Susan Rice requested to unmask names of Trump transition officials, sources say

[ProdigalSun]

From the way I have heard it explained, you can’t reveal the Identity of Americans caught by accident unless they are accused and become targets. It had already been explained the Americans were not the target and therefore their identities should not have been revealed by anyone. Its a privacy thing that has also been violated.

BTW… President Trump has been Vindicated!!!

 

[dvdjs]

From the way I have heard it explained, you can’t reveal the Identity of Americans caught by accident unless they are accused and become targets.

You have heard it wrong.

 

[Cathoholic]

Scott Uehlinger: Susan Rice Unmasking ‘Abuse of Power’ Violates ‘Spirit of the Law,’ Should Be ‘Further Investigated’

By John Hayward 4 Apr 2017

Former CIA operations officer Scott Uehlinger, co-host of The Station Chief podcast, talked about the Susan Rice “unmasking” story with SiriusXM host Raheem Kassam on Tuesday’s Breitbart News Daily.

“I think it’s an issue which deeply concerns people like myself and other people, working-level officers in the intel community,” Uehlinger said. “Even though at this point, there seems to be no evidence of breaking the law, this ‘unmasking’ of people was ill-advised at best. I think it really shows that abuse of power and the fact that many people in the Obama administration were willing to violate the spirit of the laws designed to protect Americans, perhaps rather than the law itself.” . . .

. . . He pronounced it “very disappointing” that such transparent abuse of government power for partisan politics would occur in the United States. . .

. . . . The agencies have to have the trust of the American people, and they’re losing it, because it seems as though they’ve been weaponized – perhaps, like I said, not breaking the law but playing very close to the line.”

Kassam suggested that leaking the information might have been illegal, even if Rice was legally entitled to request information on Donald Trump’s campaign and unmask the U.S. persons monitored during surveillance of foreign intelligence targets.

“That’s absolutely the case,” Uehlinger agreed. He went on to argue that the absence of hard evidence for any wrongdoing by the Trump campaign in all of these leaks was highly significant.

“Since basically the Obama administration has sort of loaded this with these rule changes and all to allow for leaks the fact that there is no ‘smoking gun’ of Trump administration collusion with Russia indicates that there isn’t any. . . .

The whole article can be viewed here.

breitbart.com/radio/2017/04/04/scott-uehlinger-susan-rice-unmasking-abuse-power-violates-spirit-law-further-investigated/

 

[Michael68]

You have heard it wrong.

No, you are wrong
No, you are wrong

It won’t end. This is the Dems Watergate and its just beginning.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

[How does Jim Sciutto fit in with this unfolding scandal?]

 

[Wedge_Antilles]

[How does Jim Sciutto fit in with this unfolding scandal?]

Her former colleague at the NSC, now an unbiased reporter for CNN, who keeps referring to “close friends of Rice’s have told me she did nothing wrong” - that guy?

Might as well ask Web Hubbell about Hillary’s complicity in the email scandal too while we are at it.

 

[Layp3rs0n]

Its amazing.

These guys a couple weeks ago were saying none of this even happened.

Then they attempted to injure President Trump’s credibility by impugning him personally and psychologically for even bringing it up saying he was lying or deluded (see CCC 2464, 2479, and CCC 2493-2499.

Then they kept trying to insinuate President Trump was “stupid”.

Then they tried to suggest Trump has been sooo smart, he has been working under the table with the Russians for as long as 2005 (I heard on liberal media commentator suggest) while the intelligence agencies just haven’t caught up to wiley old Donald yet.!

Trump is sooo brilliant that even the alphabet intelligence agencies can’t keep up with him.

Stupid, or cunning? Which is Trump today according to his detractors?

And yet not a word about Hillary’s Uranium deal at the State Department on behalf of the Russians.

wnd.com/2017/03/russia-scandal-inside-the-obama-clinton-uranium-deal/

Now the Obama supporters have shifted the whole paradigm of the discussion to: “Well this surveilling was done in national security interests and not political interests so its OK.”

The excuses should get even more interesting over the next several weeks.

This

 

[Cathoholic]

I look for the liberals to try just about ANYTHING to get this story off the front page.
(We are now to the point where even the liberal mainstream media outlets are at least reporting it).

A PERSONAL attack on someone from a notable liberal (Chelsea Handler swearing at President Trump or some other childish attack isn’t going to do it)?
A grotesque over blowing of a small story (to try to replace this story) perhaps?
Maybe something outlandish in regards to the Gorsuch hearings?

SOMETHING!

I don’t know what, but I anticipate something journalistically-speaking, pretty extreme very soon.

