Susan Rice confesses to unmasking Trump officials!

[AntonToo]

unmasking is NOT leaking....it simply means she was brought to a safe SCIF at the intelligence agency holding the info, and in there they unmasked the Americans that were in the intelligence briefing she, our National Security Advisor received. It is NOT made public....it is not leaking and it is not unlawful, when done by following protocol and in the right and safe manner.

So, how did the NYTimes and WaPost get the original story?

umm they got it from someone not named Rice. Crazy eh?

 

[easyt65]

This is the post you were questioned about. You claimed Comey said something that Comey did not say. Provide the link or STFU.

Despite being disappointed with myself for giving in and actually spoon-feeding your fat, liberal lazy ass, I take great joy in posting this additional information, information and links not found in those other threads I suggested you look at:

"According to both FBI Director Comey and NSA Director Clapper, no warrant ever authorized the intercepts and electronic surveillance on a member of Trump’s team.

If the information was inadequate to justify a FISA warrant (or the Obama White House wanted to keep some members of the intelligence community out of the loop?), what permissible purpose justified the unmasking? How significant is this?

As the minimization and masking protocols compel, the “incidental” information gathered by the NSA spying machine “is legally protected from public disclosure and is to be used only for official purposes of National Security Agency/Central Security Services.” All users with access “must strictly adhere to all classification and handling restrictions.”

Comey, backed by Intel testimony, testified he made it clear to the Obama WH that the information incidentally collected was deemed to have ZERO Intel Value, which means the collected info is categorized as 'PROTECTED PERSONAL CLASSIFIED INFORMATION'.
- This information can NOT legally be released to the public, except for National Security purposes. It was made clear, though, that the collected info had NO foreign Intel worth or National Security implications. To release it for any other reason was / is a CRIME!

This collected information was the basis for Rice's admitted ILLEGAL unmasking. As specified above, she could NOT legally unmask these Americans publicly...but she did anyway.

FURTHERMORE, Obama loyalists in different Intel organizations ILLEGALLY leaked the PROTECTED PERSONAL CLASSIFIED INFORMATION to the public / media...despite it having been made clear that the information had ZERO Intel value. The information should never have been passed around to the different Intel Agencies - to do so was ILLEGAL.

Rice initially declared she knew nothing about the unmasking. That was an extremely wise move by Rice - she should have stuck with that. As pressure / media attention grew she finally came out and admitted she was the one who ILLEGALLY unmasked Trump's team.

Once again, for the slow-reading / reading comprehension-challenged snowflakes, the minute the 'incidental collection' data was deemed to have ZERO INTEL / NATIONAL SECURITY VALUE it became categorized as legally PROTECTED PERSONAL CLASSIFIED INFORMATION which could not legally be passed around to the different Intel Agencies (no need - 'No Intel Value') and could not be legally leaked to the media / public. INSTEAD Rice did BOTH! The info was passed around to the different Intel agencies - who illegally leaked the information - and Rice illegally unmasked the Trump team members using that 'incidental collection' PROTECTED PERSONAL CLASSIFIED INFORMATION as the basis for doing so.

Comey testified to all of this, spelled it out in front of Congress. In that testimony Comey stated it clearly - clear enough for even the slowest snowflake to comprehend - SINCE THE 'INCIDENTAL COLLECTED' INFO, PROTECTED BY LAW, HAD NO INTEL VALUE OR IMPLICATION TO NATIONAL SECURITY THE ONLY REASON TO LEAK IT TO THE MEDIA AND TO THE PUBLIC WAS FOR POLITICAL GAIN. HE TESTIFIED UNDER OATH THAT SUCH ILLEGAL LEAKING - FOR POLITICAL GAIN - EQUATED TO ESPIONAGE!


Why Susan Rice’s Reported ‘Unmasking’ of Trump Officials Raises Very Serious Legal Concerns for Her


Ironically, under oath as well, Comey admitted to illegally leaking classified information that could also equate to 'Espionage':
- Breaking: Comey Just Incriminated Himself in Hearing!

