WSJ reports that Susan Rice Was Not Alone In "Unmasking" Team Trump

ZeroHedge ^ | April 4, 2017 | Tyler Durden

[Reverend Wright]

As part of its daily wrap of the Susan Rice newsflow, which focused on her first media appearance since she was "outed" as the persona responsible for "unmasking" members of team Trump, the WSJ provides two new pieces of incremental information: i) in addition to Michael Flynn, at least one more member of the Trump transition team was "unmasked" in intelligence reports due to multiple foreign conversations that weren't related to Russia; and ii) Rice wasn't the administration official who instigated Mr. Flynn’s unmasking, confirming there is at least one more high-level official giving "unmasking" orders.

[Just mythoughts]

President Trump seems to have the ‘green-light’ by these libtards to ‘unmask’ them.. What fun that would be to get up every day and find out who Brack is chatting with? Or old bjClinton, or his woman Jezebel... Susan herself? Podesta? Oh, my, the list is long that would be enlightening ... I would not mind having Lord McCain ‘unmasked’.

[bert]

Amen

All the candidates were surveilled

Meanwhile, Obama is in Tahiti (we’re told)

[Gadsden1st]

“Prediction: Susan Rice will be found dead - it will be a “suicide.””

And then what?? End of story?

Yep!

She should be scared out of her mind.

Now in a novel, a couple of FAILED attempts should be all that is needed.

Anyone....Bueler...???

[Bon mots]

[Liz]

Just ask her two questions:

(1) Is this your signature?

(2) Did you sign this at the direction of someone, or on your own accord?

If she answers those two by pleading the fifth, turn her over to a grand jury. (hat tip hoosiermama)

==================================================

(hat tip gregnh) If a name is unmasked we know a lot of information, or lack thereof.

When a name is unmasked detailed records are made and kept.

• Who requested the unmasking.

• Must be an authorized person by written request.

• Request must state a "reason."

• Who did the actual unmasking.

• The original collector of the name.

• Name of the "intelligence agency," who agrees with the "reason!"

• When each act occurred.

=====================================================

Ergo, if Rice is on-record as having signed the log to review secure documents, she can neither claim 5A or Exec-Privilege. (hat tip Cletus D. yokel)

[Liz]

From the MSNBC transcript: Susan Rice tells Andrea Mitchell@00:51 – …”Let me explain how this works. I was a National Security Adviser, my job is to protect the American people and the security of our country. That’s the same as the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense and CIA Director.; and every morning, to enable us to do that, we receive – from the intelligence com munity – a compilation of intelligence reports that the IC, the intelligence community, has selected for us –on a daily basis– to give us the best information as to what’s going on around the world.”

Susan Rice’s White House Unmasking: A Watergate-style Scandal National Review ^ | 4/4/2017 | Andrew C. McCarthy / FR Posted by Pfesser

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

Why is that so important in the context of explosive revelations that Susan Rice, President Obama’s national-security adviser, confidant, and chief dissembler, called for the “unmasking” of Trump campaign and transition officials whose identities and communications were captured in the collection of U.S. intelligence on foreign targets?

Because we’ve been told for weeks that any unmasking of people in Trump’s circle that may have occurred had two innocent explanations: (1) the FBI’s investigation of Russian meddling in the election and (2) the need to know, for purposes of understanding the communications of foreign intelligence targets, the identities of Americans incidentally intercepted or mentioned.

The unmasking, Obama apologists insist, had nothing to do with targeting Trump or his people. That won’t wash.

======================================================

Rice's interest was most assuredly not in national security but to advance the political interests of the Democratic party (and Hillary Clinton).......and, not incidentally, Obama. And she used the surveillance and intelligence power of the US govt to do it.

[rdcbn]

It was all a conspiracy from the beginning..Obama and his cronies needed leverage just in case Trump became President..they were NOT going to allow this man to come in and wipe away their Commie agenda, he needed that to be stopped in anyway possible

---

If you remember, Obama almost got caught in a felony by trying to do a deal with Illinois Gov Rodney Blagojevich to sell this US Senate seat to Jesse Jackson jr.

Blagojevich was being wire tapped by the FBI in a separate public corruption investigation and Obama got caught up in the investigation as an incidental part of that surveillance

Federal Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald immediately shut down the investigation and rolled up the targets of the investigation, admitted to put put a stop to Obama’s felony in progress.

[Liz]

Flashback 2012: Susan Rice Explains Role In WH Decision-Making ‘People Know Not To Mess With Me’
dailycaller.com ^ | 1/30/2012 / FR Posted by Helicondelta

EDITED/EMPHASIS ADDED In a book written about Susan Rice, she said she routinely confers with President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton before making decisions.

She also explained that “people know not to mess with me. And if they haven’t learned, and they try, then they will learn.”

Rice has said that during her now infamous Sept. 16 appearances on five Sunday television shows that she received and adhered to talking points from members of the intelligence community. (Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...

[Freedom_Is_Not_Free]

Anyone who saw the raw transcript before masking could get word to Rice so she knew which intercepts to ask be unmasked. All she would need is a helper in the agency collecting the data to routinely report to her about which specific communications involved Trump people. She didn’t need to know. She only needed someone in an intelligence agency to know and then tell her.

