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.
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.
OK ...... if it's all "legal" and everything, that's good.
It will be handy-dandy when TeamTrump uses the same "legal" surveillance apparatus to do the very same thing to the Leftists and whatever candidates they come up with.
Of course you and the Media will approve of that ...... after all, it's "legal" and now it is also precedented.
Thanks Obama
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.
The New York Times broke the story today ...... down at the bottom of page 16 ..... in very small print.
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.
Not who you are talking to, but we do now know for a fact that Susan Rice lied about the unmasking - why did Rice lie?
We also know that her husband's employer broke the Flynn story - is this a coincidence?
It seems like a corrupt administration masquerading as the most transparent in history could use this to violate the 4th Amendment.
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.
Well put and easy to understand.
So ..... what if there is NO "foreign target" in these transcripts? Several (including Eli Lake who broke the original story in Bloomberg) are saying just that. No Russians.
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.
That is why the media's approval rating is below bellicose Trump's.
The media doesn't report news, it pushes an agenda.
Susan Rice is the whistle blower in this case.
Why was the POTUS, staff and campaign staff contacting Russians who were spying on the US. How deep is the current POTUS in the pocket of Putin and his underlings.
It is the republican party that passes laws to legalize spying on American citizens.
And Hillary voted for that Patriot Act, and Obama and his Democrats in congress renewed it...and both parties abused it.
And now...Susan Rice LIED about her involvement in using some of these laws - why?
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.
