Susan Rice Said Yesterday On MSNBC That Obama Ordered Intel Collection In January. Trump Was Right

[KeiserC]

'Denials Don't Add Up'

Susan Rice's alleged unmasking requests not so routine, ex-officials say

"While Susan Rice is defending as routine her requests for the identities of Americans caught up in surveillance of foreign targets, others who’ve served in the intelligence community and at high levels of government say the former national security adviser's requests were quite unusual."

“The national security adviser person is a manager position, not an analyst position,” he said. “You have analysts in the intelligence community whose job is to sort through who is doing what with what. Susan Rice is a senior manager looking over the entire intelligence community. She should not have time to be unmasking individuals having conversations. It’s insane. It’s never done.”

And your sources is a former CIA analyst and a retired Lt. Col. LMAO, meanwhile, all active intelligence officials higher up agree it was routine, as does General Hayden and others.

The Bogus Susan Rice Story Shows How Desperate the White House Is Getting


I asked retired Lt. Gen. Michael Hayden, former director of the National Security Agency, whether it’s unlawful or even unusual for someone in Rice’s position to ask the NSA to unmask the names of Americans caught up in intercepts. He replied, in an email, “Absolutely lawful. Even somewhat routine.”

There would have been no intelligence need for Susan Rice to ask for identities to be unmasked. If there had been a real need to reveal the identities — an intelligence need based on American interests — the unmasking would have been done by the investigating agencies. The national-security adviser is not an investigator. She is a White House staffer. The president’s staff is a consumer of intelligence, not a generator or collector of it. If Susan Rice was unmasking Americans, it was not to fulfill an intelligence need based on American interests; it was to fulfill a political desire based on Democratic-party interests.

the unmasking would have been done by the investigating agencies.

It was. Rice has no ability to do it on her own.
She had to make a request to the originating agency. The fact that it was granted only shows that it was done correctly.

Correct... That's how it's supposed to work...She didn't, exclusively, do it that way.... She had access to the database and did it on her own, as well!!! in addition to, disseminating that which the agencies had already unmasked...

"American citizens cannot be monitored or searched by this process because, unlike foreigners or foreign intelligence agencies, they are protected by the 4th Amendment", Massie said.

When Americans are accidentally caught in the FISA dragnet, their identity is masked as a legal device to protect their 4th Amendment rights, he said.

Massie said he suspects that Rice went into the government database and searched for the names of Americans caught in the drag net, which were accessible through the database.

This is a common practice inside the executive branch and law enforcement agencies with access to the database, he said.

“It is unconstitutional, when they go in and search the database–essentially they are doing a virtual wiretap–as soon as you ID a U.S. citizen,” he said.

She had access to the database and did it on her own, as well!!! in

You're a liar.

Lay out the evidence!!!

 

[2aguy]

So Trump was right. Susan Rice admits in this interview that President Obama ordered in January this year the compilation of the reports that Susan Rice used to unmask Trump officials. She admits this 7 mins into this interview. A couple of weeks ago Susan Rice claimed this didn't happen.

Obama ordered this and whoever orders the unmasking of Americans would be the only person that would see the results, according to Susan Rice.



So Trump was fundamentally correct when he tweeted that Obama wiretapped him.....of course at the time Trump didn't know how. Evelyn Farkas said that they needed to collect all of this 'good intelligence' to keep Trump from finding out how. No we know.

Trump said his phones in the Trump Tower were wiretapped..He lied.

You are a dumb ass...

 

[Wry Catcher]

That said, it is clear Obama is a criminal...and his people did criminal acts. If we are ever to get control of the ruling class, now is the time to persecute these scumbags.

Did you feel the same way when Bush lied us into a war? That killed thousands of american soldiers, and cost the taxpayers trillions of dollars? Did you call for 8 Benghazi-style investigations into why 9-11 happened, and why the leaders ignored all the warnings?

NOPE!

Oh please...you know nothing about me, yet I have made thousands of posts here. Find ONE where I have ever stated my liking of W. Just one dipshit.

If only we could put both W and Big Ears behind bars, imagine how that would control the out-of-control ruling class.

It would crate what you seem to want, a nation of 300+ Million citizens adrift and living in a very large and very unsafe Somalia.

 

[KeiserC]

The White House reportedly discovered last month that Susan Rice, who served as former President Barack Obama’s national security adviser from 2013-17, made dozens of requests for the “unmasking” of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports who were connected to then-President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team.