There is a reason WHY . . . .

. . . .the Trump people call the mainstream media “the opposition party” (here and here for example) . . . .

. . . and . . . .

. . . the Obama people refer to that same mainstream media as their “echo chamber” (here, here, or here).

 

[dvdjs]

The whole article can be viewed…

Sprit of the Law. How sweet. Hope you don;t expect that we would try people upon allegations of violating the spirit of the law?

Uehlinger said. “Even though at this point,** there seems to be no evidence of breaking the law **…

Kassam suggested that leaking the information might have been illegal, even if Rice was legally entitled to request information on Donald Trump’s campaign and unmask the U.S. persons monitored during surveillance of foreign intelligence targets.

Thanks for the link. It spoils the false narrative of felonious actions by Rice.

 

[Michael68]

Sprit of the Law. How sweet. Hope you don;t expect that we would try people upon allegations of violating the spirit of the law?

Thanks for the link. It spoils the false narrative of felonious actions by Rice.

Nope, she was not legally entitled to these identities! Guess that’s where you are stuck. The rest of us will move on to indictments

 

[dvdjs]

Nope, she was not legally entitled to these identities!

So you say, FWIW.

 

[Michael68]

So you say, FWIW.

lol FUJI! (Idk what those intilals mean)
Fort Worth International Wafflehouse?

 

[Wedge_Antilles]

lol FUJI! (Idk what those intilals mean)
Fort Worth International Wafflehouse?

For what it’s worth, FWIW.

 

[TMC]

Nothing routine about umasking Americans then leaking that info to the media!

Excuses, excuses!

I haven’t seen any evidence of leaks to the media from Rice, have you?

 

[Aloysium]

I haven’t seen any evidence of leaks to the media from Rice, have you?

They altered the course of the election.
Wait a minute.
Oops, sorry it was the other way around.

 

[Cathoholic]

Dvdjs (here) concerning a link I referred to:

Thanks for the link. It spoils the false narrative of felonious actions by Rice.

Several things noteworthy of this post of yours dvdjs.

1. You are welcome. I’m not hoping Rice did this maliciously. I’m hoping it was all business.
2. But you seem to imply that I AM hoping for someone within our Government (in ths case, Rice who was in a high security governance position at the time) is attempting to betray the country so I can get some cheap political capital out of it.

If that’s what you are implying, you are wrong and it may even illustrate what I said about liberal projection in post 49 (here).

That being said, IF she is guilty, I hope this weaponizing the Government to try to defeat political opposition ceases in its very serious tracks and ALL who are responsible are held appropriately accountible.

1. Also you seem to have missed an important element in the very sentence you yourself quoted dvdjs . . .

Uehlinger said. “Even though at this point, there seems to be no evidence of breaking the law …

Again, I am not hoping that she DID break the law. But if she did, accountibility needs to occur.

You go back and re-read my posts. I’ve never said Susan Rice broke the law (but I never said Rice did NOT break the law either. Time may tell on that.)

1. You are forgetting that SOMEONE LEAKED SOMETHING, and the law WAS apparently broken.

And it suggests this law breaking was at least facilitated by Rice unmasking the sequested data here (so she better have had a GOOD reason to do so). Sequestered data that the Government now collects on all of us.

Rice MAY have had a good reason for unmasking it. If she didn’t I think she is in a lot of trouble. And there is not many people ABOVE her that COULD have ordered that (and if THAT is the case, he [you know who] might be in some trouble too).

And remember she just publicly LIED about it days ago (I think it was a week or two ago. You can find it in my earlier posts if you want specifics). I would have expected a “no comment” to the question she was asked instead of a LIE.

And Susan Rice has a well-known history of DISSEMINATING LIES in the Benghazi scandal (I am not saying SHE was the source although it LOOKS like she knew the truth but lied about Benghazi anyway). No significant accountibility there either which is often the case when Governmwnt gets so grossly oversized.

The question is WHO (not “if”) sent/gave classified US intelligence information to the press! It’s doubtful this was a security “accident”.

And I don’t hear you even asking this question.

And I honestly can’t recall you ever expressing ANY concern with that breach of security here on CAF dvdjs.

You ARE concerned about it aren’t you? You would not put “politics over country” would you? I’ve seen your posts and even I don’t think you would think that way (hopefully I am correct).

1. And if this security breach WAS an accident, then questions NEED to be addressed about the incompetence of handling secure information within the recent Obama administration.