"The Espionage Act clearly states leaking information about a meeting with the President on national defense matters is illegal,” Posobiec tweeted.

Indeed, in discussing with the Senate his meetings with the president, which he had documented in the memos, Comey admitted that his discussions with Trump had involved the investigation into alleged Russian attempts to interfere with the 2016 election, a matter that could be an issue of national defense."



Now, snowflake, let's hear it...
- Let's hear your OPINION about how these articles don't say / mean what they say - give us your interpretation...

- Let's hear about how my sources 'aren't legit' because they expose a lot of ugly truth about the criminal Liberals and Obama's administration who broke numerous laws trying to take down Trump

- Let's hear the bullshit...AS I PREDICTED WOULD BE COMING - GO AHEAD, PROVE ME RIGHT!

OR you could make the long walk back to the KIDS' TABLE, sit down, STFU, and let the grown-ups talk.

 

[Care4all]

unmasking is NOT leaking....it simply means she was brought to a safe SCIF at the intelligence agency holding the info, and in there they unmasked the Americans that were in the intelligence briefing she, our National Security Advisor received. It is NOT made public....it is not leaking and it is not unlawful, when done by following protocol and in the right and safe manner.

So, how did the NYTimes and WaPost get the original story?

link?

not from Rice...

 

[AntonToo]

This is the post you were questioned about. You claimed Comey said something that Comey did not say. Provide the link or STFU.

Despite being disappointed with myself for giving in and actually spoon-feeding your fat, liberal lazy ass, I take great joy in posting this additional information, information and links not found in those other threads I suggested you look at:

"According to both FBI Director Comey and NSA Director Clapper, no warrant ever authorized the intercepts and electronic surveillance on a member of Trump’s team.

If the information was inadequate to justify a FISA warrant (or the Obama White House wanted to keep some members of the intelligence community out of the loop?), what permissible purpose justified the unmasking? How significant is this?

As the minimization and masking protocols compel, the “incidental” information gathered by the NSA spying machine “is legally protected from public disclosure and is to be used only for official purposes of National Security Agency/Central Security Services.” All users with access “must strictly adhere to all classification and handling restrictions.”

Comey, backed by Intel testimony, testified he made it clear to the Obama WH that the information incidentally collected was deemed to have ZERO Intel Value, which means the collected info is categorized as 'PROTECTED PERSONAL CLASSIFIED INFORMATION'.
- This information can NOT legally be released to the public, except for National Security purposes. It was made clear, though, that the collected info had NO foreign Intel worth or National Security implications. To release it for any other reason was / is a CRIME!

This collected information was the basis for Rice's admitted ILLEGAL unmasking. As specified above, she could NOT legally unmask these Americans publicly...but she did anyway.

FURTHERMORE, Obama loyalists in different Intel organizations ILLEGALLY leaked the PROTECTED PERSONAL CLASSIFIED INFORMATION to the public / media...despite it having been made clear that the information had ZERO Intel value. The information should never have been passed around to the different Intel Agencies - to do so was ILLEGAL.

Rice initially declared she knew nothing about the unmasking. That was an extremely wise move by Rice - she should have stuck with that. As pressure / media attention grew she finally came out and admitted she was the one who ILLEGALLY unmasked Trump's team.

Once again, for the slow-reading / reading comprehension-challenged snowflakes, the minute the 'incidental collection' data was deemed to have ZERO INTEL / NATIONAL SECURITY VALUE it became categorized as legally PROTECTED PERSONAL CLASSIFIED INFORMATION which could not legally be passed around to the different Intel Agencies (no need - 'No Intel Value') and could not be legally leaked to the media / public. INSTEAD Rice did BOTH! The info was passed around to the different Intel agencies - who illegally leaked the information - and Rice illegally unmasked the Trump team members using that 'incidental collection' PROTECTED PERSONAL CLASSIFIED INFORMATION as the basis for doing so.

