BREAKING: Obama's NSA Advisor Susan Rice Requested The Unmaskings Of Incoming Trump Officials

[ClosedCaption]

Just gave you TWO superb reasons why that can never happen.

You can make an unlimited number of excuses why he can't prove what he's saying i's true. But the fact is that he alone can prove it and he can't because he doesn't have any evidence.

Trump is in the WH. He has access to everything the last folks in the WH had. If there were anything to be found, Trump has all the access he needs.

And he CAN'T and WON'T compromise those classified systems and reports that APPARENTLY the last Admin did have the restraint or the ethics to do the same... You'll never know..

So he can't prove it because he can't prove it. Got it!

 

[ClosedCaption]

You can make an unlimited number of excuses why he can't prove what he's saying i's true. But the fact is that he alone can prove it and he can't because he doesn't have any evidence.

Are you totally UNAWARE of the statement by Farkus? Totally unaware of the substantial legal/tech diff between "wiretap" and "pre-authorized bulk domestic spying by collection and recording?

NEED AN ANSWER to the 2 questions above.... .

You can ask all the silly questions you like buto asking questions is not proof. Imy asking why Trump, who can release the proof hasn't released the proof. The only logical answer is because he has no proof.

So you're not answering those 2 simple questions because you don't KNOW -- or you don't CARE.. Pick one.

I'm not answering those questions because you fail to make a point. Those questions have nothing to do with why Trump can't produce any proof. You're attempting to draw connections without making the point and using question marks for covver.

Those questions HAVE EVERYTHING with what KIND of proof can be LEGALLY disclosed. You're not following close enough if you CAN'T or WON'T acknowledge that you can answer and understand them.

He's the President. He can declassified anything. You keep pretending that he can't provide proof because it will be illegal to prove himself.

No one but you and you alone is making that excuse. No one else...so maybe you should tell Trump he needs to use your excuse.

Whether or not I know about Farkas has nothing to do with why Trump can't prove his bullshit. Let's say I do know, does that mean Trump can't provide proof because I know what she said? Lol

 

[Uncensored2008]

So the unmasking wasn't illegal then?

It was a felony.

It was?
Rice did it on her own?
Who knew?

Rice was "just following orders," but the all-in media will never allow Obama to be pulled in, hence Rice will take the fall alone.

Pulled into what?
What did Rice do?

Felonious dissemination of the names of persons incidentally associated with a FISA wire tap.

Do you pay no attention at all to what is going on around you?

 

[Faun]

LOL

Typical rightie, no evidence she saw any of those transcripts with U.S. citizens unmasked before she requested the NSA unmask them; but don't let that stop you from making the claim anyway.

And for what should she be prosecuted? For doing her job? A function of her job was to review transcripts from intercepted communications when they might contain threats to national security. That includes unmasking names of incidentally intercepted U.S. citizens depending on the contents of the foreigners captured in the intercept.

Wow, you're way out on a limb.

Former US Attorney: Susan Rice Ordered Spy Agencies To Produce ‘Detailed Spreadsheets’ Involving Trump

RICHARD POLLOCK
Reporter
10:08 PM 04/03/2017

[...]

Former President Barack Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice ordered U.S. spy agencies to produce “detailed spreadsheets” of legal phone calls involving Donald Trump and his aides when he was running for president, according to former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova.

“What was produced by the intelligence community at the request of Ms. Rice were detailed spreadsheets of intercepted phone calls with unmasked Trump associates in perfectly legal conversations with individuals,” diGenova told The Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group Monday.

“The overheard conversations involved no illegal activity by anybody of the Trump associates, or anyone they were speaking with,” diGenova said. “In short, the only apparent illegal activity was the unmasking of the people in the calls.”

Other official sources with direct knowledge and who requested anonymity confirmed to TheDCNF diGenova’s description of surveillance reports Rice ordered one year before the 2016 presidential election.

[...]

Read more: Former US Attorney: Susan Rice Ordered Spy Agencies To Produce ‘Detailed Spreadsheets’ Involving Trump

Yeah, suuuure she did.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Twit.....it has already been reported that things she looked at had nothing to do with the Russians.....and even if she looked at it legally, the crime was unmasking the American Citizen..that is a felony...