And we need to learn from those mistakes (not take a “What difference does it make!?” attitude)

 

[kat07]

The problem with Susan Rice “unmasking” and data mining classified intelligence reports is summed up well in this article.

nationalreview.com/article/446415/susan-rice-unmasking-trump-campaign-members-obama-administration-fbi-cia-nsa

"Unmasking is done by the FBI, CIA, NSA ( they are the agencies that generate and collect intelligence) using "minimization standards, and which James Comey described as “obsessive” in their determination to protect identities and privacy of US citizens, and as extremely “rare”.

Susan Rice was the NSA Adviser, she was NOT an investigator. She was a WH staff member, who are not generators or collectors of intelligence but only consumers of it.

If Susan Rice was unmasking Americans, it was not to fulfill an intelligence need based on American interests…"

 

[Reuben_J]

Dvdjs (here) concerning a link I referred to:

Several things noteworthy of this post of yours dvdjs.

1. You are welcome. I’m not hoping Rice did this maliciously. I’m hoping it was all business.
2. But you seem to imply that I AM hoping for someone within our Government (in ths case, Rice who was in a high security governance position at the time) is attempting to betray the country so I can get some cheap political capital out of it.

If that’s what you are implying, you are wrong and it may even illustrate what I said about liberal projection in post 49 (here).

That being said, IF she is guilty, I hope this weaponizing the Government to try to defeat political opposition ceases in its very serious tracks and ALL who are responsible are held appropriately accountible.

1. Also you seem to have missed an important element in the very sentence you yourself quoted dvdjs . . .

Again, I am not hoping that she DID break the law. But if she did, accountibility needs to occur.

You go back and re-read my posts. I’ve never said Susan Rice broke the law (but I never said Rice did NOT break the law either. Time may tell on that.)

1. You are forgetting that SOMEONE LEAKED SOMETHING, and the law WAS apparently broken.

And it suggests this law breaking was at least facilitated by Rice unmasking the sequested data here (so she better have had a GOOD reason to do so). Sequestered data that the Government now collects on all of us.

Rice MAY have had a good reason for unmasking it. If she didn’t I think she is in a lot of trouble. And there is not many people ABOVE her that COULD have ordered that (and if THAT is the case, he [you know who] might be in some trouble too).

And remember she just publicly LIED about it days ago (I think it was a week or two ago. You can find it in my earlier posts if you want specifics). I would have expected a “no comment” to the question she was asked instead of a LIE.

And Susan Rice has a well-known history of DISSEMINATING LIES in the Benghazi scandal (I am not saying SHE was the source although it LOOKS like she knew the truth but lied about Benghazi anyway). No significant accountibility there either which is often the case when Governmwnt gets so grossly oversized.

The question is WHO (not “if”) sent/gave classified US intelligence information to the press! It’s doubtful this was a security “accident”.

And I don’t hear you even asking this question.

And I honestly can’t recall you ever expressing ANY concern with that breach of security here on CAF dvdjs.

You ARE concerned about it aren’t you? You would not put “politics over country” would you? I’ve seen your posts and even I don’t think you would think that way (hopefully I am correct).

1. And if this security breach WAS an accident, then questions NEED to be addressed about the incompetence of handling secure information within the recent Obama administration.

And we need to learn from those mistakes (not take a “What difference does it make!?” attitude)

Well said.

 

[dvdjs]

Dvdjs (here) concerning a link I referred to:
But you seem to imply that I AM hoping for someone within our Government (in ths case, Rice who was in a high security governance position at the time) is attempting to betray the country so I can get some cheap political capital out of it.

No, your inference in incorrect.

Also you seem to have missed an important element in the very sentence you yourself.

I saw it. It is hard to predict the future.

You are forgetting that SOMEONE LEAKED SOMETHING, and the law WAS apparently broken.

I have not forgotten and have posted numerous time that the leaking, a matter different from the unmasking, is illegal. I am happy for the leakers to face justice. Both those i the trump administration and those in the Obama administration.

And remember she just publicly LIED about it days ago (I think it was a week or two ago. You can find it in my earlier posts if you want specifics). I would have expected a “no comment” to the question she was asked instead of a LIE.

Actually she said, immediately after the comments of Nunes, that she had knowledge of what she was talking about. You should find the full question and the full response and stop falling victim to the gotcha spin of the alt-media. you may not have an agenda, but they do.

 

[Sophie_Lawrence]

If this is what Trumo was referring to in his tweet, why not say "Susan rice had members of my cabinet unmasked " back in march when he said Obama was wiretapping him and called him sick.

Why not be clear insead of going down multiple roads?

And no one thinks it weird he cited Fox and Friends? Steve Doocy is an investigative journalist?