Susan Rice – Did She Really?

by Jack

The insiders say Susan Rice ordered surveillance of Donald Trump’s 2016 election campaign aides as part of a political intelligence operation. She has since gone on the record, numerous times, to deny this allegation.

Let’s take a look at some of the other things Rice has told us and see how they have held up to the test of time:

  • Rice claimed that climate change was responsible for the deadly civil war in Syria.
    Rice once declared that there is “no military solution” to the raging conflict in Yemen.
    Susan Rice said accused deserter Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl served “with honor and distinction.”
    Susan Rice was the driving force behind a misinformation campaign about the Sept. 11, 2012, Benghazi terror attacks.

    Tuesday, April 4th, 2017, former National Security Adviser Susan Rice once again flatly denied that she sought to improperly “unmask” Trump campaign officials whose conversations were caught on surveillance by U.S. intelligence services. “The allegation is that somehow the Obama administration officials utilized intelligence for political purposes, ” Rice said in an exclusive interview with NBC’s Andrea Mitchell. “That’s absolutely false.”

Rice added that it’s not unusual to request the identities of people caught on intelligence surveillance.

‘I leaked nothing to nobody,’ Susan Rice insists

“There were occasions when I would receive a report in which a U.S. person was referred to, name not provided, just a U.S. person, and sometimes in that context in order to understand the importance of that report, and assess its significance, it was necessary to find out or request the information as to who that U.S. official was,” she said, without going into specifics.

Washington insiders say it’s not a uncommon ploy use the excuse of monitoring a foreign official, when the object is really an American.  However, at this time no hard evidence has surfaced to prove Rice was the person who unmasked the American political figures in the phone taps.  She had motive, ability and opportunity and there are unnamed sources who say she absolutely was the person responsible, but that is not enough.  Hopefully, Congress will sort this out in their probe, because we really need to know.  This is a felony crime and it involves an attempt to undermine the President of the United States.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Susan Rice – Did She Really?

  1. Tina says:

    If she leaked “nothing” to “nobody” she leaked something to somebody. I know practiced liars are good at what they do but this is on par with Bill Clinton saying “It depends on what the definition of is, is.”

    She told the truth and masked the lie in five words!

    (These people are college educated, yes?)

    • Peggy says:

      With her Harvard education she knew exactly what she was saying. She just figured, like the rest of her cohorts, we were too “stupid” to understand.

      A double negative of “nothing to nobody” means everything to everyone.

  2. Tina says:

    “…at this time no hard evidence has surfaced to prove Rice was the person who unmasked the American political figures in the phone taps”

    White House logs are not proof?

    By Eli Lake

    White House lawyers last month discovered 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.”

    The National Security Council’s senior director for intelligence, Ezra Cohen-Watnick, was conducting the review, according to two U.S. officials who spoke with Bloomberg View on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly. 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.

    The intelligence reports were summaries of monitored conversations — primarily between foreign officials discussing the Trump transition, but also in some cases direct contact between members of the Trump team and monitored foreign officials. One U.S. official familiar with the reports said they contained valuable political information on the Trump transition such as whom the Trump team was meeting, the views of Trump associates on foreign policy matters and plans for the incoming administration.

    Rice did not respond to an email seeking comment on Monday morning….

    Funny how the left media lets them get away with this $#*^!

  3. J. Soden says:

    One picture is worth 1000 words. But in this case, only one really applies: LIARS!

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8qCYUkV0AAkTRa.jpg

  4. J. Soden says:

    Rice also boasted just before Obumble left office that we had successfully eliminated chemical weapons from Syria.
    I’m sure those victims of the latest chem weapons attacks in Syria will be happy to know that.
    One proven serial liar worked for another proven serial liar.