A friend of mine in the intel community explained to me that Rice asking for the unmasking from the NSA itself is not illegal as long as she did not commit FRAUD by misrepresenting the reasons for the unmasking. That she did this in a systematic way over many months suggests RICO action may be applicable for this heinous disregard for the limits of executive power and respect for the privacy of American citizens.

This abuse of intelligence gathering methods to spy on Obama's political opponents is so outrageous that no one ever thought we would need a law specifically for that, but fraud in deceiving the NSA is just as illegal as anything else.

This should put the anti-Trump ass holes back on their heels.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Twit.....it has already been reported that things she looked at had nothing to do with the Russians.....and even if she looked at it legally, the crime was unmasking the American Citizen..that is a felony...

A friend of mine in the intel community explained to me that Rice asking for the unmasking from the NSA itself is not illegal as long as she did not commit FRAUD by misrepresenting the reasons for the unmasking. That she did this in a systematic way over many months suggests RICO action may be applicable for this heinous disregard for the limits of executive power and respect for the privacy of American citizens.

This abuse of intelligence gathering methods to spy on Obama's political opponents is so outrageous that no one ever thought we would need a law specifically for that, but fraud in deceiving the NSA is just as illegal as anything else.

This should put the anti-Trump ass holes back on their heels.

It should, but the all in Soros Press is doing all the can to lie and blow smoke to cover this up.

 

[JimBowie1958]

It should, but the all in Soros Press is doing all the can to lie and blow smoke to cover this up.

And it might also help if the GOP would stop undermining and backstabbing Trump and his circle.

 

[hunarcy]

And most likely, Obama gave her the authority to do it! The shit has hit the fan!


www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/04/report-obama-nsa-advisor-susan-rice-requested-unmasking-incoming-trump-officials/

It was legal for her to request to "unmask" the Americans who were "incidentally" recorded. It was illegal to release their names publicly through leaks.

Absolutely true ---- it is also illegal to release unmasked names to other intelligence agencies that don't need it in the course of a particular investigation.

Actually, that rule was modified by Obama, allowing the unmasking to intelligence agencies and Administration officials. However those agencies and individuals are NOT allowed to release the name publicly..

 

[hunarcy]

Absolutely true ---- it is also illegal to release unmasked names to other intelligence agencies that don't need it in the course of a particular investigation.

It's not illegal, It's just against protocol.

What does 'unmasking' mean?

 

[tinydancer]

And most likely, Obama gave her the authority to do it! The shit has hit the fan!


www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/04/report-obama-nsa-advisor-susan-rice-requested-unmasking-incoming-trump-officials/

It was legal for her to request to "unmask" the Americans who were "incidentally" recorded. It was illegal to release their names publicly through leaks.

Absolutely true ---- it is also illegal to release unmasked names to other intelligence agencies that don't need it in the course of a particular investigation.

Actually, that rule was modified by Obama, allowing the unmasking to intelligence agencies and Administration officials. However those agencies and individuals are NOT allowed to release the name publicly..

Wasn't that in January 2017 though that Obama eased the rules?

Meanwhile all of this unmasking and sharing had been going on for quite some time. What is particularly disturbing is Farkas claiming the Obama administration were rushing classified information "to the hill".

I'd like to not only know who was involved in leaking information but who the hell at the Capitol was receiving classified information.

 

[hunarcy]

And most likely, Obama gave her the authority to do it! The shit has hit the fan!


www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/04/report-obama-nsa-advisor-susan-rice-requested-unmasking-incoming-trump-officials/

It was legal for her to request to "unmask" the Americans who were "incidentally" recorded. It was illegal to release their names publicly through leaks.

Absolutely true ---- it is also illegal to release unmasked names to other intelligence agencies that don't need it in the course of a particular investigation.

Actually, that rule was modified by Obama, allowing the unmasking to intelligence agencies and Administration officials. However those agencies and individuals are NOT allowed to release the name publicly..

Wasn't that in January 2017 though that Obama eased the rules?

Meanwhile all of this unmasking and sharing had been going on for quite some time. What is particularly disturbing is Farkas claiming the Obama administration were rushing classified information "to the hill".

I'd like to not only know who was involved in leaking information but who the hell at the Capitol was receiving classified information.

Either late December or January..just in time, eh?

 

[Rambunctious]

So, you really think that during a wire tap of a foreign operative that if an US citixen was found conspiring against this country, that it would be ignored.

