Susan Rice Ordered Spy Agencies To Produce ‘Detailed Spreadsheets’ Involving Trump

a reply to: Deny Arrogance

These spreadsheets are proof a deliberate and ongoing targeting of the Trump team by the Obama Administration.

Targeting - or observing?

“She’s responsible for implementing sanctions policy of President Obama and she sees intelligence that says Person No. 1, Person No. 1 is talking to Russian officials about the issue,” he went on. She says, ‘I have the responsibility to know who is talking to the president about the policy,’ or, ‘I’m going to go forward and unmask the names.’ Not only appropriate but it’s her responsibility to know this. This is a smoke screen. By the way, Sean Spicer knows about intelligence what I know about ballet. This is dime-a-dozen for what the national security adviser should be doing. She has got to know what people are doing to try and impede the president of the United States from implementing sanctions and she’s got to know who’s talking to the Russians. It’s that simple.”

“One person cannot order unmasking,” he said. “It requires intelligence community, NSA, to agree that request is material and grant that request. The other point that was made to me, these things are meticulously logged. One senior intelligence official said to me, Chris, you’ll appreciate this, they are logged like Irish baptismal records. So, you can’t do it in the dark. That’s one reason why Devin Nunes was able to go to the White House and look at the request Susan Rice made. They are meticulously logged.”

a reply to: Deny Arrogance

Your OP is based on a discredited Former US Attorney (former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova) who hasn't been in government for a couple decades.

explain to me how he knows anything?

then explain to me why he said Clinton was going to be arrested...and a world of other right wing nonsense over the years.

Fake News..

a reply to: Indigo5

OK, maybe you'll give credence to statements made by two people associated with the National Security Council, one being a former deputy director for intelligence at the U.S. Central Command:

Col. (Ret.) James Waurishuk, an NSC veteran and former deputy director for intelligence at the U.S. Central Command, told TheDCNF that many hands had to be involved throughout the Obama administration to launch such a political spying program. “The surveillance initially is the responsibility of the National Security Agency,” Waurishuk said. “They have to abide by this guidance when one of the other agencies says, ‘we’re looking at this particular person which we would like to unmask.'” “The lawyers and counsel at the NSA surely would be talking to the lawyers and members of counsel at CIA, or at the National Security Council or at the Director of National Intelligence or at the FBI,” he said. “It’s unbelievable of the level and degree of the administration to look for information on Donald Trump and his associates, his campaign team and his transition team. This is really, really serious stuff.” Michael Doran, former NSC senior director, told TheDCNF Monday that “somebody blew a hole in the wall between national security secrets and partisan politics.” This “was a stream of information that was supposed to be hermetically sealed from politics and the Obama administration found a way to blow a hole in that wall,” he said. Read more: dailycaller.com...

dailycaller.com...

a reply to: shawmanfromny

What am I supposed to give credence to?

He is correct in that...
"They have to abide by this guidance when one of the other agencies says, ‘we’re looking at this particular person which we would like to unmask.'” “The lawyers and counsel at the NSA surely would be talking to the lawyers and members of counsel at CIA, or at the National Security Council or at the Director of National Intelligence or at the FBI,” he said"

Which no doubt happened if and when "unmasking" occurred.

The premise that process was circumvented is false, unproven, not substantiated and outright denied by any and every active intelligence official during the Obama administration.

That leaves the question...IF...members of the Trump campaign were "Unmasked" under what everyone agrees was a LEGAL FISA warrant (Nunes even said the same)...AND the Intelligence Community Lawyers (Susan Rice can not order unmasking..only request it)...the IC Lawyers make that decision...And it must be found HIGHLY CRITICAL TO NATIONAL SECURITY by those NSA/CIA lawyers before unmasking...then YES...lets get the whole story on that PURPORTED surveillance.

Who ordered Rice to spy on Trump and complie these spreadsheets well before Trump was even the nominee?

Obama.

He was her boss.

She does NOTHING without his say so.

Goes with the job.

a reply to: neo96

she followed the orders to try and make the american public believe banghazi was because of a youtube video

www.breitbart.com...