Comey testified to all of this, spelled it out in front of Congress. In that testimony Comey stated it clearly - clear enough for even the slowest snowflake to comprehend - SINCE THE 'INCIDENTAL COLLECTED' INFO, PROTECTED BY LAW, HAD NO INTEL VALUE OR IMPLICATION TO NATIONAL SECURITY THE ONLY REASON TO LEAK IT TO THE MEDIA AND TO THE PUBLIC WAS FOR POLITICAL GAIN. HE TESTUIFIED UNDER OATH THAT SUCH ILLEGAL LEAKING EQUATED TO ESPIONAGE!


Why Susan Rice’s Reported ‘Unmasking’ of Trump Officials Raises Very Serious Legal Concerns for Her


Ironically, under oath as well, Comey admitted to illegally leaking classified information that could also equate to 'Espionage':
- Breaking: Comey Just Incriminated Himself in Hearing!

"The Espionage Act clearly states leaking information about a meeting with the President on national defense matters is illegal,” Posobiec tweeted.

Indeed, in discussing with the Senate his meetings with the president, which he had documented in the memos, Comey admitted that his discussions with Trump had involved the investigation into alleged Russian attempts to interfere with the 2016 election, a matter that could be an issue of national defense."



Now, snowflake, let's hear it...
- Let's hear your OPINION about how these articles don't say / mean what they say - give us your interpretation...

- Let's hear about how my sources 'aren't legit' because they expose a lot of ugly truth about the criminal Liberals and Obama's administration who broke numerous laws trying to take down Trump

- Let's hear the bullshit...AS I PREDICTED WOIULD BE COMING - GO AHEAD, PROVE ME RIGHT!

OR you could make the long walk back to the KIDS' TABLE, sit down, STFU, and let the grown-ups talk.

^ hey asshole, how about you stop throwing shit against the wall to see if it sticks and simply provide AN ACTUAL QUOTE FROM COMEY where he states what you attributed to him saying about Rice.

Rice made clear she DID NOT leak unmasked names to the public.

 

[Aletheia4u]

...as a normal part of her job.

Rice told investigators why she unmasked Trump aides - CNNPolitics

Recap:

1. Trump's "That sicko Obama wiretapped me!" is conclusively proven bullshit with DOJ and FBI court filing.

2. Recused-but-not-really Nunes now forced to step aside from running the Russia investigation amid a House ethics inquiry into whether he improperly disclosed classified data.

3. Republicans see no improper unmasking after questioning Rice, feel there is no reason to bring her back again.

Comey Asks Justice Dept. to Reject Trump’s Wiretapping Claim

 

[easyt65]

^ hey asshole, how about you stop throwing shit against the wall to see if it sticks and simply provide AN ACTUAL QUOTE FROM COMEY where he states what you attributed to him saying about Rice.

Thank you for proving me right.

Thank you for proving you are a fat, lazy liberal who doesn't put forth effort because you don't WANT to know / acknowledge the truth.

Thank you for proving that you are one of that select / specific group of snowflakes who continue to prove over and over that nothing on God's green earth Trump will ever do will be 'good enough' because you are consumed with incurable partisan hatred and ignorance.

You got your links. You got your ass handed to you. You want more? Do your own research - educate yourself...except you have already proven you have no intention of doing / desire to do that. Wallow in your ignorance and hate - I've already spent more than enough time on your fat, sorry, lazy ass. Have a nice day.

 

[AntonToo]

^ hey asshole, how about you stop throwing shit against the wall to see if it sticks and simply provide AN ACTUAL QUOTE FROM COMEY where he states what you attributed to him saying about Rice.

Thank you for proving me right.

Thank you for proving you are a fat, lazy liberal who doesn't put forth effort because you don't WANT to know / acknowledge the truth.

Thank you for proving that you are one of that select / specific group of snowflakes who continue to prove over and over that nothing on God's green earth Trump will ever do will be 'good enough' because you are consumed with incurable partisan hatred and ignorance.

