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

[JohnnyApplesack]

Trump throw's out the wildest shit without proof then demands that everyone muses on what if it did happen and what it would mean.

Instead of searching for his red herrings and asking what they mean if it's real how about the news refuses to cover any of it until Trump acts to prove the allegations?

excellent point, this is just a routine smoke screen, Bannon's probably got about 10 more lined up

 

[PoliticalChic]

There isn't a bureaucrat in the intelligence business that would unmask those names, or release those names to other agencies, without authorization from above.

You have it backwards. Nobody above can authorize the intelligence agencies to unmask those names. Read up on how government classification works, I think you can find it in Ronald Reagans executive order 12333

That was changed 17 days before the snake left office.

There isn't a bureaucrat in the intelligence business that would unmask those names, or release those names to other agencies, without authorization from above.

You have it backwards. Nobody above can authorize the intelligence agencies to unmask those names. Read up on how government classification works, I think you can find it in Ronald Reagans executive order 12333

Wrong.

17 days before Trump was sworn in, the Obamunists changed the protocols of the intell community that had been in effect and effective since the 1980s.

At that time, raw intell data was kept by one and only one agency.....and carefully doled out to the other 16 on a need-to-know basis.

This was the change:

"OBAMA Gave NSA New Powers In Final Days As President That May Have Been Used To Sabotage Trump"
OBAMA Gave NSA New Powers In Final Days As President That May Have Been Used To Sabotage Trump



Obama made a change that he was not willing to live under.

Since the 80s NSA would decide if and who had access. So....limited the number of those who had access.


On his last weeks in office, the snake gave more people access.....this, designed to allow more leaks, and to subvert the incoming administration.
Other agencies with Obama loyalists could request raw intell data...leaked to a compliant media. This is espionage....
18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

16 additional agencies had access.....



Only a dirt-eating snake like Obama would destroy the integrity of the intell community to use against a rival.





Jan 3 Loretta Lynch signed it....17 days before they left.

Suddenly it was imperative for 16 agencies to have access to all raw data.....but not imperative for the prior 8 years.




Did I mention that Obama is a low-life, dirt-eating snake?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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????

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.

Who says?

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.

"How the information was disseminated beyond Rice will also be a potential focus of congressional oversight, since lawmakers may want to know if it was briefed to Obama or shared with members of her larger circle of advisers, like deputy Ben Rhodes."
White House logs indicate Susan Rice consumed unmasked intel on Trump associates


Susan Rice had the names of every Trump official unmasked and sent to all those heads of intell agencies that the snake had added to the loop....and even non-members of said community, such as Ben Rhodes.

Rhodes was the slime who boasted of how he created a journalist's 'echo chamber' to market the administration's foreign policy."


Here is a clear link to the leaks for intell to the media.

Of course Obama was briefed. Just like he's briefed by the FBI. He knew about the counterintelligence investigation before it started.

 

[Spare_change]

Is this wrong or right?

...it was not 'incidental collection of intelligence'....it was purely political spying by Obamunists.

The incidental collection came from the Intel agency doing the collection. Rice was simply reviewing the associated reports from that agency. She had no way of knowing the identity until they were unmasked.

That is absolutely, categorically, 100% false. The National Security Adviser received unredacted intelligence (that's WHY there is a National Security Adviser!!!). Quit trying to dream up a scenario that will justify her heinous actions.

Well then, kindly tell us professor, why in the world did she need to request that they be unmasked?

She is directing her minions to release the final report (to 17 agencies - are you ******* kidding me?) with the names unmasked. There is a definitive procedure, and a paper trail, of that request. There isn't a bureaucrat in the intelligence business that would unmask those names, or release those names to other agencies, without authorization from above.

There isn't a bureaucrat in the intelligence business that would unmask those names, or release those names to other agencies, without authorization from above.

So the FBI has to check with the WH to get those reports?

If the national security adviser directs masking, only the national security adviser can authorize unmasking. The FBI request for information would be received by NSA, and passed to the national security adviser for approval - NSA would do nothing without the approval from the national security adviser. In this instance, NSA has no decision making authority. Welcome to the wonderful world of bureaucracy inside the Beltway.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Rice could easily go to prison for this. It is FAR worse than anything Scooter Libby ever did.