A newly released email collected by Judicial Watch in response to a FOIA request shows the White House pushed Ambassador Susan Rice to promote the idea that an internet video mocking Islam, not President Obama’s foreign policy, was responsible for attacks in the Middle East, including the one in Benghazi. There has been much discussion of a set of talking points which were edited by the CIA at the State Department’s behest for use by Members of Congress. But there was another set of talking points being prepared at almost the same time for use by Ambassador Susan Rice. Rice appeared as a surrogate for Secretary of State Clinton on five separate Sunday morning news programs on September 16th, 2012. On the Saturday prior to Rice’s appearance, the White House organized a conference call with a dozen press people including Jay Carney, David Plouffe, and Dan Pfeiffer. The purpose of the call was to prepare Rice for her appearance on all of the Sunday shows the following morning. In preparation for the conference call, White House adviser Ben Rhodes sent out a list of talking points Friday night with the subject “RE: PREP CALL with Susan: Saturday at 4:00 pm ET.” The document opens with a section labeled “Goals” followed by four bullet points. These are not talking points per se, rather they are concepts the White House hoped Rice would communicate on television. Point one is “to convey that the United States is doing everything that we can to protect our people and facilities abroad.” Point two reads, “To underscore that these protests are rooted in an internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.” Notice that this was framed as part of an either-or response. Either this was a failure of policy or it was the result of an internet video; the White House wanted Rice to make clear it was definitely the video that was to blame. The other two goals also have to do with the president’s credibility, which the White House clearly worried was at jeopardy. Point three is a promise that the perpetrators will be brought to justice by a “resolute” administration. Point four is even more blunt, “To reinforce the President and Administration’s strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges.” Four simple messages Rice was to convey: We’re keeping our people safe. It was the video. We’ll get these guys. The president is strong.

Why would anyone think this trash capable of thinking on her own?

a reply to: shooterbrody

Why would anyone think this trash capable of thinking on her own?

Because they hate Trump so much they don't care about the out right LIES that came before him.

Or the out right LIES by the last administration and it's cronies trying to cover their arses.

GD amazing government accountability suddenly began when Trump was elected.

a reply to: neo96

Obama was everybody in government's boss. Everybody. Do you think he oversaw it all?
These agencies operate under a chair or director. Lots of folks did lots of things that Obama had no hand in.
Every single day.

a reply to: Indigo5

Yeah, I get what you're saying...that the possibility of the Obama administration and the intelligence community colluding to "surveil" a presidential candidate never happened. That they did this to find "dirt" on Trump in order to help Hillary get in the White House never happened. That they masqueraded this with the “false narrative” that the Trump campaign joined with Russia to steal the US presidency never happened. That "false narratives" are spun by the liberal progressive machine and MSM, with the intent of molding public perceptions never happen. The "premise that process was circumvented is false, unproven, not substantiated and outright denied by any and every active intelligence official during the Obama administration", because no one involved in the intelligence community and Obama's administration lies or is corrupt. There's plenty of evidence that Susan Rice has lied in the past, but I guess that never happened either. Yeah, I get what you're saying...no one in Obama's administration and the intelligence community ever intended to purposely smear Donald Trump and his administration. It's all "right wing nonsense" and fake news.

originally posted by: Annee
Seems Joseph diGenova has a pattern of saying unfounded stuff.

Right-wing media are reporting discredited Republican lawyer Joseph diGenova's baseless claim that Democratic presidential candidate and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton committed "numerous federal crimes" with her private email use, failing to note that Clinton is not the target of the FBI's investigation and that the probe is not criminal in nature. mediamatters.org...

Except she WAS the target. It was a proven fact she did what was claimed. The investigation concluded with no criminal charges due to 'lack of intent'. Awesome fake news you provided of the liberal media covering clinton's ass.

a reply to: Indigo5

I notice you said nothing about the LEAKING aspect.

a reply to: shawmanfromny


Your post is all over the place.


It is simple...


President Trump has the clear and easy authority to declassify and release to the press the evidence in question.


If it shows that his campaign was illegally spied on, why has he not done that? It is literally as easy as him scribbling his initials on the documents to declassify them.


This is a ploy, not real. A purposeful distraction from the very real fact that his campaign is being investigated for colluding with Russian intelligence to interfere with a US election.


That is not a political opinion. Conservative pundits and GOP have inferred the same.


Trump could release the evidence he claims he has at any time.


WHY has he chosen instead to tweet and spin without sharing the actual "evidence"?

originally posted by: Indigo5

President Trump has the clear and easy authority to declassify and release to the press the evidence in question.

Weren't the democrats and CNN saying Trump could not be given access to this information and Nunes telling Trump about it could be criminal?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Indigo5

President Trump has the clear and easy authority to declassify and release to the press the evidence in question.

Weren't the democrats and CNN saying Trump could not be given access to this information and Nunes telling Trump about it could be criminal?

No?

Trump was the SOURCE of the material.

Trump can request any and all classified documents from the intelligence community.