Rice’s frequent requests were discovered during a National Security Council’s review of the government’s policy on “unmasking” U.S. citizens who are caught up in surveillance but are not the target of intelligence eavesdropping, Bloomberg columnist Eli Lake reported Monday.

 

[2aguy]

The amazing thing........they believed that Hilary was going to win and no one she appointed would even look into this criminal spying...........imagine the cold sweats that broke out when they saw Trump win ....and that their criminal spying was no longer protected by democrats.....and that Trump would now have all the information because he now runs the FBI, the CIA and the NSA?.....

 

[BULLDOG]

So Trump was right. Susan Rice admits in this interview that President Obama ordered in January this year the compilation of the reports that Susan Rice used to unmask Trump officials. She admits this 7 mins into this interview. A couple of weeks ago Susan Rice claimed this didn't happen.

Obama ordered this and whoever orders the unmasking of Americans would be the only person that would see the results, according to Susan Rice.



So Trump was fundamentally correct when he tweeted that Obama wiretapped him.....of course at the time Trump didn't know how. Evelyn Farkas said that they needed to collect all of this 'good intelligence' to keep Trump from finding out how. No we know.

The security agencies were listening to foreign agents. If those foreign agents we talking to someone in Trump tower, they were recorded. What is wrong with that? Should Trump, or anyone who happened to have been in his building have been given a special immunity to standard security procedures?

Do you really want to be schooled in the obvious? Yes, all calls are recorded. When you call your mom and ask her what color pants will go with the shirt you want to wear, it is recorded and saved for later if needed. Those calls with foreign nationals are supposed to have American citizen's names masked to preserve their privacy. Intelligence folks at a high level can make a request thru a process to have the name unmasked if needed. When unmasked, care must be taken to limit who sees the information. checking up on calls of a candidate for president's team in the midst of an election and after being elected, unmasking American's names and sharing it openly with others for political purposes is against the law. So yeah, recording calls involving foreign nationals is legal and done 24/7/365. you just conveniently served the appetizer and skipped the meal. Now you know.

Great. We are finding more areas of agreement all along. I also think it's proper for high level officials to be able to request the names of incidental previously masked people involved in those conversations when appropriate, and, as I understand it, that information is only revealed to the person requesting it. Do you think any of those steps weren't followed?
Where our beliefs begin to differ, is that you seem to think Obama somehow circumvented those procedures to hurt Trump's chance of election or to discredit him after the election. Do you think he convinced all the security agencies to break the law and spy on Trump, and report to him or his agents , or did he use an outside contractor?

You of course realize that there is far more tangible proof of this than there is of any collusion between Trump and Russia, yet there are already investigations going on based on rumors, innuendo and wishes. To date, no actual evidence has been offered and every official looking into it that has been asked states that nothing has been found. It's smoke without a fire. Here, we actually do have a fire. There are procedures to access the recorded messages and procedures to unmask names and procedures as to how you handle that information. If you'll recall, Hillary's campaign manager Mook started pushing the Russian connection hard last summer. It took a while to catch on. We know because of wikileaks how the DNC operates which are an extension of Hillary and the then sitting president. It would be very easy once the idea was floated of Russian collusion to take the next step and say that for national security reasons, let's pull the recordings and see who was having conversations. Hey, this guy is connected to Trump. Hey, so is this one. Let's request their names be unmasked. Then magically, unnamed sources began floating information to the media that this person tied to Trump talked to this Russian on this date. Where, who and how do you think media started getting tips from unnamed sources inside the government? Remember, that info isn't easily obtainable and there are procedures for accessing and unmasking and there are procedures for containment. Not just anyone can request it. There is a lot more heave smoke here than there is of the "collusion" narrative. This requires any equally aggressive investigation to see if the Obama administration involved themselves in the election to the point of using data gathered for national security purposes and weaponized it for political purposes. The liberal compliant media is treating it as fake news right now, but there is more there there than there is with the collusion stories they are manufacturing. So, can we agree that the Russia/Trump collusion story is devoid so far of any actual evidence while the Rice unmasking story has actual feet?

 

[gipper]

That said, it is clear Obama is a criminal...and his people did criminal acts. If we are ever to get control of the ruling class, now is the time to persecute these scumbags.

Did you feel the same way when Bush lied us into a war? That killed thousands of american soldiers, and cost the taxpayers trillions of dollars? Did you call for 8 Benghazi-style investigations into why 9-11 happened, and why the leaders ignored all the warnings?

NOPE!

Oh please...you know nothing about me, yet I have made thousands of posts here. Find ONE where I have ever stated my liking of W. Just one dipshit.