  5. RHT447 says:

    “Hell yes, Donald Trump was “wiretapped.” So were you, by the way. And me. From open source information shared by defectors the intelligence community was too incompetent to keep from defecting, we know that every single electronic communication we send is collected in the NSA mainframes. Every single one. And the NSA has algorithms they can use to search it. You don’t go plant a bug in Trump Tower. You wiretap the opposition party’s nominee for president by running a search through the communications that the government “incidentally” collected. And if you find something juicy, then you call up your buddy at the Post and hand it over.”

    Read the rest plus links here:

    http://bayourenaissanceman.blogspot.com/2017/04/this-is-beginning-to-look-like-obamagate.html

  6. RHT447 says:

    Off topic, but word needs to spread–

    “Samsung is making all their devices “smart” – not just phones, but TVs and appliances like dishwashers and the like. All of these will be connected on your home network. They have shipped something like 30 million of these devices, so this is in all kinds of things. You may even have one of these and not know about it.”

    https://borepatch.blogspot.com/2017/04/samsung-smart-devices-it-may-be-worse.html

  7. Post Scripts says:

    The evidence we know about is very compelling, but it falls just short of the threshold to get a conviction. The problem is this, the government must prove beyond a shadow of a doubt…that’s a high bar. We know she requested the information, but we don’t know what she did with it once she got it. And therein is the problem, otherwise we would be seeing an indictment. We need to establish the link between the last government person with their hands on it and the media that received it. I’m betting it was Rice, but obviously we’re not quite there yet.

      • Tina says:

        That was a great movie.

        the Federalist, “BOMBSHELL: The Obama Spying Scandal Started Long Before Trump,” by Bre Payton:

        …it appears the Obama White House had been spying on its political opponents and leaking classified information about them long before Donald Trump won the presidential election last November, Lee Smith of Tablet Magazine writes.

        Remember the Iran Deal negotiations? In December 2015, The Wall Street Journal revealed that the Obama administration used the NSA to cast a wide net of surveillance around not just Israeli officials and diplomats, but American lawmakers who were friendly towards Israel as well as Jewish-American groups.

        White House officials believed the intercepted information could be valuable to counter Mr. Netanyahu’s campaign. They also recognized that asking for it was politically risky. So, wary of a paper trail stemming from a request, the White House let the NSA decide what to share and what to withhold, officials said. ‘We didn’t say, ‘Do it,’ a senior U.S. official said. ‘We didn’t say, ‘Don’t do it.’

        Stepped-up NSA eavesdropping revealed to the White House how Mr. Netanyahu and his advisers had leaked details of the U.S.-Iran negotiations—learned through Israeli spying operations—to undermine the talks; coordinated talking points with Jewish-American groups against the deal; and asked undecided lawmakers what it would take to win their votes, according to current and former officials familiar with the intercepts.

        In other words, the Obama White House used Israel as an excuse to collect classified information on its political opponents via the NSA and then leak bits of this information to the news media in an effort to intimidate them. Smith writes.

        ‘At some point, the administration weaponized the NSA’s legitimate monitoring of communications of foreign officials to stay one step ahead of domestic political opponents,’ says a pro-Israel political operative who was deeply involved in the day-to-day fight over the Iran Deal. ‘The NSA’s collections of foreigners became a means of gathering real-time intelligence on Americans engaged in perfectly legitimate political activism—activism, due to the nature of the issue, that naturally involved conversations with foreigners. We began to notice the White House was responding immediately, sometimes within 24 hours, to specific conversations we were having. At first, we thought it was a coincidence being amplified by our own paranoia. After a while, it simply became our working assumption that we were being spied on.’

        The White House redefined who is an agent of a foreign government in order to justify collecting classified information about American citizens, then used that information to bully them into doing what they wanted — in this case, passing the Iran Deal, he writes.

        To make its case for the Iran Deal, the Obama administration redefined America’s pro-Israel community as agents of Israel. They did something similar with Trump and the Russians—whereby every Russian with money was defined as an agent of the state. Where the Israeli ambassador once was poison, now the Russian ambassador is the kiss of death—a phone call with him led to Flynn’s departure from the White House and a meeting with him landed Attorney General Jeff Sessions in hot water.