You got your links. You got your ass handed to you. You want more? Do your own research - educate yourself...except you have already proven you have no intention of doing / desire to do that. Wallow in your ignorance and hate - I've already spent more than enough time on your fat, sorry, lazy ass. Have a nice day.

You ******* idiot all your links are saying is that it is illegal to LEAK, NOT TO UNMASK while Rice denied any leaking.

So go ahead retard, quote Comey saying that Rice broke the law.

You can't BECAUSE HE DID NOT SAY THAT AND YOU ARE JUST FULL OF SHIT.

 

[Lastamender]

And Trump lets her walk

because she broke no laws

Lying to the American public about a video and Bergdhals distinguished service are not crimes. But that is what she did. She has 0 credibility.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

And Trump lets her walk

because she broke no laws

Lying to the American public about a video and Bergdhals distinguished service are not crimes. But that is what she did. She has 0 credibility.

From my point of view there is not a single individual the White House or Congress that has any credibility. Has Not been for a couple decades

 

[Lastamender]

And Trump lets her walk

because she broke no laws

Lying to the American public about a video and Bergdhals distinguished service are not crimes. But that is what she did. She has 0 credibility.

From my point of view there is not a single individual the White House or Congress that has any credibility. Has Not been for a couple decades

Obama's administration was terrible and she was part of it. She enables Islam just like Obama did.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

And Trump lets her walk

because she broke no laws

Lying to the American public about a video and Bergdhals distinguished service are not crimes. But that is what she did. She has 0 credibility.

From my point of view there is not a single individual the White House or Congress that has any credibility. Has Not been for a couple decades

Obama's administration was terrible and she was part of it. She enables Islam just like Obama did.

Yes, the Obama Admin was terrible and she was part of it. The sad part is that the Obama Admin replaced a terrible Admin and was replaced by a terrible Admin.
Obama was no worse than Bush II and Trump is no better than Obama.

 

[easyt65]

TRANSCRIPT:

GOWDY: Do you agree programs like FISA were intentionally designed to safeguard the identity of U.S. persons?

COMEY: Yes, there are other -- other important elements of it but that's a primary goal, I believe.

GOWDY: It wasn't an afterthought, it wasn't an accident. These are intentional safeguards that we put in place to protect U.S. citizens, is that correct?

COMEY: Correct.

GOWDY: Do you agree much of what is learned from these programs is classified or otherwise legally protected?

COMEY: All FISA applications review by the court collection by us pursuant to our FISA authority is classified.

GOWDY: The dissemination of which is a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison?

COMEY: Sure, dissemination -- unauthorized dissemination. GOWDY: Unauthorized dissemination of classified or otherwise legally protected material punishable by a felony up to 10 years in federal prison.

COMEY: Yes. Yes, as it should be.

GOWDY: All right.

In January of this year, the Washington Post reported, according to a senior U.S. government official, a named U.S. citizen -- and I will not use the name -- a named U.S. citizen phoned the Russian ambassador several times on December 29.

In February of this year, the Washington Post reported nine, nine current and former officials who were in senior positions at multiple agencies at the time of the call, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters and that officials began pouring over intelligence reports, intercepted communications, and diplomatic cables.

In February of this year, the New York Times reported a U.S. citizen, whose name I will not use, discusses sanctions with the Russian ambassador in a phone call according to officials who have seen a transcript of the wiretapped conversation. And again in February of this year, the New York Times reported on a phone call involving a U.S. citizen including significant discussions of phone records, intercepted calls, intercepted communications, and reported the NSA captured calls and then asked the FBI to collect as much information as possible.

My time is up so I will say this for this round. I thought it was against the law to disseminate classified information. Is it?

COMEY: Yes, sir. It's a serious crime. I'm not going to comment on those particular articles because I don't want to, in any circumstance, compound a criminal act by confirming that it was classified information but in general, yes, it's a serious crime and it should be for the reasons you said.


