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

[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?

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.

They were minimized until there as a security issue requiring the name to be unmasked.

 

[Billy_Bob]

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?

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.

Evidence she unmasked went as far back as July.. She was illegally using the information for political purposes.

 

[BULLDOG]

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.

Evidence she unmasked went as far back as July.. She was illegally using the information for political purposes.

Was she? I'm sure you have proof of that. Link?

 

[KeiserC]

Again.... Consciousness of guilt is best proved by false exculpatory statements. That’s a genre in which Susan Rice has rich experience. Two weeks ago, she was asked in an interview about allegations by Devin Nunes that the Obama administration had unmasked Trump-team members. “I know nothing about this,” Rice replied. “I was surprised to see reports from Nunes on that count today.” Well, at least she didn’t blame it on a video. Combine that with

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.

They were minimized until there as a security issue requiring the name to be unmasked.

Purview of intelligence agencies (namely NSA) to decide on "minimization" NOT WH staff (Rice)

 

[BULLDOG]

Again.... Consciousness of guilt is best proved by false exculpatory statements. That’s a genre in which Susan Rice has rich experience. Two weeks ago, she was asked in an interview about allegations by Devin Nunes that the Obama administration had unmasked Trump-team members. “I know nothing about this,” Rice replied. “I was surprised to see reports from Nunes on that count today.” Well, at least she didn’t blame it on a video. Combine that with

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.

They were minimized until there as a security issue requiring the name to be unmasked.

Purview of intelligence agencies (namely NSA) to decide on "minimization" NOT WH staff (Rice)

Exactly. That's why she had to request the name to be unmasked.

 

[LeftofLeft]

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.

What is your validation that said Russians actively interfering with our elections? If that were the case, when did Obama/Rice know and why didn't they speak up?

 

[KeiserC]

Again.... Consciousness of guilt is best proved by false exculpatory statements. That’s a genre in which Susan Rice has rich experience. Two weeks ago, she was asked in an interview about allegations by Devin Nunes that the Obama administration had unmasked Trump-team members. “I know nothing about this,” Rice replied. “I was surprised to see reports from Nunes on that count today.” Well, at least she didn’t blame it on a video. Combine that with

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.

They were minimized until there as a security issue requiring the name to be unmasked.

Purview of intelligence agencies (namely NSA) to decide on "minimization" NOT WH staff (Rice)

Exactly. That's why she had to request the name to be unmasked.

Rice wasn’t the only person to request the unmasking of Trump officials regarding politically sensitive operations, and she wasn’t the person who requested that Flynn’s name be unmasked, meaning she requested at least one other Trump associate’s unmasking. We still don’t know who committed the crime of leaking Flynn’s name to the Washington Post. Don't worry, we won't be picking on Rice exclusively.... plenty of blame to go around most likely...

 

[mudwhistle]

Again.... Consciousness of guilt is best proved by false exculpatory statements. That’s a genre in which Susan Rice has rich experience. Two weeks ago, she was asked in an interview about allegations by Devin Nunes that the Obama administration had unmasked Trump-team members. “I know nothing about this,” Rice replied. “I was surprised to see reports from Nunes on that count today.” Well, at least she didn’t blame it on a video. Combine that with

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.

They were minimized until there as a security issue requiring the name to be unmasked.

Purview of intelligence agencies (namely NSA) to decide on "minimization" NOT WH staff (Rice)

Exactly. That's why she had to request the name to be unmasked.

I wonder what gave her the idea that she's authorized to conduct investigations into criminal wrongdoing.
It's that the FBI's job???

 

[Contumacious]

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.

What is your validation that said Russians actively interfering with our elections? If that were the case, when did Obama/Rice know and why didn't they speak up?

That's right all the illegal spying yielded NO EVIDENCE.

 

[KeiserC]

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.

What is your validation that said Russians actively interfering with our elections? If that were the case, when did Obama/Rice know and why didn't they speak up?

That's right all the illegal spying yielded NO EVIDENCE.

If you look at it more holistically... It produced evidence (against themselves).... Arrogant ***** that they are... got too comfortable with not being called out by the DOJ or the MSM.... thought they could inevitably flaunt truth, law, protocol, courts etc. etc. ....

 

[BULLDOG]

Again.... Consciousness of guilt is best proved by false exculpatory statements. That’s a genre in which Susan Rice has rich experience. Two weeks ago, she was asked in an interview about allegations by Devin Nunes that the Obama administration had unmasked Trump-team members. “I know nothing about this,” Rice replied. “I was surprised to see reports from Nunes on that count today.” Well, at least she didn’t blame it on a video. Combine that with

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.

They were minimized until there as a security issue requiring the name to be unmasked.

Purview of intelligence agencies (namely NSA) to decide on "minimization" NOT WH staff (Rice)

Exactly. That's why she had to request the name to be unmasked.

I wonder what gave her the idea that she's authorized to conduct investigations into criminal wrongdoing.
It's that the FBI's job???

She was National Security Adviser, and given the same security briefings as Flynn did before he as fired, and McMaster does now.