        So is it really all that surprising the same administration would deploy the same spying methods to collect classified information on members of the Trump team, then leaks bits of it to the news media in an effort to de-legitimize them?

  8. J. Soden says:

    And from Dr. Sebastian Gorka:
    http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/04/05/gorka-watergate-little-spat-sandbox-compared-susan-rice-unmasking-allegations/

    Those of us who lived through Watergate and who have been paying attention to the weaponizing of the IRS, HHS, DOJ, FBI and now the “intelligence” community’s leaking under Obumble are well aware that Mr. Gorka is spot on!

  9. Peggy says:

    Since this spying of republican candidates started during the primary I want to know if Cruz and the other candidates and their teams were also under surveillance. I hope the committees look beyond Trump since the polls showed him loosing to Hillary, while Cruz and Rubio were higher in most.

    Looks like Hannity has been added to the Obama’s attack on the media, like Rosen, Attkisson and the AP. How many others will be uncovered?

    BREAKING: CIA Director John Brennan Targeted General Flynn and Sean Hannity For Surveillance:

    “Yesterday, we reported on a breaking story by GotNews that Sean Hannity and Blackwater founder, Erik Prince were also spied on and unmasked by the Obama administration.

    GotNews has just revealed that it was Obama’s CIA Director, John Brennan who was targeting them and other Trump supporters for surveillance.

    Via GotNews:
    Barack Obama‘s CIA Director John O. Brennan targeted Trump supporters for enhanced surveillance, intelligence sources confirm to GotNews’ Charles C. Johnson.

    The surveillance took place between Trump’s election on November 8 and the inauguration in January, according to White House and House intelligence sources.

    The focus was on General Mike Flynn, billionaire Erik Prince, and Fox News host Sean Hannity — all of whom had close ties to Trump before and after the November election and had helped the future president with managing his new diplomatic responsibilities.

    Hannity was targeted because of his perceived ties to Julian Assange, say our intelligence sources. Hannity was reportedly unmasked by Susan Rice at Brennan’s behest thanks to his close relationship with Trump and Julian Assange.

    Blackwater founder Erik Prince, a former CIA covert asset, has long criticized the CIA’s bloat and incompetence, including the Brennan-run CIA drone program’s failure to properly target terrorists rather than Afghan civilians. Prince has repeatedly called for restructuring the CIA and argued against Brennan’s tenure.

    GotNews’ Chuck Johnson went on to explain the feuding history of Brennan and General Flynn…”

    Continued..
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/04/breaking-cia-director-john-brennan-targeted-general-flynn-sean-hannity-surveillance/

  10. Peggy says:

    Found this related article of interest, especially update #2.

    The Inside Story on How Roberts Changed His Supreme Court Vote on Obamacare:

    “UPDATE 2: The Volokh Conspiracy lends some insight into the Crawford report. Stewart Baker notes that Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy (D.), Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, may have been aware that Roberts was the swing vote, because he gave a notably partisan speech on the Senate Floor directed at Roberts—and not mentioning Kennedy—in mid-May. “I have not seen much devoted to the Chief Justice’s role,” warned Leahy. “Why,” asks Baker, “would the chair of the Judiciary Committee risk the appearance of trying to harshly strongarm the Court when his remarks wouldn’t make the slightest difference?” Could Leahy have had inside information?

    Orin Kerr, also at Volokh, makes a persuasive case that Crawford’s sources are not clerks, but actual Supreme Court Justices. “First, law clerks don’t generally chat with Jan Crawford, while several of the Justices have done so publicly. Crawford appears to have particularly good relations with several of the court’s conservative Justices. Here’s Crawford interviewing Justice Thomas, and here’s Crawford interviewing Justice Scalia. Second, a clerk who leaked this and is identified has likely made a career-ending move.”

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2012/07/01/the-supreme-courts-john-roberts-changed-his-obamacare-vote-in-may/#17e405a9d701

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.