The data obtained through 'incidental collection', deemed 'Protected Personal Classified Information' was leaked by Obama Administration Loyalists in Intel Agencies (again, this information should never have been circulated to the Intel Agencies as it was deemed not to have any Intel Value) to the media, resulting in numerous articles revealing the illegally leaked classified information.

Comey makes it clear in answering Goudy's question that the leaks were indeed ILLEGAL. The information used, collected from 'incidental collection', was also the basis for Rice's public ILLEGAL unmasking under the same classification laws / restrictions protecting the Protected Personal Classified Information.

Full transcript: FBI Director James Comey testifies on Russian interference in 2016 election

 

[easyt65]

TRANSCRIPT:


Does the unauthorized disclosure of classified information to the press violate 18 USC 793, a section of the Espionage Act that criminalizes improperly accessing handling or transmitting national defense information?


COMEY: Yes.


NUNES: Would an unauthorized disclosure of FISA-derived information to the press violate 18 USC 798, a section of the Espionage Act that criminalizes the disclosure of information concerning the communication and intelligence activities of the United States?


COMEY: Yes, in addition to being a breach of our trust with the FISA Court that oversees our use of those authorities.

Full transcript: FBI Director James Comey testifies on Russian interference in 2016 election

 

[easyt65]

^ hey asshole, how about you stop throwing shit against the wall to see if it sticks and simply provide AN ACTUAL QUOTE FROM COMEY where he states what you attributed to him saying about Rice.

Thank you for proving me right.

Thank you for proving you are a fat, lazy liberal who doesn't put forth effort because you don't WANT to know / acknowledge the truth.

Thank you for proving that you are one of that select / specific group of snowflakes who continue to prove over and over that nothing on God's green earth Trump will ever do will be 'good enough' because you are consumed with incurable partisan hatred and ignorance.

You got your links. You got your ass handed to you. You want more? Do your own research - educate yourself...except you have already proven you have no intention of doing / desire to do that. Wallow in your ignorance and hate - I've already spent more than enough time on your fat, sorry, lazy ass. Have a nice day.

You ******* idiot all your links are saying is that it is illegal to LEAK, NOT TO UNMASK while Rice denied any leaking.

So go ahead retard, quote Comey saying that Rice broke the law.

You can't BECAUSE HE DID NOT SAY THAT AND YOU ARE JUST FULL OF SHIT.

LIE, DENY, JUSTIFY, 'TIL THE DAY YOU DIE...THE SNOWFLAKE WAY.

Comey made it clear the information that was leaked, the information Rice used as a basis for unmasking Trump's team members, was Protected Personal CLASSIFIED Information that was protected by law and could not be disseminated or publicly released, both of which was done - for POLITICAL GAIN...the same reason Obama illegally used the IRS as his own personal weapon against Americans who opposed his ideology and re-election in 2012.

Leaking the information was illegal. 18 USC 793
Unmasking Americans based on the classified information was illegal.
Your OPINION does not change that.

 

[g5000]

Rice admitted to unmasking Flynn a long time ago.

No, really!


WHY she did has been splained to the tards many times.


And another thing.

Obama didn't wiretap Trump. The NSA was wiretapping the RUSSIANS.

I think the tards should think about what they are saying when they say wiretapping the Russians is the same as wiretapping Trump.

 

[Camp]

This is the post you were questioned about. You claimed Comey said something that Comey did not say. Provide the link or STFU.

Despite being disappointed with myself for giving in and actually spoon-feeding your fat, liberal lazy ass, I take great joy in posting this additional information, information and links not found in those other threads I suggested you look at:

"According to both FBI Director Comey and NSA Director Clapper, no warrant ever authorized the intercepts and electronic surveillance on a member of Trump’s team.

If the information was inadequate to justify a FISA warrant (or the Obama White House wanted to keep some members of the intelligence community out of the loop?), what permissible purpose justified the unmasking? How significant is this?