 

[mudwhistle]

Again.... Consciousness of guilt is best proved by false exculpatory statements. That’s a genre in which Susan Rice has rich experience. Two weeks ago, she was asked in an interview about allegations by Devin Nunes that the Obama administration had unmasked Trump-team members. “I know nothing about this,” Rice replied. “I was surprised to see reports from Nunes on that count today.” Well, at least she didn’t blame it on a video. Combine that with

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.

They were minimized until there as a security issue requiring the name to be unmasked.

Purview of intelligence agencies (namely NSA) to decide on "minimization" NOT WH staff (Rice)

Exactly. That's why she had to request the name to be unmasked.

I wonder what gave her the idea that she's authorized to conduct investigations into criminal wrongdoing.
It's that the FBI's job???

She was National Security Adviser, and given the same security briefings as Flynn did before he as fired, and McMaster does now.

So what. Investigation of criminal activity isn't her job.
She is a political operative who stepped outside of her authority to do something I'm certain that Obama has been doing for years, spying on anyone who gets in his way. I can see why Trump has decided to go to Mara-Lago every time he needs to conduct business with Congress or with foreign leaders. Because the White House isn't secure. Obama's people are still working there.

 

[PoliticalChic]

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.

Evidence she unmasked went as far back as July.. She was illegally using the information for political purposes.

Was she? I'm sure you have proof of that. Link?

"Intelligence sources said the logs discovered by National Security Council staff suggested Rice’s interest in the NSA materials, some of which included unmasked Americans' identities, appeared to begin last July around the time Trump secured the GOP nomination and accelerated after Trump’s election in November launched a transition that continued through January.

The intelligence reports included some intercepts of Americans talking to foreigners and many more involving foreign leaders talking about the future president, his campaign associates or his transition, the sources said. Most if not all had nothing to do with the Russian election interference scandal, the sources said, speaking only on condition of anonymity given the sensitive nature of the materials.


.... names were sometimes unmasked at the request of Rice...."
White House logs indicate Susan Rice consumed unmasked intel on Trump associates

 

[BULLDOG]

Again.... Consciousness of guilt is best proved by false exculpatory statements. That’s a genre in which Susan Rice has rich experience. Two weeks ago, she was asked in an interview about allegations by Devin Nunes that the Obama administration had unmasked Trump-team members. “I know nothing about this,” Rice replied. “I was surprised to see reports from Nunes on that count today.” Well, at least she didn’t blame it on a video. Combine that with

They were minimized until there as a security issue requiring the name to be unmasked.

Purview of intelligence agencies (namely NSA) to decide on "minimization" NOT WH staff (Rice)

Exactly. That's why she had to request the name to be unmasked.

I wonder what gave her the idea that she's authorized to conduct investigations into criminal wrongdoing.
It's that the FBI's job???

She was National Security Adviser, and given the same security briefings as Flynn did before he as fired, and McMaster does now.

So what. Investigation of criminal activity isn't her job.
She is a political operative who stepped outside of her authority to do something I'm certain that Obama has been doing for years, spying on anyone who gets in his way. I can see why Trump has decided to go to Mara-Lago every time he needs to conduct business with Congress or with foreign leaders. Because the White House isn't secure. Obama's people are still working there.

That is what happened to the GOP. You forgot that the job of our officials is to work to protect us, not their party. The National Security Adviser's job is to advise the president on matters of national security. Not as a political operative. Knowledge of potential threats to the country is a requirement to do that job. Just because Trump named people like Steve Bannon to his national security council doesn't mean that is the way a real president operates.

 

[BULLDOG]

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.

Evidence she unmasked went as far back as July.. She was illegally using the information for political purposes.

Was she? I'm sure you have proof of that. Link?

"Intelligence sources said the logs discovered by National Security Council staff suggested Rice’s interest in the NSA materials, some of which included unmasked Americans' identities, appeared to begin last July around the time Trump secured the GOP nomination and accelerated after Trump’s election in November launched a transition that continued through January.

The intelligence reports included some intercepts of Americans talking to foreigners and many more involving foreign leaders talking about the future president, his campaign associates or his transition, the sources said. Most if not all had nothing to do with the Russian election interference scandal, the sources said, speaking only on condition of anonymity given the sensitive nature of the materials.


.... names were sometimes unmasked at the request of Rice...."
White House logs indicate Susan Rice consumed unmasked intel on Trump associates

Got it. You claim some anonymous person told you what you wanted to hear. You got anything credible?

 

[gipper]

Again.... Consciousness of guilt is best proved by false exculpatory statements. That’s a genre in which Susan Rice has rich experience. Two weeks ago, she was asked in an interview about allegations by Devin Nunes that the Obama administration had unmasked Trump-team members. “I know nothing about this,” Rice replied. “I was surprised to see reports from Nunes on that count today.” Well, at least she didn’t blame it on a video. Combine that with
Purview of intelligence agencies (namely NSA) to decide on "minimization" NOT WH staff (Rice)

Exactly. That's why she had to request the name to be unmasked.

I wonder what gave her the idea that she's authorized to conduct investigations into criminal wrongdoing.
It's that the FBI's job???