Rice is small fish, this goes much higher.

Where is Barry hiding today? Just asking...

Oh, I agree, BUT it won't get past Rice, she will fall on her sword to protect her party. After she gets out of prison, she will magically become VERY wealthy.

 

[The Irish Ram]

"and that means Trump and his merry band of non-Russian patriots are innocent! ~ Joe Wingunt

lol too funny

btw, there is no 'spreadsheet' can't wait to see what Nunes will shits out!

What role in the Obama administration did you play to have such inside information? Prove to me that there were no spreadsheets....

 

[Uncensored2008]

So the unmasking wasn't illegal then?

It was a felony.

 

[koshergrl]

Does she realize she has committed a felony and is now risking jail time?

Susan Rice Sought Names of Trump Associates in Intel

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."...

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.​

More proof of how easily duped the Trumpettes really are.

Let's review.

Our intelligence Agencies are spying on the Russians.

They overhear a conversation between an American & these Russians in which a discussion of using Russian hackers to help Trump win the Presidency.

Upon learning of this, the NSA (Rice) is concerned & wants to learn who is doing this.

Whiners & dumbfucks think that is a crime or plot. Whiners don't giv a shit that their orange buddy won because the Russians helped him.

They don't care that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians.

'Just like the writer of thois thrreasd, rthey only care that Trumpo won & they don't give a shit about this country.

You people are disgusting maggots & should all be shot for treason.

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...

She was the national Security adivsor to obama...this goes right into the Oval Office......It would be a good time to be a D.C. lawyer.....

No it is not illegal with good cause.

Unmaksing the Americans involved is a felony.....and we need to wait and see how she exlpains what she did....since this had nothing to do with Russia....she really needs a lawyer.....

NO NO No NO No No No No No No

"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 Atlantic.

No will, you ever quit being such a lying jerk? Will you ever become informed?
'

"Likely".

Will you ever learn the English language? How can you be informed if you don't comprehend what you read?

Articles: Benghazi Liar Susan Rice's Treachery Continues

 

[Spare_change]

That is absolutely, categorically, 100% false. The National Security Adviser received unredacted intelligence (that's WHY there is a National Security Adviser!!!). Quit trying to dream up a scenario that will justify her heinous actions.

Not even the president receives unredacted intelligence, unless it's requested.

That's not true .... the president has access to ALL intelligence. It is the decision of the national security adviser, and the collective agencies, to determine if the information reaches the level necessary to consume the President's briefing time. It is a filtering and prioritization process. It is not a restrictive process.

That's why those who provide the morning intelligence briefing start work at 2:30 am every morning (gee, wonder how I knew THAT). The winnowing process is time consuming, and ultimately, wrong. The Pres always wants more info - and it's the job of the briefer to have it at his fingertips.

 

[koshergrl]

"Rice was ordered to lie about Benghazi and blame it on a video. Rice was sent out to lie for the Obama administration about Army deserter Bowe Bergdahl, for whom the Obama administration would trade four top captured Taliban leaders."

"Susan Rice was a key cog in both the Clinton and Obama administrations’ disinformation machines designed to keep the truth from the American people and hide what was arguably criminal negligence in the deaths of many Americans at the hands of terrorism. That she should be up to her eyeballs in this current round of corruption by Team Obama, using classified data gleaned by surveillance of Americans to sabotage an incoming president, is both unconscionable and not surprising."

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/04/benghazi_liar_susan_rices_treachery_continues.html#ixzz4dIflDETr

 

[Spare_change]

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????

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.

Who says?

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.

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????

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.

Who says?

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.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The incidental collection came from the Intel agency doing the collection. Rice was simply reviewing the associated reports from that agency. She had no way of knowing the identity until they were unmasked.

That is absolutely, categorically, 100% false. The National Security Adviser received unredacted intelligence (that's WHY there is a National Security Adviser!!!). Quit trying to dream up a scenario that will justify her heinous actions.

Well then, kindly tell us professor, why in the world did she need to request that they be unmasked?

She is directing her minions to release the final report (to 17 agencies - are you ******* kidding me?) with the names unmasked. There is a definitive procedure, and a paper trail, of that request. There isn't a bureaucrat in the intelligence business that would unmask those names, or release those names to other agencies, without authorization from above.

