.
This then becomes a Felony Espionage Case and is a violation of The Espionage Act which subjects The Leaker to Sedition, and Treason Charges as well.
For the sake of Brevity, let me put it in these words.
"Your Goose Is Cooked!"
The standard for senior officials to learn the names of U.S. persons incidentally collected is that it must have some foreign intelligence value, a standard that can apply to almost anything. This suggests Rice's unmasking requests were likely within the law.
The news about Rice also sheds light on the strange behavior of Nunes in the last two weeks. It emerged last week that he traveled to the White House last month, the night before he made an explosive allegation about Trump transition officials caught up in incidental surveillance. At the time he said he needed to go to the White House because the reports were only on a database for the executive branch. It now appears that he needed to view computer systems within the National Security Council that would include the logs of Rice's requests to unmask U.S. persons.
Susan Rice Sought Names of Trump Associates in Intel
What? JFC
yep[/QUOTE]something!
Nothing.
Whomever said you need a warrant to unmask incidental targets of Surveillance was wrong.
You Need Authorization. That could be in the form of a Subpoena. Or it could be done by A Lawful and Public Order to do the unmasking by An Intelligence Official who has that Authority, but to do that, he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation, and also has to have The Classified Information Declassified and have this approved, and has to cite why.
There are hurdles and checks and balances in place that you have to overcome to unmask an Incidental Target of Surveillance, and NO ONE ACCOMPLISHED THAT!
In other words The Unmasking was Illegal because there was No Legal Authorization Ordering any Unmasking to take place.
It does not matter if you argue over whether or not The Surveillance was Legal or Not. There was no Authorization to Unmask which means The Intelligence was still Classified, and was not Legally Declassified.
This then become a Felony Espionage Case and is a violation of The Espionage Act which subjects The Leaker to Sedition, and Treason Charges as well.
It was JC who foolishly said a warrant was required.
he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation,
No true. It must have foreign intelligence value. As Trump's people are part of a counterintelligence investigation that is attempting to determine the nature of their relationships with foreign officials, it certainly appears that any intercept from any Trump associate can fit that description.
It's about foreign intelligence not so much because of Trump doing something wrong, but the Trump folks met with Russians as part of there working for Trump, and the Russians were helping Trump. If some Hillary person met with Russians, they could be unmasked too. But you have to think if someone gets unmasked and didn't have any suspicion of anything underhanded, the leaker would get disciplined. And, if you are a plumber or someone just hired to do your regular job job for some foreign govt , you shouldn't be unmasked/UOTE="jc456, post: 16947014, member: 46512"]the intel Nunes received was american to american. ooopppsssDon't think so.she admitted it. and the reason it is a felony is based on the Foreign Intelligence Act, fool.That Rice did it , idiot.
Rice admitted that she was the leaker?
Link? Rice didn't need a warrant to request unmasking.something!
Nothing.
Whomever said you need a warrant to unmask incidental targets of Surveillance was wrong.
You Need Authorization.
That could be in the form of a Subpoena. Or it could be done by A Lawful and Public Order to do the unmasking by An Intelligence Official who has that Authority, but to do that, he or she has to Cite a Criminal Violation, and also has to have The Classified Information Declassified and have this approved by a Civilian Authority who has oversight over his or her Department, and has to cite why.
There are hurdles and checks and balances in place that you have to overcome to Unmask an Incidental Target of Surveillance, and NO ONE ACCOMPLISHED THAT!
In other words The Unmasking was Illegal because there was No Legal Authorization Ordering any Unmasking to take place. Therefore a Felony was Committed.
It does not matter if you argue over whether or not The Surveillance was Legal or Not. There was no Authorization to Unmask which means The Intelligence was still Classified, and was not Legally Declassified.
This then becomes a Felony Espionage Case and is a violation of The Espionage Act which subjects The Leaker to Sedition, and Treason Charges as well.
For the sake of Brevity, let me put it in these words.
"Your Goose Is Cooked!"
The standard for senior officials to learn the names of U.S. persons incidentally collected is that it must have some foreign intelligence value, a standard that can apply to almost anything. This suggests Rice's unmasking requests were likely within the law.
The news about Rice also sheds light on the strange behavior of Nunes in the last two weeks. It emerged last week that he traveled to the White House last month, the night before he made an explosive allegation about Trump transition officials caught up in incidental surveillance. At the time he said he needed to go to the White House because the reports were only on a database for the executive branch. It now appears that he needed to view computer systems within the National Security Council that would include the logs of Rice's requests to unmask U.S. persons.