She was National Security Adviser, and given the same security briefings as Flynn did before he as fired, and McMaster does now.

So what. Investigation of criminal activity isn't her job.
She is a political operative who stepped outside of her authority to do something I'm certain that Obama has been doing for years, spying on anyone who gets in his way. I can see why Trump has decided to go to Mara-Lago every time he needs to conduct business with Congress or with foreign leaders. Because the White House isn't secure. Obama's people are still working there.

That is what happened to the GOP. You forgot that the job of our officials is to work to protect us, not their party. The National Security Adviser's job is to advise the president on matters of national security. Not as a political operative. Knowledge of potential threats to the country is a requirement to do that job. Just because Trump named people like Steve Bannon to his national security council doesn't mean that is the way a real president operates.

Has it not occurred to you that Big Ears and Rice did not place surveillance on the Clinton campaign, but only on the Trump campaign? Yet, you think they are all about protecting us...LMFAO!

 

[skookerasbil]

Again.... Consciousness of guilt is best proved by false exculpatory statements. That’s a genre in which Susan Rice has rich experience. Two weeks ago, she was asked in an interview about allegations by Devin Nunes that the Obama administration had unmasked Trump-team members. “I know nothing about this,” Rice replied. “I was surprised to see reports from Nunes on that count today.” Well, at least she didn’t blame it on a video. Combine that with
Purview of intelligence agencies (namely NSA) to decide on "minimization" NOT WH staff (Rice)

Exactly. That's why she had to request the name to be unmasked.

I wonder what gave her the idea that she's authorized to conduct investigations into criminal wrongdoing.
It's that the FBI's job???

She was National Security Adviser, and given the same security briefings as Flynn did before he as fired, and McMaster does now.

So what. Investigation of criminal activity isn't her job.
She is a political operative who stepped outside of her authority to do something I'm certain that Obama has been doing for years, spying on anyone who gets in his way. I can see why Trump has decided to go to Mara-Lago every time he needs to conduct business with Congress or with foreign leaders. Because the White House isn't secure. Obama's people are still working there.

That is what happened to the GOP. You forgot that the job of our officials is to work to protect us, not their party. The National Security Adviser's job is to advise the president on matters of national security. Not as a political operative. Knowledge of potential threats to the country is a requirement to do that job. Just because Trump named people like Steve Bannon to his national security council doesn't mean that is the way a real president operates.

Anybody else notice that Schiff has suddenly disappeared this week?

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-schiff-mum-on-what-he-saw-at-white-house/article/2619168


http://datechguyblog.com/2017/04/04/the-unexpectedly-chronicles-silence-is-suddenly-golden-for-leftmedia/


https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/04/did-susan-rice-ask-to-unmask-trump-officials/521688/

 

[BULLDOG]

Exactly. That's why she had to request the name to be unmasked.

I wonder what gave her the idea that she's authorized to conduct investigations into criminal wrongdoing.
It's that the FBI's job???

She was National Security Adviser, and given the same security briefings as Flynn did before he as fired, and McMaster does now.

So what. Investigation of criminal activity isn't her job.
She is a political operative who stepped outside of her authority to do something I'm certain that Obama has been doing for years, spying on anyone who gets in his way. I can see why Trump has decided to go to Mara-Lago every time he needs to conduct business with Congress or with foreign leaders. Because the White House isn't secure. Obama's people are still working there.

That is what happened to the GOP. You forgot that the job of our officials is to work to protect us, not their party. The National Security Adviser's job is to advise the president on matters of national security. Not as a political operative. Knowledge of potential threats to the country is a requirement to do that job. Just because Trump named people like Steve Bannon to his national security council doesn't mean that is the way a real president operates.

Has it not occurred to you that Big Ears and Rice did not place surveillance on the Clinton campaign, but only on the Trump campaign? Yet, you think they are all about protecting us...LMFAO!

Has it occurred to you that neither Rice or Obama had the authority to launch an investigation like that? They can only see the results that the security agencies have already gathered. The agencies decide what they will investigate.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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.

Evidence she unmasked went as far back as July.. She was illegally using the information for political purposes.

Evidence she unmasked went as far back as July.. She was illegally using the information for political purposes.

In what way(s)?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Again.... Consciousness of guilt is best proved by false exculpatory statements. That’s a genre in which Susan Rice has rich experience. Two weeks ago, she was asked in an interview about allegations by Devin Nunes that the Obama administration had unmasked Trump-team members. “I know nothing about this,” Rice replied. “I was surprised to see reports from Nunes on that count today.” Well, at least she didn’t blame it on a video. Combine that with

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.

They were minimized until there as a security issue requiring the name to be unmasked.

Purview of intelligence agencies (namely NSA) to decide on "minimization" NOT WH staff (Rice)

Exactly. That's why she had to request the name to be unmasked.

I wonder what gave her the idea that she's authorized to conduct investigations into criminal wrongdoing.
It's that the FBI's job???

She was doing her job in reading intelligence reports. Trump has been a part of a counterintelligence investigation since July.
It stands to reason that intelligence reports would also include information pertinent to that investigation. It's her job to keep the President apprised on the subject.