As the minimization and masking protocols compel, the “incidental” information gathered by the NSA spying machine “is legally protected from public disclosure and is to be used only for official purposes of National Security Agency/Central Security Services.” All users with access “must strictly adhere to all classification and handling restrictions.”

Comey, backed by Intel testimony, testified he made it clear to the Obama WH that the information incidentally collected was deemed to have ZERO Intel Value, which means the collected info is categorized as 'PROTECTED PERSONAL CLASSIFIED INFORMATION'.
- This information can NOT legally be released to the public, except for National Security purposes. It was made clear, though, that the collected info had NO foreign Intel worth or National Security implications. To release it for any other reason was / is a CRIME!

This collected information was the basis for Rice's admitted ILLEGAL unmasking. As specified above, she could NOT legally unmask these Americans publicly...but she did anyway.

FURTHERMORE, Obama loyalists in different Intel organizations ILLEGALLY leaked the PROTECTED PERSONAL CLASSIFIED INFORMATION to the public / media...despite it having been made clear that the information had ZERO Intel value. The information should never have been passed around to the different Intel Agencies - to do so was ILLEGAL.

Rice initially declared she knew nothing about the unmasking. That was an extremely wise move by Rice - she should have stuck with that. As pressure / media attention grew she finally came out and admitted she was the one who ILLEGALLY unmasked Trump's team.

Once again, for the slow-reading / reading comprehension-challenged snowflakes, the minute the 'incidental collection' data was deemed to have ZERO INTEL / NATIONAL SECURITY VALUE it became categorized as legally PROTECTED PERSONAL CLASSIFIED INFORMATION which could not legally be passed around to the different Intel Agencies (no need - 'No Intel Value') and could not be legally leaked to the media / public. INSTEAD Rice did BOTH! The info was passed around to the different Intel agencies - who illegally leaked the information - and Rice illegally unmasked the Trump team members using that 'incidental collection' PROTECTED PERSONAL CLASSIFIED INFORMATION as the basis for doing so.

Comey testified to all of this, spelled it out in front of Congress. In that testimony Comey stated it clearly - clear enough for even the slowest snowflake to comprehend - SINCE THE 'INCIDENTAL COLLECTED' INFO, PROTECTED BY LAW, HAD NO INTEL VALUE OR IMPLICATION TO NATIONAL SECURITY THE ONLY REASON TO LEAK IT TO THE MEDIA AND TO THE PUBLIC WAS FOR POLITICAL GAIN. HE TESTIFIED UNDER OATH THAT SUCH ILLEGAL LEAKING - FOR POLITICAL GAIN - EQUATED TO ESPIONAGE!


Why Susan Rice’s Reported ‘Unmasking’ of Trump Officials Raises Very Serious Legal Concerns for Her


Ironically, under oath as well, Comey admitted to illegally leaking classified information that could also equate to 'Espionage':
- Breaking: Comey Just Incriminated Himself in Hearing!

"The Espionage Act clearly states leaking information about a meeting with the President on national defense matters is illegal,” Posobiec tweeted.

Indeed, in discussing with the Senate his meetings with the president, which he had documented in the memos, Comey admitted that his discussions with Trump had involved the investigation into alleged Russian attempts to interfere with the 2016 election, a matter that could be an issue of national defense."



Now, snowflake, let's hear it...
- Let's hear your OPINION about how these articles don't say / mean what they say - give us your interpretation...

- Let's hear about how my sources 'aren't legit' because they expose a lot of ugly truth about the criminal Liberals and Obama's administration who broke numerous laws trying to take down Trump

- Let's hear the bullshit...AS I PREDICTED WOULD BE COMING - GO AHEAD, PROVE ME RIGHT!

OR you could make the long walk back to the KIDS' TABLE, sit down, STFU, and let the grown-ups talk.

LIAR. Nothing in your long post supports or backs up your claim that Comey said what you claim he said. Not one sentence. If it did you would be able to isolate the single sentence and quote. You can't because he never said what you claimed.