If only we could put both W and Big Ears behind bars, imagine how that would control the out-of-control ruling class.

It would crate what you seem to want, a nation of 300+ Million citizens adrift and living in a very large and very unsafe Somalia.

Yeah that's what I want. Good God help this fool.

 

[radical right]

The White House reportedly discovered last month that Susan Rice, who served as former President Barack Obama’s national security adviser from 2013-17, made dozens of requests for the “unmasking” of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports who were connected to then-President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team.

Rice’s frequent requests were discovered during a National Security Council’s review of the government’s policy on “unmasking” U.S. citizens who are caught up in surveillance but are not the target of intelligence eavesdropping, Bloomberg columnist Eli Lake reported Monday.

Apparently you don't know how the process works. Rice was given transcripts with all american identites redacted or 'masked' so they could not be identified. All Rice had to go on were the topics they talked about, and the bad guys they talked to them with. After reading what they said, Rice asked to find out who it was, that was colluding with the bad guys, and asked for their names to be 'unmasked', only then did she find out they were members of the trump transition team.

 

[hadit]

So Trump was right. Susan Rice admits in this interview that President Obama ordered in January this year the compilation of the reports that Susan Rice used to unmask Trump officials. She admits this 7 mins into this interview. A couple of weeks ago Susan Rice claimed this didn't happen.

Obama ordered this and whoever orders the unmasking of Americans would be the only person that would see the results, according to Susan Rice.



So Trump was fundamentally correct when he tweeted that Obama wiretapped him.....of course at the time Trump didn't know how. Evelyn Farkas said that they needed to collect all of this 'good intelligence' to keep Trump from finding out how. No we know.

The security agencies were listening to foreign agents. If those foreign agents we talking to someone in Trump tower, they were recorded. What is wrong with that? Should Trump, or anyone who happened to have been in his building have been given a special immunity to standard security procedures?

No, they should be granted the same constitutional protections every other American citizen has, which is to have their identities minimized when they are incidentally recorded. That's the way it's supposed to work.

 

[2aguy]

The White House reportedly discovered last month that Susan Rice, who served as former President Barack Obama’s national security adviser from 2013-17, made dozens of requests for the “unmasking” of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports who were connected to then-President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team.

Rice’s frequent requests were discovered during a National Security Council’s review of the government’s policy on “unmasking” U.S. citizens who are caught up in surveillance but are not the target of intelligence eavesdropping, Bloomberg columnist Eli Lake reported Monday.

Apparently you don't know how the process works. Rice was given transcripts with all american identites redacted or 'masked' so they could not be identified. All Rice had to go on were the topics they talked about, and the bad guys they talked to them with. After reading what they said, Rice asked to find out who it was, that was colluding with the bad guys, and asked for their names to be 'unmasked', only then did she find out they were members of the trump transition team.

You are wrong...nothing she did is usual or part of her job.....she is not an investigator....and had no reason to unmask those people.....

Susan Rice’s White House Unmasking: A Watergate-style Scandal

Her interest was not in national security but to advance the political interests of the Democratic party.


The thing to bear in mind is that the White House does not do investigations. Not criminal investigations, not intelligence investigations. Remember that.
----
In general, it is the FBI that conducts investigations that bear on American citizens suspected of committing crimes or of acting as agents of foreign powers. In the matter of alleged Russian meddling, the investigative camp also includes the CIA and the NSA. All three agencies conducted a probe and issued a joint report in January.

That was after Obama, despite having previously acknowledged that the Russian activity was inconsequential, suddenly made a great show of ordering an inquiry and issuing sanctions.

Consequently, if unmasking was relevant to the Russia investigation, it would have been done by those three agencies.

And if it had been critical to know the identities of Americans caught up in other foreign intelligence efforts, the agencies that collect the information and conduct investigations would have unmasked it.


Because they are the agencies that collect and refine intelligence “products” for the rest of the “intelligence community,” they are responsible for any unmasking; and they do it under “minimization” standards that FBI Director James Comey, in recent congressional testimony, described as “obsessive” in their determination to protect the identities and privacy of Americans.


Understand: There would have been no intelligence need for Susan Rice to ask for identities to be unmasked. If there had been a real need to reveal the identities — an intelligence need based on American interests — the unmasking would have been done by the investigating agencies.

---------

To summarize: At a high level, officials like Susan Rice had names unmasked that would not ordinarily be unmasked.