Is this how fucking stupid you are?

If there was any evidence of that we would all know it by now. It was Flynn's job to speak to foreign entities. Any suggestion that he was conspiring to undermine our election is fake made up bullshit.
Are you so fucking stupid that you think something like that wouldn't be a front page story by now? The dems are dirty and the dems are filthy. Any means necessary is their mantra. But some rank and file libs like you are too stupid to see it.

 

[koshergrl]

So, you really think that during a wire tap of a foreign operative that if an US citixen was found conspiring against this country, that it would be ignored.

Is this how fucking stupid you are?

If there was any evidence of that we would all know it by now. It was Flynn's job to speak to foreign entities. Any suggestion that he was conspiring to undermine our election is fake made up bullshit.
Are you so fucking stupid that you think something like that wouldn't be a front page story by now? The dems are dirty and the dems are filthy. Any means necessary is their mantra. But some rank and file libs like you are too stupid to see it.

They are stupid.
But they are also complicit. They are alright with the criminality because they think they will benefit from it.

 

[Ame®icano]

"Asked if she would testify, Susan Rice freezes, stammers, then changes subject to Russia."

Chris Manehan

 

[Billy_Bob]

"Asked if she would testify, Susan Rice freezes, stammers, then changes subject to Russia."

Chris Manehan

Cant stop those impulse behaviors... Lying like a rug, she is!

 

[Billy_Bob]

I say .... and I bring 30 years of experience in that line of business with me.

You say she "released" them to 17 agencies who didn't have authority?

Those were reports from those very agencies, fool.

See how the your logic falls apart???

That information was collected by a single agency - most probably, NSA - was collated, and sent to the national security adviser for review. At that point in time, they (in this case, she) would have to review the data to determine 1) its significance, 2) its disposition, and 3) whether the names should be masked.

It is NOT automatically disseminated to other agencies - that has to be a conscious decision (I'm pretty sure the Coast Guard Intelligence Service didn't collect that data)

In fact, I would suggest the possibility exists that the "decision" for greater sharing of intelligence data made by Obama in December 2016 was a belated attempt to camouflage their previous actions, but we'll never know for sure.

See how the your logic falls apart???

Not at all.
I was going to say the same about you. You are using supposition to fill gaps in your logic.

You don't know a damned thing about the process. If you did, you would know that this was entirely routine.

I say .... and I bring 30 years of experience in that line of business with me.

You say she "released" them to 17 agencies who didn't have authority?

Those were reports from those very agencies, fool.

See how the your logic falls apart???

That information was collected by a single agency - most probably, NSA - was collated, and sent to the national security adviser for review. At that point in time, they (in this case, she) would have to review the data to determine 1) its significance, 2) its disposition, and 3) whether the names should be masked.

It is NOT automatically disseminated to other agencies - that has to be a conscious decision (I'm pretty sure the Coast Guard Intelligence Service didn't collect that data)

In fact, I would suggest the possibility exists that the "decision" for greater sharing of intelligence data made by Obama in December 2016 was a belated attempt to camouflage their previous actions, but we'll never know for sure.

See how the your logic falls apart???

Not at all.
I was going to say the same about you. You are using supposition to fill gaps in your logic.

You don't know a damned thing about the process. If you did, you would know that this was entirely routine.

I can assure you that I know that process very well - I was directly involved in it, at various levels, for about 9 years (and an additional 20 years on the collection side of the house).

No supposition here.

Tell us some more about how the NSA reports to the National Security Advisor.

SO your consistent...

Your an assclown to everyone who has life experience and facts about investigative procedure you dislike..

 

[P@triot]

It is all unraveling quickly for Barack Obama, Susan Rice, and the Gang of Hate. You can already see Rice starting to throw Obama under the bus. She's not going to do time for anyone (nor should she if she was ordered to do this by Obama).

Could Barack Obama become the first president to go to prison for his actions as president?

White House lawyers last month learned that the former national security adviser Susan Rice requested the identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump transition and campaign, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

The pattern of Rice's requests was discovered in a National Security Council review of the government's policy on "unmasking" the identities of individuals in the U.S. who are not targets of electronic eavesdropping, but whose communications are collected incidentally. Normally those names are redacted from summaries of monitored conversations and appear in reports as something like "U.S. Person One." In February Cohen-Watnick discovered Rice's multiple requests to unmask U.S. persons in intelligence reports that related to Trump transition activities. He brought this to the attention of the White House General Counsel's office, who reviewed more of Rice's requests and instructed him to end his own research into the unmasking policy.