Susan Rice Sought Names of Trump Associates in Intel
What? JFC
yepNothing.
Whomever said you need a warrant to unmask incidental targets of Surveillance was wrong.
You Need Authorization. That could be in the form of a Subpoena. Or it could be done by A Lawful and Public Order to do the unmasking by An Intelligence Official who has that Authority, but to do that, he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation, and also has to have The Classified Information Declassified and have this approved, and has to cite why.
There are hurdles and checks and balances in place that you have to overcome to unmask an Incidental Target of Surveillance, and NO ONE ACCOMPLISHED THAT!
In other words The Unmasking was Illegal because there was No Legal Authorization Ordering any Unmasking to take place.
It does not matter if you argue over whether or not The Surveillance was Legal or Not. There was no Authorization to Unmask which means The Intelligence was still Classified, and was not Legally Declassified.
This then become a Felony Espionage Case and is a violation of The Espionage Act which subjects The Leaker to Sedition, and Treason Charges as well.
It was JC who foolishly said a warrant was required.
he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation,
No true. It must have foreign intelligence value. As Trump's people are part of a counterintelligence investigation that is attempting to determine the nature of their relationships with foreign officials, it certainly appears that any intercept from any Trump associate can fit that description.
It's about foreign intelligence not so much because of Trump doing something wrong, but the Trump folks met with Russians as part of there working for Trump, and the Russians were helping Trump. If some Hillary person met with Russians, they could be unmasked too. But you have to think if someone gets unmasked and didn't have any suspicion of anything underhanded, the leaker would get disciplined. And, if you are a plumber or someone just hired to do your regular job job for some foreign govt , you shouldn't be unmasked/UOTE="jc456, post: 16947014, member: 46512"]the intel Nunes received was american to american. ooopppsssDon't think so.she admitted it. and the reason it is a felony is based on the Foreign Intelligence Act, fool.
Rice admitted that she was the leaker?
Link? Rice didn't need a warrant to request unmasking.Nothing.
Whomever said you need a warrant to unmask incidental targets of Surveillance was wrong.
You Need Authorization.
That could be in the form of a Subpoena. Or it could be done by A Lawful and Public Order to do the unmasking by An Intelligence Official who has that Authority, but to do that, he or she has to Cite a Criminal Violation, and also has to have The Classified Information Declassified and have this approved by a Civilian Authority who has oversight over his or her Department, and has to cite why.
There are hurdles and checks and balances in place that you have to overcome to Unmask an Incidental Target of Surveillance, and NO ONE ACCOMPLISHED THAT!
In other words The Unmasking was Illegal because there was No Legal Authorization Ordering any Unmasking to take place. Therefore a Felony was Committed.
It does not matter if you argue over whether or not The Surveillance was Legal or Not. There was no Authorization to Unmask which means The Intelligence was still Classified, and was not Legally Declassified.
This then becomes a Felony Espionage Case and is a violation of The Espionage Act which subjects The Leaker to Sedition, and Treason Charges as well.
For the sake of Brevity, let me put it in these words.
"Your Goose Is Cooked!"
The standard for senior officials to learn the names of U.S. persons incidentally collected is that it must have some foreign intelligence value, a standard that can apply to almost anything. This suggests Rice's unmasking requests were likely within the law.
The news about Rice also sheds light on the strange behavior of Nunes in the last two weeks. It emerged last week that he traveled to the White House last month, the night before he made an explosive allegation about Trump transition officials caught up in incidental surveillance. At the time he said he needed to go to the White House because the reports were only on a database for the executive branch. It now appears that he needed to view computer systems within the National Security Council that would include the logs of Rice's requests to unmask U.S. persons.
Susan Rice Sought Names of Trump Associates in Intel
What? JFC
was it illegal if someone met with a russian?Maybe there is confusion between unmasking and leaking. Rice was doing her job for Obama to find out which Trump folks were meeting with Ruskies. It was connected to nalt sec, and not some innocent American having some unsolicited communication.
We don't yet know who told the press. Even so it was not illegal for Nunes to leak he had some information showing Trump guys were caught talking even though they were not targets of survellience, and I don't see why it would be illegal for a dem to do the same.
