Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
People working at Bloomberg and the New York Times revealed that both Eli Lake (Bloomberg) and Maggie Haberman (NYT) were sitting on the Susan Rice story in order to protect the Obama administration. All of which just begs the question of what other stories the mainstream media is sitting on in an effort to protect their chosen politicians.
Obama may be the first POTUS brought down by a scandal after he left office. Every major outlet had this scoop, none would run it.
... And I know you are all hot to burn Susan Rice, but no official investigator or attorney has said that she (or anyone) did anything illegal. In fact, we don't know with any specificity exactly what she or anyone did.
I would usually agree with such calm and sage advice, but maybe not tonight.
When a positive intel agency reports that [foreign target XYZ] had a telecom with USPers#1, it means that the originating (collecting) agency has already subjected the identity of USPers#1 to the legal vetting process required under the intel oversight laws (EOs 12333 and 34; subsequently codified at I forget where) and his or her identity is not releasable.
There are very, very few people in the government who can go back to the original agency and request the identity of USPers#1 and actually get it. Like 'count them on the fingers of one hand' very few people. The reason is that you are essentially overruling the agency's decision to mask the identity in accordance with the intelligence oversight law. And a surprisingly large number of those very few people work at the White House. The National Security Advisor is one of those people. (The others are POTUS, DNI, DCI, and maybe VPOTUS - that's probably it.) That would have been Rice, who has been outed as the one who requested the 'unmasking.' So that probably violated intel oversight, the law we all lived in fear of when I was in that business.
But then details of his conversations showed up in the NY Times in early January. Because of how that intel was collected, that also violates the Espionage Act at 18 USC 793.
Based on what I know of the business and what has been reported in the media, ya gotta think the Bureau is opening a criminal case tonight with her name in the subject block.
With Susan rice running for the hills, it's unbelievable how bad the democrats have sunk with politics. Spying on Americans? Where is the resignations?
And recently the republican congress passed a law that allows large corporations or anyone with the required fees to purchase (any) Americans entire internet search and website browsing history. https://qz.com/945261/how-to-get-a-p...-need-one-now/
Republicans made it legal for the US government to spy on our phone calls and emails, and then republicans made it legal to sell any Americans entire internet browsing history.
Can you please explain how democrats OK spying on Americans?
For every Democrat that is defending Susan Rice. If you consider this legal, that means that it's legal for Trump to do the same thing in 2020. Is this what you want?
With Susan rice running for the hills, it's unbelievable how bad the democrats have sunk with politics. Spying on Americans? Where is the resignations?
I think you don't understand the role of the NSA head. If intelligence surveillance was being done on spies who were on the phone with Americans and nobody asked who that American was, the intelligence officer would be derelict of duty.
The right is trying to paint what Rice did as unseemly when, in fact, it is routine and required. She's supposed to ask these questions.
Originally Posted by jacqueg
I hate to be the bearer of bad news here, but our nation's security (spy) apparatus is available on a multipartisan basis to anyone with the required government position.
And I know you are all hot to burn Susan Rice, but no official investigator or attorney has said that she (or anyone) did anything illegal. In fact, we don't know with any specificity exactly what she or anyone did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmyy
But it is Fox News so it has to be the truth especially since Trump gets his security information from it.
We know it wasn't JUST "Fox News" - 3 separate sources came forward today with the information that Susan Rice was the one behind gathering information on the Trump Campaign - including Eli Lake, who now works for Bloomberg News, but was a long time reporter for the Daily Beast.
White House lawyers last month learned that the former national security adviser Susan Rice requested the identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump transition and campaign, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.
The pattern of Rice's requests was discovered in a National Security Council review of the government's policy on "unmasking" the identities of individuals in the U.S. who are not targets of electronic eavesdropping, but whose communications are collected incidentally. Normally those names are redacted from summaries of monitored conversations and appear in reports as something like "U.S. Person One."
We also know that the White House Counsel was made aware of this and told the investigators to "stop the investigation and we now know WHY Nunes had to go to the White House to find the information. He had to look at Susan Rice's computer records (based on a whistle blower tip) from her time as National Security Advisor for Obama.
The news about Rice also sheds light on the strange behavior of Nunes in the last two weeks. It emerged last week that he traveled to the White House last month, the night before he made an explosive allegation about Trump transition officials caught up in incidental surveillance. At the time he said he needed to go to the White House because the reports were only on a database for the executive branch. It now appears that he needed to view computer systems within the National Security Council that would include the logs of Rice's requests to unmask U.S. persons.
It's an abuse of Power to use Government Surveillance based in the President's Administration against a Political Opponent ...... and that is clearly what happened.
I don't know about a Democratic spy ring, but the Obama administration was certainly comfortable eavesdropping on friends and enemies. Heat Street has a partial list here - https://heatst.com/politics/the-obam...-surveillance/
This is no shocker, it's what we all know the left wants, because they not only defend it, but celebrate it when it's exposed. An all powerful, Soviet style, surveillance state, where Government is used to attack political dissidents. The IRS, DOJ, FBI, CIA, NSA....all geared now to keeping the elites in power & the people down.
For every Democrat that is defending Susan Rice. If you consider this legal, that means that it's legal for Trump to do the same thing in 2020. Is this what you want?
Consider what legal, exactly?
So far, what we have is that Rice is believed to have requested the identities of masked people. As national security advisor, it is legal for her to have access to all kinds of very secret information about all kinds of people and events.
I am waiting to hear exactly which names she received and why she requested them, assuming she actually did ask for them. Until we know those things, how can you be so sure that what she did is illegal?
Unlike you, I want to know what REALLY happened here. Not some peoples' dark suspicions. After all, an obvious tactic for secret agencies to keep secrets is to throw out a misleading bone.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