Susan Rice Sought Names of Trump Associates in Intel

 

[Rambunctious]

It is all unraveling quickly for Barack Obama, Susan Rice, and the Gang of Hate. You can already see Rice starting to throw Obama under the bus. She's not going to do time for anyone (nor should she if she was ordered to do this by Obama).

Could Barack Obama become the first president to go to prison for his actions as president?

Yeah this is big P@triot, even with the main stream media trying to cover this up it will be bigger than watergate in the end. Obama has still stayed silent and away from the cameras. This tells me he is guilty of not only this but much much more.

 

[Billy_Bob]

It is all unraveling quickly for Barack Obama, Susan Rice, and the Gang of Hate. You can already see Rice starting to throw Obama under the bus. She's not going to do time for anyone (nor should she if she was ordered to do this by Obama).

Could Barack Obama become the first president to go to prison for his actions as president?

Yeah this is big P@triot, even with the main stream media trying to cover this up it will be bigger than watergate in the end. Obama has still stayed silent and away from the cameras. This tells me he is guilty of not only this but much much more.

They now have the spread sheets that were ordered by Rice on all trump communications. No denying this was totally political and an illegal surveillance.

 

[Faun]

WE now have evidence that there was both legal and illegal surveillance by the Obama administration.

For over a year there was illegal surveillance that had noting to do with Russia.. Since July of last year the legal incidental surveillance was also done.

Rice demanded the unmasking of Trump and his associates. She then had the transcripts of conversations sent out to senior Obama staff and included John Podesta and Farkas in the Clinton campaign because they retained their security clearances.

Rice did not have a warrant to do what she did. So all of what she did was illegal, Reverse targeting Trump and his team.

It was clearly political espionage using US government intelligence assets.

This makes Watergate look like kids play.

billy billy billy

Riddle me this,

IF Rice asked for certain foreign intelligence that had listed US PERSON #1 in it, and she needed to know who this US person #1 is and she requested from the intelligence agency head to UNMASK who this US PERSON #1 is,

HOW in the world did she KNOW she was REQUESTING the UNMASKING of a Trump employee when the whole reason for unmasking is because the US PERSON'S Identity was MASKED.

So when she requested the unmasking of the identities of the US PERSON #1 or #2 or #3 etc. she did NOT know they were Trump employees.

As the deputy National Security Adviser, she didn't need to ask for the "unmasking" - because she receives the initial intelligence report BEFORE it is redacted. In fact, her position can authorize the masking. So, she knew the names all along.

Where she messed up is when she ordered the names to be unmasked (within her authority, but done without adequate justification), and then released those names to 17 intelligence agencies who did NOT have authority to see them.

Sorry - but this lady is going down.

In fact, I'm guessing she is the one that Obama will throw under the bus in order to protect the rest of his administration. We should see a news release from obama in about 10 days that expresses shock and dismay that Ms Rice would step so far outside her authority, claim that he had no knowledge whatsoever of what she's done, and is pleased that the investigation was able to uncover the culprit.

She won't be prosecuted - this whole thing will blow over - and we'll go right back to the government spying on the citizens. Whatever makes you think the government is going to give up that kind of power????

LOL

Typical rightie, no evidence she saw any of those transcripts with U.S. citizens unmasked before she requested the NSA unmask them; but don't let that stop you from making the claim anyway.

And for what should she be prosecuted? For doing her job? A function of her job was to review transcripts from intercepted communications when they might contain threats to national security. That includes unmasking names of incidentally intercepted U.S. citizens depending on the contents of the foreigners captured in the intercept.

Grasping at straws, don't you think:?

The national security adviser receives un-redacted intelligence. In fact, she is one of the few who can authorize masking (remember, somebody has to make a conscious decision to redact the names). She has to make a conscious decision to: 1) request the names be unmasked in the final report, and 2) authorize release of the information to the 17 intelligence collections agencies.

Her hands are dirty - live with it.

I suggest that you do just like Obama is going to do ---- sell her down the river, and move on as fast as you can.

Do you think before you type? Why on Earth would she request having names unmasked if she was given "un-redacted intelligence?"