That information was then being pushed widely throughout the intelligence community in unmasked form . . . particularly after Obama, toward the end of his presidency, suddenly — and seemingly apropos of nothing — changed the rules so that all of the intelligence agencies (not just the collecting agencies) could have access to raw intelligence information.

 

[radical right]

Apparently you don't know how the process works. Rice was given transcripts with all american identites redacted or 'masked' so they could not be identified. All Rice had to go on were the topics they talked about, and the bad guys they talked to them with. After reading what they said, Rice asked to find out who it was, that was colluding with the bad guys, and asked for their names to be 'unmasked', only then did she find out they were members of the trump transition team.

You are wrong...nothing she did is usual or part of her job.....she is not an investigator....and had no reason to unmask those people.....

Susan Rice’s White House Unmasking: A Watergate-style Scandal

Her interest was not in national security but to advance the political interests of the Democratic party.


The thing to bear in mind is that the White House does not do investigations. Not criminal investigations, not intelligence investigations. Remember that.

Nothing there refutes that Rice got a copy of the fully redacted 'masked' transcripts. And after reading them, wanted to know who the americans colluding with foreigners were. And requested their names be 'unmasked' And only then did she find out they were Trump associates constantly talking to the bad guys.

 

[BULLDOG]

So Trump was right. Susan Rice admits in this interview that President Obama ordered in January this year the compilation of the reports that Susan Rice used to unmask Trump officials. She admits this 7 mins into this interview. A couple of weeks ago Susan Rice claimed this didn't happen.

Obama ordered this and whoever orders the unmasking of Americans would be the only person that would see the results, according to Susan Rice.



So Trump was fundamentally correct when he tweeted that Obama wiretapped him.....of course at the time Trump didn't know how. Evelyn Farkas said that they needed to collect all of this 'good intelligence' to keep Trump from finding out how. No we know.

The security agencies were listening to foreign agents. If those foreign agents we talking to someone in Trump tower, they were recorded. What is wrong with that? Should Trump, or anyone who happened to have been in his building have been given a special immunity to standard security procedures?

Do you really want to be schooled in the obvious? Yes, all calls are recorded. When you call your mom and ask her what color pants will go with the shirt you want to wear, it is recorded and saved for later if needed. Those calls with foreign nationals are supposed to have American citizen's names masked to preserve their privacy. Intelligence folks at a high level can make a request thru a process to have the name unmasked if needed. When unmasked, care must be taken to limit who sees the information. checking up on calls of a candidate for president's team in the midst of an election and after being elected, unmasking American's names and sharing it openly with others for political purposes is against the law. So yeah, recording calls involving foreign nationals is legal and done 24/7/365. you just conveniently served the appetizer and skipped the meal. Now you know.

Great. We are finding more areas of agreement all along. I also think it's proper for high level officials to be able to request the names of incidental previously masked people involved in those conversations when appropriate, and, as I understand it, that information is only revealed to the person requesting it. Do you think any of those steps weren't followed?
Where our beliefs begin to differ, is that you seem to think Obama somehow circumvented those procedures to hurt Trump's chance of election or to discredit him after the election. Do you think he convinced all the security agencies to break the law and spy on Trump, and report to him or his agents , or did he use an outside contractor?

You of course realize that there is far more tangible proof of this than there is of any collusion between Trump and Russia, yet there are already investigations going on based on rumors, innuendo and wishes. To date, no actual evidence has been offered and every official looking into it that has been asked states that nothing has been found. It's smoke without a fire. Here, we actually do have a fire. There are procedures to access the recorded messages and procedures to unmask names and procedures as to how you handle that information. If you'll recall, Hillary's campaign manager Mook started pushing the Russian connection hard last summer. It took a while to catch on. We know because of wikileaks how the DNC operates which are an extension of Hillary and the then sitting president. It would be very easy once the idea was floated of Russian collusion to take the next step and say that for national security reasons, let's pull the recordings and see who was having conversations. Hey, this guy is connected to Trump. Hey, so is this one. Let's request their names be unmasked. Then magically, unnamed sources began floating information to the media that this person tied to Trump talked to this Russian on this date. Where, who and how do you think media started getting tips from unnamed sources inside the government? Remember, that info isn't easily obtainable and there are procedures for accessing and unmasking and there are procedures for containment. Not just anyone can request it. There is a lot more heave smoke here than there is of the "collusion" narrative. This requires any equally aggressive investigation to see if the Obama administration involved themselves in the election to the point of using data gathered for national security purposes and weaponized it for political purposes. The liberal compliant media is treating it as fake news right now, but there is more there there than there is with the collusion stories they are manufacturing. So, can we agree that the Russia/Trump collusion story is devoid so far of any actual evidence while the Rice unmasking story has actual feet?