There isn't a bureaucrat in the intelligence business that would unmask those names, or release those names to other agencies, without authorization from above.

So the FBI has to check with the WH to get those reports?

If the national security adviser directs masking, only the national security adviser can authorize unmasking. The FBI request for information would be received by NSA, and passed to the national security adviser for approval - NSA would do nothing without the approval from the national security adviser. In this instance, NSA has no decision making authority. Welcome to the wonderful world of bureaucracy inside the Beltway.

If the national security adviser directs masking, only the national security adviser can authorize unmasking.

You have no idea what you're talking about.
Rice had to make a request to the originating agency to have reports unmasked. That means she does not have the authority to unilaterally unmask. It also means there is a protocol for doing so and would have had to meet the requirements for her request to be granted.

The NSA is not under the National Security Advisor, fool.

Here's some remedial reading.
What Is the Role of the National Security Advisor? - dummies

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Who says?

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.

Who says?

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.

 

[koshergrl]

That is absolutely, categorically, 100% false. The National Security Adviser received unredacted intelligence (that's WHY there is a National Security Adviser!!!). Quit trying to dream up a scenario that will justify her heinous actions.

Well then, kindly tell us professor, why in the world did she need to request that they be unmasked?

She is directing her minions to release the final report (to 17 agencies - are you ******* kidding me?) with the names unmasked. There is a definitive procedure, and a paper trail, of that request. There isn't a bureaucrat in the intelligence business that would unmask those names, or release those names to other agencies, without authorization from above.

There isn't a bureaucrat in the intelligence business that would unmask those names, or release those names to other agencies, without authorization from above.

So the FBI has to check with the WH to get those reports?

If the national security adviser directs masking, only the national security adviser can authorize unmasking. The FBI request for information would be received by NSA, and passed to the national security adviser for approval - NSA would do nothing without the approval from the national security adviser. In this instance, NSA has no decision making authority. Welcome to the wonderful world of bureaucracy inside the Beltway.

If the national security adviser directs masking, only the national security adviser can authorize unmasking.

You have no idea what you're talking about.
Rice had to make a request to the originating agency to have reports unmasked. That means she does not have the authority to unilaterally unmask. It also means there is a protocol for doing so and would have had to meet the requirements for her request to be granted.

The NSA is not under the National Security Advisor, fool.

Here's some remedial reading.
What Is the Role of the National Security Advisor? - dummies

Rice is a henchman for Obama, always has been. If they tell her to lie, no lie is too big for her to distribute.

 

[The Original Tree]

Nope. She was busted for releasing information she inadvertently picked up while doing her job, for the express purpose of shifting an election and obstructing the president from performing his duties.

Treason, in other words.

no she wasn't, that's just another routine lie, whose name did she release???

y'all clutching at every straw, and there will be plenty more as Trump nears conviction

"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."

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/03/susan-rice-ordered-spy-agencies-to-produce-detailed-spreadsheets-involving-trump/#ixzz4dIZRqGdz

AND? You said they used it to influence the election. That's not true. The information wasn't leaked or even reported widely by the feds until AFTER the election.

You don't have to release Classified Information to THE PUBLIC to damage President Trump's election campaign.

You simply illegally share your illegal intelligence with Hillary Clinton and let her know exactly what The Trump Campaign is discussing.

EXAMPLE: Let's say President Trump was planning a rally in California in a particular city. They pick a date a 2 or 3 months in advance. They don't plan on announcing this appearance until 2-3 weeks before.

This "Intel" is shared with Clinton and then she calls her Political Mobsters to arrange some Violent Protests at The Next Trump Rally, and they have plenty of time to organize, make signs, and make it look like a random grass roots protest, bus people in, & pay people to commit violent acts etc. They have months to do this, not just a couple weeks....months.

That is just one example of what seems to be something rather mundane that can be used to damage a campaign.