[Titus-Maximus]

4th amendment prevents illegal search and siezure. Violation of civil rights. Trump team can bring a suit.

[Bob434]

nope- i didn’t say melissa said she woudl skate- I did say they are getting info from the intel community that she was asked to unmask by the intel units- so that means she won’t be the one to have ‘initiated the request to unmask’- the intel community will be-

[[When a political appointee with clearance asks for an unmasking, they have to be specific and it has to be a written request or an audit trail of request actions.]]

True- but when —they— are —asked— to do the unmasking, they do so based on the specific info they are handed-

[[It is a fact that in order for Rice to get anything unmasked, she would have to submit justification again in writing for each.]]

True- but again- she was acting- supposedly- on the request of others to do the unmasking- so that leaves her without the stink on her hands- technically

The way it works- on paper that is- is that the intel community ‘finds something suspicions’ and which ‘creates a need to have folks unmasked’ in order to ‘further understand the extent of involvement’ by individuals-

The intel community then goes to someone like rice and explains that they ‘need’ someone unmasked- she is supposed to —objectively— review the info and decide if it is warranted-

This whole process is subjective because there are no real laws that make it a felony to unmask people without solid reason to do so- there is only a subjective sense of right and wrong- which of course the left exploit and manipulate to their advantage-

[[So from what we are starting to learn, this thing was an orchestration involving many, many operatives inside the bubble.]]

And that’s the problem- pinning it on someone directly as the originator- —and— the other problem is that it’s not illegal —unless- they can make a case for espionage- but again we’re faced with the fact that there is too much subjective decision making to make a clean case for espionage- I think the espionage charge is more lenient- but still there must be proven collusion to wrongly expose those who are unmasked to violations of their constitutional rights-

[[Lots of canaries are already starting to sing.]]

I hope so- but again- it —might not matter— how much they sing if no actual laws wwere technically broken

We all know why the obama administration and why rice did what they did, the problem will be proving they broke the law tho0ugh- and provign that they were the ones who did so on their own

[txhurl]

Regarding the title, the main RATmaster who designs major crimes without ever a smidgen of a fingerprint left on them is the one whose name has NOT come up in this.... Eric Holder. In CA, he can be on a plane to a non-extraditible banana republic within hours.

Jeh Johnson’s in here, too, with the SoS voter database hacks.

[Bob434]

[[4th amendment prevents illegal search...]]

Key word is illegal- proving the gobmint broke the law is going to be tough- especially because it’s liberals we’re dealing with here-

[stylin19a]

Hey...of course. thanks. I didn’t think along those lines.

[riri]

I wonder if they are being forced to report some things because Cernovich has said this Rice info wad only the tip of a very large iceberg and he has much more intel.

[stylin19a]

thanx. see my post 54.

[conservativereports]

This could be just the tip of the iceberg. Recall Maxine Waters claim of Obama having a HUGE database on EVERYONE. Excellent point.

I brought this up on an earlier thread. Combine that with Farkas' unhinged interview and how she feared Trump would stop that flow of information and this becomes the rest of the iceberg. There's no doubt the previous administration was fine with allowing the government to be weaponized. They didn't need to order anything, just unleash the liberals in government who have the "I should do whatever I can because I'm right and the world should be ruled our way" mentality.

[mazda77]

The “need” had to be specific and spelled out in writing to even apply for the justification, period. If it was given without this, which we can now assume it was, a long line of people are in serious trouble because of the sign-on and sign-off logs for the departments on the days it was done.

[laplata]

“I should do whatever I can because I’m right and the world should be ruled our way” mentality.

---

You are right. You will appreciate this:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/266197/civil-war-here-daniel-greenfield

[SteveH]

if it was done without logging and/or written justification, my very limited understanding is that it would have been illegal.

the relaxing of the unmasking was deliberate imho in the sense of having the effect of spreading the responsibility. these guys are experts at spreading responsibility. by spreading responsibility, it becomes difficult for the blame to be pinned on any one person. that pattern goes back to sometime around 1993 IIRC.

Also another next step would be to hide the truth in numbers. It would look like “we performed hundreds of unmaskings as a routine matter. it could be that trump and his associates were just caught up in the mix. if so, it could have been incidental, or even accidental.”

after the info was shared between agencies, any of dozens of people could have leaked it to the media. that is the really illegal part. good luck tracking down whoever it might have been.

trump and co seem to be playing it smart by letting the information drip slowly out, much like watergate. in doing so they maximize damage to the democrats. maybe it is all they can do. personally i hope they can do more. the difference between now and watergate is of course that the democrats are involved in the crimes and the coverup, which of course changes the direction of the MSM spin.

the most interesting thing will be if rice is called to congress to testify. there will likely be other confederates such as (perhaps) rogers. after that it becomes what president (obama) knew and when he knew it. obama is in tahiti now— so when will he come testify before congress? we are in uncharted constitutional waters starting right about now. imho for the future of the country, at least, those waters need to be charted.