No, I can't quit agree with you on all of that. In the first place, Hillary or her team didn't start the discussion of Russians hacking our systems. The FBI, CIA, etc. found that, and then notified the president and other high level officials. The fact that had happened was soon released to the public. The Russian spy connection was real, and there was, and still is, investigation going on in that matter. ALL security agencies have agreed it is real.

Next, the names were masked. All that was listed was the foreign agents. She had no idea if the masked person was from Trump's organization or anywhere else until until after it as unmasked, and then that information as given only to her. If others read the same report, and asked for those still masked names they had to go through the same procedure to have them unmasked to each person who made the request individually. Lots of senior officials would have had the same questions.

You seem to think that the mere fact of talking to some random Russian has people concerned. That is not the case. The particular Russians were foreign agents actively working to interfere with our elections, and discredit our country. Every security agency we have agreed on that fact. That's the reason the people they were talking to was of importance, and a matter of national security. Bottom line If Trump and his campaign didn't want to be accused of talking to Russian spies about matters of national security, they shouldn't have done it.

 

[BULLDOG]

I'm glad you approve. I noticed you weren't able to answer my question.

/---- Yes. They are masked by law. Rice unmasked them.

Since she didn't know the masked name, she only requested that it be unmasked, and explained why she needed it to be unmasked to her. Using their long used criteria, they decided her request as reasonable and exposed the name to only her. Are you trying to say you think she as the one who leaked the name? What evidence do you have of that?

SOMEBODY released the name after she requested it be unmasked. There was nothing wrong with her asking for the name to be unmasked. HOWEVER, it was a crime to release the name. Somebody needs to go to prison and I'd say she is the first candidate for investigation to become a ward of the state.

You think it should be proven first, or do you just ant to pick her up this afternoon? Does the conversation with foreign agents about canceling sanctions in exchange for wikileaks releases matter to you?

No, but this must be investigated.

No because there's no evidence that happened. Remember, Comey testified there was no evidence of collusion.

Come back hen you have something.

 

[BULLDOG]

I'm glad you approve. I noticed you weren't able to answer my question.

/---- Yes. They are masked by law. Rice unmasked them.

Since she didn't know the masked name, she only requested that it be unmasked, and explained why she needed it to be unmasked to her. Using their long used criteria, they decided her request as reasonable and exposed the name to only her. Are you trying to say you think she as the one who leaked the name? What evidence do you have of that?

SOMEBODY released the name after she requested it be unmasked. There was nothing wrong with her asking for the name to be unmasked. HOWEVER, it was a crime to release the name. Somebody needs to go to prison and I'd say she is the first candidate for investigation to become a ward of the state.

You think it should be proven first, or do you just ant to pick her up this afternoon? Does the conversation with foreign agents about canceling sanctions in exchange for wikileaks releases matter to you?

dude the worst thing she did was go on MSNBC and open her mouth. She is fking toast. fking toast. she admitted to sooooo much illegal she now won't ever see straight again.

Got it. Would you say "Any day now" again?

 

[radical right]

Next, the names were masked. All that was listed was the foreign agents. She had no idea if the masked person was from Trump's organization or anywhere else until until after it as unmasked, and then that information as given only to her. If others read the same report, and asked for those still masked names they had to go through the same procedure to have them unmasked to each person who made the request individually. Lots of senior officials would have had the same questions..

I told him: Nothing there refutes that Rice got a copy of the fully redacted 'masked' transcripts. And after reading them, wanted to know who the americans colluding with foreigners were. And requested their names be 'unmasked' And only then did she find out they were Trump associates constantly talking to the bad guys.

 

[BULLDOG]

So Trump was right. Susan Rice admits in this interview that President Obama ordered in January this year the compilation of the reports that Susan Rice used to unmask Trump officials. She admits this 7 mins into this interview. A couple of weeks ago Susan Rice claimed this didn't happen.

Obama ordered this and whoever orders the unmasking of Americans would be the only person that would see the results, according to Susan Rice.



So Trump was fundamentally correct when he tweeted that Obama wiretapped him.....of course at the time Trump didn't know how. Evelyn Farkas said that they needed to collect all of this 'good intelligence' to keep Trump from finding out how. No we know.

The security agencies were listening to foreign agents. If those foreign agents we talking to someone in Trump tower, they were recorded. What is wrong with that? Should Trump, or anyone who happened to have been in his building have been given a special immunity to standard security procedures?