WikiLeaks: Peter Kadzik Leaked Email Investigation Intel to Hillary Clinton Campaign
A Near Future Headline: OBAMA SHARED TRUMP INTEL WITH CLINTON CAMPAIGN
BUSTED: Hillary Clinton Tweet Proves She Received Trump Tower Illegal Wiretap Intel During Presidential Campaign
Obama Engaged in Spying on Trump Campaign & May have Shared Intel with Schummer & Hillary | Armstrong Economics
Clinton camp supports Electoral College members' request for intel briefings

No matter which way Lefty Tries To Cook This, It Comes up Smelling like a Shit Sandwhich for him.

This is what Losing Looks Like Lefty. Get used to it.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

So the unmasking wasn't illegal then?

It was a felony.

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

 

[Spare_change]

There isn't a bureaucrat in the intelligence business that would unmask those names, or release those names to other agencies, without authorization from above.

You have it backwards. Nobody above can authorize the intelligence agencies to unmask those names. Read up on how government classification works, I think you can find it in Ronald Reagans executive order 12333

i'm very familiar with EO 12333 - I was there when it was drafted, staffed, and implemented. EO 12333 authorizes the collection of information (to include the "incidental" collection) but does not define implementation techniques or processing methodologies. In short, it told agencies what they COULD do, but didn't tell them HOW to do it.

In fact, EO 12333 is the first time that intelligence agencies were authorized targeting those American citizens suspected of "activities that may violate federal, state, local or foreign laws", providing, of course, their name was discovered during foreign security monitoring. This, of course, was originally intended to mean that the crimes were a continuation of foreign security issues, but was perverted by EO 13470, which altered the role of DNI and expanded the basis for domestic monitoring.

 

[RealDave]

Well then, kindly tell us professor, why in the world did she need to request that they be unmasked?

She is directing her minions to release the final report (to 17 agencies - are you ******* kidding me?) with the names unmasked. There is a definitive procedure, and a paper trail, of that request. There isn't a bureaucrat in the intelligence business that would unmask those names, or release those names to other agencies, without authorization from above.

There isn't a bureaucrat in the intelligence business that would unmask those names, or release those names to other agencies, without authorization from above.

So the FBI has to check with the WH to get those reports?

If the national security adviser directs masking, only the national security adviser can authorize unmasking. The FBI request for information would be received by NSA, and passed to the national security adviser for approval - NSA would do nothing without the approval from the national security adviser. In this instance, NSA has no decision making authority. Welcome to the wonderful world of bureaucracy inside the Beltway.

If the national security adviser directs masking, only the national security adviser can authorize unmasking.

You have no idea what you're talking about.
Rice had to make a request to the originating agency to have reports unmasked. That means she does not have the authority to unilaterally unmask. It also means there is a protocol for doing so and would have had to meet the requirements for her request to be granted.

The NSA is not under the National Security Advisor, fool.

Here's some remedial reading.
What Is the Role of the National Security Advisor? - dummies

Rice is a henchman for Obama, always has been. If they tell her to lie, no lie is too big for her to distribute.

Nope. She was busted for releasing information she inadvertently picked up while doing her job, for the express purpose of shifting an election and obstructing the president from performing his duties.

Treason, in other words.

no she wasn't, that's just another routine lie, whose name did she release???

y'all clutching at every straw, and there will be plenty more as Trump nears conviction

"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."

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/03/susan-rice-ordered-spy-agencies-to-produce-detailed-spreadsheets-involving-trump/#ixzz4dIZRqGdz

AND? You said they used it to influence the election. That's not true. The information wasn't leaked or even reported widely by the feds until AFTER the election.

You don't have to release Classified Information to THE PUBLIC to damage President Trump's election campaign.

You simply illegally share your illegal intelligence with Hillary Clinton and let her know exactly what The Trump Campaign is discussing.

EXAMPLE: Let's say President Trump was planning a rally in California in a particular city. They pick a date a 2 or 3 months in advance. They don't plan on announcing this appearance until 2-3 weeks before.

This "Intel" is shared with Clinton and then she calls her Political Mobsters to arrange some Violent Protests at The Next Trump Rally, and they have plenty of time to organize, make signs, and make it look like a random grass roots protest, bus people in, & pay people to commit violent acts etc. They have months to do this, not just a couple weeks....months.

That is just one example of what seems to be something rather mundane that can be used to damage a campaign.