 

[easyt65]

Caught With Her Pants Down -- Susan Rice Denied TheDC's Report But Accidentally Fessed Up To Doing THIS [VIDEO]

"During her Tuesday interview with MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell, former National Security Advisor Susan Rice for the first time admitted to unmasking “U.S. persons” included in intelligence reports.

The intelligence community sometimes incidentally collects the communications of U.S. citizens in its surveillance of foreigners, but those names are redacted when they are reported to White House officials. Rice told Mitchell that at times it was necessary for her to ask the intelligence agencies for the names of those U.S. citizens to determine the potential threat to national security."

Bullshit! As already proven / shown, the Trump Team data collected through 'Incidental Collection' was determined to have NO FOREIGN INTEL VALUE and NOTHING TO DO WITH NATIONAL SECURITY.

---------------------------

Democrats Shouldn’t Dismiss Nunes’s Spying Claims So Quickly

"Intelligence agencies cannot share details about American citizens with no foreign-intelligence value."

--------------------

Comey declared the leaks were for POLITICAL gain. In his own testimony he admitted his own illegal leak was in hopes (his own personal hope) a Special Counsel would be formed. Comey and Rice/Obama Intel Loyalists shared the same hope, because that is what her / their leaks and unmasking were intended to do:

James Comey hoped leak would lead to special counsel on Russia
- James Comey hoped leak would lead to special counsel on Russia - CNNPolitics

 

[AntonToo]

^ hey asshole, how about you stop throwing shit against the wall to see if it sticks and simply provide AN ACTUAL QUOTE FROM COMEY where he states what you attributed to him saying about Rice.

Thank you for proving me right.

Thank you for proving you are a fat, lazy liberal who doesn't put forth effort because you don't WANT to know / acknowledge the truth.

Thank you for proving that you are one of that select / specific group of snowflakes who continue to prove over and over that nothing on God's green earth Trump will ever do will be 'good enough' because you are consumed with incurable partisan hatred and ignorance.

You got your links. You got your ass handed to you. You want more? Do your own research - educate yourself...except you have already proven you have no intention of doing / desire to do that. Wallow in your ignorance and hate - I've already spent more than enough time on your fat, sorry, lazy ass. Have a nice day.

You ******* idiot all your links are saying is that it is illegal to LEAK, NOT TO UNMASK while Rice denied any leaking.

So go ahead retard, quote Comey saying that Rice broke the law.

You can't BECAUSE HE DID NOT SAY THAT AND YOU ARE JUST FULL OF SHIT.

LIE, DENY, JUSTIFY, 'TIL THE DAY YOU DIE...THE SNOWFLAKE WAY.

Comey made it clear the information that was leaked, the information Rice used as a basis for unmasking Trump's team members, was Protected Personal CLASSIFIED Information that was protected by law and could not be disseminated or publicly released, both of which was done - for POLITICAL GAIN...the same reason Obama illegally used the IRS as his own personal weapon against Americans who opposed his ideology and re-election in 2012.

Leaking the information was illegal. 18 USC 793
Unmasking Americans based on the classified information was illegal.
Your OPINION does not change that.

Dumbass, Comey NEVER accused Rice of leaking, so he therefore DID NOT directly or even implicitly suggest that she broke any laws.

Please stop spreading your silly bullshit and STFU already.

 

[g5000]

Why are you tards saying that wiretapping the Russians is the same as wiretapping Trump?

Is there something you would like to confess?

 

[meaner gene]

Comey, backed by Intel testimony, testified he made it clear to the Obama WH that the information incidentally collected was deemed to have ZERO Intel Value, which means the collected info is categorized as 'PROTECTED PERSONAL CLASSIFIED INFORMATION'.
- This information can NOT legally be released to the public, except for National Security purposes. It was made clear, though, that the collected info had NO foreign Intel worth or National Security implications. To release it for any other reason was / is a CRIME!.

Foreign nationals colluding with americans is a national security issue. Especially if they're doing it clandestinly.