Wasn’t she so part of the Benghazi “internet video” fraud?
“IF” ?
Sounds like the Democrats have already decided that the best thing to do at this point is to make Susan Rice the sacrificial lamb and try to get everybody else to move on after that. Democrats never talked Off Script
Are there any co-ed federal prisons? It would be nice for Susan Rice to be able to share a suite with James Clapper and John Brennan.
For a long time!
SO, if it wasn’t done for political purposes, then why is it that only Trump and his staff were ‘unmasked’ ?
Sounds like Flynn has grounds to sue her now.
There is so much here to answer.
1. Why Trump? How did you know Trump calls or calls from his advisors were already intercepted through incidental surveillance?
2. Why isn’t the President elect — for all intent and purposes not accorded the same privacy and diplomatic leeway as the Lame Duck? In other words, spying on the President elect is espionage. Espionage with a period.
3. A perfectly valid argument can be made that the lame duck term of a president from the election period to the inauguration is simply perfunctory and the real shots are called by the incoming administration in terms of Foreign Policy.
4. Where did she get info that Trump or Trumps advisors were John Doe in non FISA intercepts?
Impressions from Rice’s interview just now with Democrat political propagandist Andrea Mitchell.
Takeaways:
1. My take is that Rice has already lawyered up. She would be stupid not to. On the other hand, this is a woman who agreed to go out and lie on TV about a youtube video in Benghazi in place of the Secretary of State who should have have been giving the interviews, but who called in sick that Sunday in order to leave Rice holding the bag.
But they must think there’s a chance for Rice to nip it in the bud with the help of the MSM, so she agreed to a TV interview with a Democrat media hack.
2. Basically, she is claiming the Intel Community is responsible for making sure Rice is not spying on political opponents, not her. So if she ordered unmasked intel reports on Donald Trump and team, it was their responsibility to tell the White House no, you can’t do that. It’s like the President ordering someone to do something illegal, and later claiming, well, that underling should have refused because it was illegal.
So yeah, she ordered it is the takeaway.
3. Andrea asked the money question in a way to play into Rice’s defense: “Did you order blah blah blah, FOR THE PURPOSE OF SPYING ON TRUMP?”
That gave Rice the opportunity to say no, because of her claim as to her motive, even if in fact she did order it, as appears to be the case.
4. Similarly the “spreadsheet” claim. Obviously Rice herself did not prepare any spreadsheet. She probably does not even know how to work Excel or whatever program was used. I would guess someone subordinate or someone in the Intel Community made the spreadsheet, not Rice personally, so Andrea asked the question again in a way to give her an out.
5. Rice said such unmasked intel was not “typically” broadly disseminated in the government. That dodged the question of whether the Trump intel was broadly disseminated.
6. Did you leak Flynn? “I can’t get into specific reports.” And, indignantly, I will not sit here and discuss classified info with you, Andrea! So yeah, appears guilty on this one.
7. Did the pace increase as election approached? Rice: no, but the number of reports became more frequent. So, yeah.
8. Rice talks about protecting the integrity of the US election, which apparently means keeping people from knowing that the DNC rigged the election to screw Bernie in the primaries.
9. Rice relied on the technicality that only the DOJ can apply for court surveillance, not the president. So it sounds like Obama is guilty on all of this too, which would be surprising if it were not the case, since Rice is simply his flunky.
10. Andrea asked Rice about someone on a radio show calling Rice a mean name. How did that make you feel?
11. What if you’re subpoenaed before Congress, will you testify? Rice: Let’s see what comes. Translation: if I get a subpoena, I’m taking the Fifth.
12. Andrea: Shouldn’t you have blown the whistle on Russian hacking earlier? This is trademark MSM deceptiveness. As the Crowdstrike claim on which it all is based is weakening, the MSM likes to ask questions that assume the Russian hacking as a given in order for the party line to be reinforced in the public mind that it is not to questioned but taken as proven.
Summary: Girl in big trouble! She will have to rely on the McCain/Graham faction to join with Schumer et al to save her bacon. But if she goes down, she may take Obama down, so McCain and Graham will probably come to her defense.
I don’t know why people are ragging on Susan Rice. She served her country honorably and with distinction. Oh wait, that was Bo Bergdahl....
Throwing Rice under the bus just means they want to declare the scandal over, nothing to see here, investigation closed. I take it as an invitation to dig deeper to see who REALLY did it.
Susan needs round the clock protection or she might find herself suicided in Marcy park, on the other hand she might escape north of the border- i\her husband is canadian if I remember correctly