WikiLeaks: Peter Kadzik Leaked Email Investigation Intel to Hillary Clinton Campaign
A Near Future Headline: OBAMA SHARED TRUMP INTEL WITH CLINTON CAMPAIGN
BUSTED: Hillary Clinton Tweet Proves She Received Trump Tower Illegal Wiretap Intel During Presidential Campaign
Obama Engaged in Spying on Trump Campaign & May have Shared Intel with Schummer & Hillary | Armstrong Economics
Clinton camp supports Electoral College members' request for intel briefings

No matter which way Lefty Tries To Cook This, It Comes up Smelling like a Shit Sandwhich for him.

This is what Losing Looks Like Lefty. Get used to it.

And why would the Trump campaign be discussing their rallies with the Russians???????

 

[Spare_change]

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.

Is THAT what I said?

Damn, you're dumb.

 

[Spare_change]

She is directing her minions to release the final report (to 17 agencies - are you ******* kidding me?) with the names unmasked. There is a definitive procedure, and a paper trail, of that request. There isn't a bureaucrat in the intelligence business that would unmask those names, or release those names to other agencies, without authorization from above.

There isn't a bureaucrat in the intelligence business that would unmask those names, or release those names to other agencies, without authorization from above.

So the FBI has to check with the WH to get those reports?

If the national security adviser directs masking, only the national security adviser can authorize unmasking. The FBI request for information would be received by NSA, and passed to the national security adviser for approval - NSA would do nothing without the approval from the national security adviser. In this instance, NSA has no decision making authority. Welcome to the wonderful world of bureaucracy inside the Beltway.

If the national security adviser directs masking, only the national security adviser can authorize unmasking.

You have no idea what you're talking about.
Rice had to make a request to the originating agency to have reports unmasked. That means she does not have the authority to unilaterally unmask. It also means there is a protocol for doing so and would have had to meet the requirements for her request to be granted.

The NSA is not under the National Security Advisor, fool.

Here's some remedial reading.
What Is the Role of the National Security Advisor? - dummies

Rice is a henchman for Obama, always has been. If they tell her to lie, no lie is too big for her to distribute.

Nope. She was busted for releasing information she inadvertently picked up while doing her job, for the express purpose of shifting an election and obstructing the president from performing his duties.

Treason, in other words.

no she wasn't, that's just another routine lie, whose name did she release???

y'all clutching at every straw, and there will be plenty more as Trump nears conviction

"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."

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/03/susan-rice-ordered-spy-agencies-to-produce-detailed-spreadsheets-involving-trump/#ixzz4dIZRqGdz

AND? You said they used it to influence the election. That's not true. The information wasn't leaked or even reported widely by the feds until AFTER the election.

You don't have to release Classified Information to THE PUBLIC to damage President Trump's election campaign.

You simply illegally share your illegal intelligence with Hillary Clinton and let her know exactly what The Trump Campaign is discussing.

EXAMPLE: Let's say President Trump was planning a rally in California in a particular city. They pick a date a 2 or 3 months in advance. They don't plan on announcing this appearance until 2-3 weeks before.

This "Intel" is shared with Clinton and then she calls her Political Mobsters to arrange some Violent Protests at The Next Trump Rally, and they have plenty of time to organize, make signs, and make it look like a random grass roots protest, bus people in, & pay people to commit violent acts etc. They have months to do this, not just a couple weeks....months.

That is just one example of what seems to be something rather mundane that can be used to damage a campaign.

WikiLeaks: Peter Kadzik Leaked Email Investigation Intel to Hillary Clinton Campaign
A Near Future Headline: OBAMA SHARED TRUMP INTEL WITH CLINTON CAMPAIGN
BUSTED: Hillary Clinton Tweet Proves She Received Trump Tower Illegal Wiretap Intel During Presidential Campaign
Obama Engaged in Spying on Trump Campaign & May have Shared Intel with Schummer & Hillary | Armstrong Economics
Clinton camp supports Electoral College members' request for intel briefings

No matter which way Lefty Tries To Cook This, It Comes up Smelling like a Shit Sandwhich for him.

This is what Losing Looks Like Lefty. Get used to it.

And why would the Trump campaign be discussing their rallies with the Russians???????

I think the Russians were in charge of food for the Green Room.