WTF are you attempting to say?[/QUOTE]yepNothing.
Whomever said you need a warrant to unmask incidental targets of Surveillance was wrong.
You Need Authorization. That could be in the form of a Subpoena. Or it could be done by A Lawful and Public Order to do the unmasking by An Intelligence Official who has that Authority, but to do that, he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation, and also has to have The Classified Information Declassified and have this approved, and has to cite why.
There are hurdles and checks and balances in place that you have to overcome to unmask an Incidental Target of Surveillance, and NO ONE ACCOMPLISHED THAT!
In other words The Unmasking was Illegal because there was No Legal Authorization Ordering any Unmasking to take place.
It does not matter if you argue over whether or not The Surveillance was Legal or Not. There was no Authorization to Unmask which means The Intelligence was still Classified, and was not Legally Declassified.
This then become a Felony Espionage Case and is a violation of The Espionage Act which subjects The Leaker to Sedition, and Treason Charges as well.
It was JC who foolishly said a warrant was required.
he or she has to cite a Criminal Violation,
No true. It must have foreign intelligence value. As Trump's people are part of a counterintelligence investigation that is attempting to determine the nature of their relationships with foreign officials, it certainly appears that any intercept from any Trump associate can fit that description.
It's about foreign intelligence not so much because of Trump doing something wrong, but the Trump folks met with Russians as part of there working for Trump, and the Russians were helping Trump. If some Hillary person met with Russians, they could be unmasked too. But you have to think if someone gets unmasked and didn't have any suspicion of anything underhanded, the leaker would get disciplined. And, if you are a plumber or someone just hired to do your regular job job for some foreign govt , you shouldn't be unmasked/UOTE="jc456, post: 16947014, member: 46512"]the intel Nunes received was american to american. ooopppsssDon't think so.she admitted it. and the reason it is a felony is based on the Foreign Intelligence Act, fool.
Rice admitted that she was the leaker?
Link? Rice didn't need a warrant to request unmasking.Nothing.
Whomever said you need a warrant to unmask incidental targets of Surveillance was wrong.
You Need Authorization.
That could be in the form of a Subpoena. Or it could be done by A Lawful and Public Order to do the unmasking by An Intelligence Official who has that Authority, but to do that, he or she has to Cite a Criminal Violation, and also has to have The Classified Information Declassified and have this approved by a Civilian Authority who has oversight over his or her Department, and has to cite why.
There are hurdles and checks and balances in place that you have to overcome to Unmask an Incidental Target of Surveillance, and NO ONE ACCOMPLISHED THAT!
In other words The Unmasking was Illegal because there was No Legal Authorization Ordering any Unmasking to take place. Therefore a Felony was Committed.
It does not matter if you argue over whether or not The Surveillance was Legal or Not. There was no Authorization to Unmask which means The Intelligence was still Classified, and was not Legally Declassified.
This then becomes a Felony Espionage Case and is a violation of The Espionage Act which subjects The Leaker to Sedition, and Treason Charges as well.
For the sake of Brevity, let me put it in these words.
"Your Goose Is Cooked!"
The standard for senior officials to learn the names of U.S. persons incidentally collected is that it must have some foreign intelligence value, a standard that can apply to almost anything. This suggests Rice's unmasking requests were likely within the law.
The news about Rice also sheds light on the strange behavior of Nunes in the last two weeks. It emerged last week that he traveled to the White House last month, the night before he made an explosive allegation about Trump transition officials caught up in incidental surveillance. At the time he said he needed to go to the White House because the reports were only on a database for the executive branch. It now appears that he needed to view computer systems within the National Security Council that would include the logs of Rice's requests to unmask U.S. persons.
Susan Rice Sought Names of Trump Associates in Intel
What? JFC
Well yes it would be illegal if the meeting was intended to further Trump's campaign. I don't think Trump gets hung unless someone says "he told me to meet wiith them"was it illegal if someone met with a russian?Maybe there is confusion between unmasking and leaking. Rice was doing her job for Obama to find out which Trump folks were meeting with Ruskies. It was connected to nalt sec, and not some innocent American having some unsolicited communication.
We don't yet know who told the press. Even so it was not illegal for Nunes to leak he had some information showing Trump guys were caught talking even though they were not targets of survellience, and I don't see why it would be illegal for a dem to do the same.
Again, I'm looking at the crime that started this. what was it?