Yes that is what is supposed to happen, NO AMERICAN NAMES.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Great. We agree up to that point. The next step was for her to request the name of the masked American and explain why that information is required for her to evaluate any potential threat. The intelligence agencies have a long used procedure to make that determination. If her request is determined to be reasonable, the name is given to only her. Do you agree that part was followed and proper too?

If the name was only given to her then she leaked it to someone who then leaked it to the press.

Great. You solved the mystery. Now, all you have to do is take your proof of that to Washington, and they can wrap it up tonight. Hurry, they will be closing for the day soon.

 

[BULLDOG]

I'm glad you approve. I noticed you weren't able to answer my question.

Now you are seeing a liberal , showing FAUX indignation about her/his/its side being found wrong.

How to spot a sociopath - 10 red flags that could save you from being swept under the influence of a charismatic nut job

#5) Sociopaths seek to dominate others and "win" at all costs. They hate to lose any argument or fight and will viciously defend their web of lies, even to the point of logical absurdity.
9) Sociopaths never apologize. They are never wrong. They never feel guilt. They can never apologize. Even if shown proof that they were wrong, they will refuse to apologize and instead go on the attack.

No indignation. I was actually quite courteous. Still no answer to my question though

The answer to your question is it is absurd. No one with any brains thinks Big Ears was only after the Russians.

Yes. It is absurd to think Trump or anyone who happened to be in his building should be immune to standard security procedures. What proof do you have that Obama ordered surveillance on trump ,since the president doesn't have the authority to do that? Do you think he hired outside contractors to do that, or did the entire security apparatus just decide to break the law?

He didn't have to. Susan Rice said Obama ordered that the collected intelligence be made available and it was in January which then magically got leaked to the press.

Yep.When he was told that Russians were hacking our election, I'm sure he did tell them to gather all the evidence.

 

[Rambunctious]

come on morons. We're talking about the Obama administration. When they acted legally and spoke honestly it was a rare occurrence. No way I give Rice and Obama a pass on this. This is what has surprised the left so much to learn that we are not stupid. We see through them and the liberal arts graduates AKA the lefty lame stream media like they live in a glass house.

 

[BULLDOG]

Now you are seeing a liberal , showing FAUX indignation about her/his/its side being found wrong.

How to spot a sociopath - 10 red flags that could save you from being swept under the influence of a charismatic nut job

No indignation. I was actually quite courteous. Still no answer to my question though

The answer to your question is it is absurd. No one with any brains thinks Big Ears was only after the Russians.

Yes. It is absurd to think Trump or anyone who happened to be in his building should be immune to standard security procedures. What proof do you have that Obama ordered surveillance on trump ,since the president doesn't have the authority to do that? Do you think he hired outside contractors to do that, or did the entire security apparatus just decide to break the law?

Surveillance needs court order, court order needs probable cause.... you trumpanzees are barking up the wrong tree.
When we do find out why he was being surveillanced, we will also find out about impeachment proceedings.

Sorry, but the regulations were so relaxed that all Susan Rice had to do was say "This is a matter of national security" without a warrant and she got what she needed. Remember, she was representing Obama. This is all on record. That's how Nunes found out Susan Rice did it.

You got a credible link to that? perhaps the law, or rule change that said all she had to do was say it was for national security.

 

[BULLDOG]

I'm glad you approve. I noticed you weren't able to answer my question.

Now you are seeing a liberal , showing FAUX indignation about her/his/its side being found wrong.

How to spot a sociopath - 10 red flags that could save you from being swept under the influence of a charismatic nut job

#5) Sociopaths seek to dominate others and "win" at all costs. They hate to lose any argument or fight and will viciously defend their web of lies, even to the point of logical absurdity.
9) Sociopaths never apologize. They are never wrong. They never feel guilt. They can never apologize. Even if shown proof that they were wrong, they will refuse to apologize and instead go on the attack.

No indignation. I was actually quite courteous. Still no answer to my question though

The answer to your question is it is absurd. No one with any brains thinks Big Ears was only after the Russians.

Yes. It is absurd to think Trump or anyone who happened to be in his building should be immune to standard security procedures. What proof do you have that Obama ordered surveillance on trump ,since the president doesn't have the authority to do that? Do you think he hired outside contractors to do that, or did the entire security apparatus just decide to break the law?

He didn't have to. Susan Rice said Obama ordered that the collected intelligence be made available and it was in January which then magically got leaked to the press.

January was when he said to collect all the evidence.