Now if you want to get weird..In order to request those documents you need a Doc #..so it's a little chicken and the egg with the intelligence community. If you don't know what they have, making general requests can be hard..if Trump requests a doc # they have to turn it over...And Trump doesn't necessarily want to spend time pouring through classified material and making doc requests..beyond time consuming..it would look really bad. So what he did was assign Ezra-Cohen to the NSC and task him with finding out what the intelligence community has on him. Ezra was brought to the WH by Flynn. That is why Trump over-rode his Chief National Security Advisor, McMaster when he tried to remove Ezra.

But Ezra found some intelligence that he edited-up to spin in defense of Trumps spying claim and made the show with Nunes.

But yes..Trump has those doc numbers and can release the redacted or full docs at any time with a swipe of pen.

He chooses not to, because he knows what the Docs actually show and they are only valuable for BS Spin purposes.

Ezra having full clearance as NSC can request, review any and all Classified docs and intelligence related to the investigation. His only impediment is their being thousands of documents and not knowing what to ask for etc.

Trump can declassify anything he likes and release it to the press.

Nunes? Working with the subject of an investigation while investigating them? Faking the whole show of running over to the Whitehouse to share the "evidence"...when he actually got it from the WH? Yes..If he was not congress, but FBI, he would be prosecuted.

Folks will go to jail, but Nunes is a sitting congressman and will get a pass...Manafort, Flynn, Page are all in legal jeopardy though..It will be interesting to see if they go "G. Gordon Liddy" and refuse to talk and serve jail time...or if they roll over on more "senior" participants.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Indigo5

I notice you said nothing about the LEAKING aspect.

I notice you said nothing about it raining in NYC?

We are just tossing in stuff right?

I said nothing about "leaking" because it wasn't the topic.

But I suppose that is why you chose to mention it?

How in deep crap is Susan Rice? it will be investigations.

The National Security adviser is not an investigator, She is a white house staffer, The white house Staffer is a consumer of intelligence, no a generator or collector of it, Susan Rice was unmasking Americans, It was not to fulfill an intelligence need, base on intelligence need, it was to fulfill a political desire on democratic parties interest

She will burn, the Obama administration is shown their corruption now, she will have to tell who she talk about this and how those that took the information leaked.

www.nationalreview.com...

originally posted by: marg6043
How in deep crap is Susan Rice? it will be investigations.

The National Security adviser is not an investigator, She is a white house staffer, The white house Staffer is a consumer of intelligence, no a generator or collector of it, Susan Rice was unmasking Americans, It was not to fulfill an intelligence need, base on intelligence need, it was to fulfill a political desire on democratic parties interest

Seriously...reality matters..

THe NSA Advisor is not an investigator..True...Note that Trumps NSA Ezra Cohen appears to be the first exception...digging and giving intelligence to Nunes on the sly..But otherwise correct.

Consumer of Intelligence, not generator...ALSO Correct..The intelligence community only sends the NSC intelligence it considers HIGHLY CRITICAL to NATIONAL SECURITY.
They obviously felt whatever they sent her warranted that.

Susan Rice was Unmasking Americans...False..She doesn't have that authority...That is decided by NSA/CIA/FBI lawyers..and it is a deliberative process asking if the unmasking is necessary to national security..Susan Rice isn't able to "Unmask" anyone...she can ask..but from there it is the Intelligence agency lawyers who make that decision and they have a high standard.

To Fulfill a political desire...FALSE...no evidence of the same..if the unmasking was not warranted then the panel of close to 20 Intelligence Agency lawyers who actually decide to "Unmask" would risk 30 years in prison.

This is some sad BS being bandied about.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: neo96

Obama was everybody in government's boss. Everybody. Do you think he oversaw it all?
These agencies operate under a chair or director. Lots of folks did lots of things that Obama had no hand in.
Every single day.

bullsh@@
the president is not every bodies boss in government. he is the head of the executive branch and departments and the agencies that fall under that branch. he is not the boss of the legislative, nor the judicial branch.

your are correct about the secretaries, they are in charge of the everyday business, and answer to him. with that being the said, he can also tell them what to do as far as any investigation, surveillance involving national security that can be justified, or think that they can cover. very few secretaries have the nerve to refuse a president, or something like what just happened to the temporary sec of justice hold over yates.

example, how many times did obama say that he ordered holder to look into civil rights violations.
example, true he can say to congress pass the this law, but congress can tel lhim to bite us by not passing a law. as in when obama said shame you on to congress when they didn't pass the gun laws he wanted. then said he has a pen and phone he can use. he never did use said pen and phone to get any gun control laws because he did not have the authority or power to do so.



ETA: if the president was the boss of all the government, wouldn't that be more like a dictator or king. if that was so any law he wanted would be passed, and any thing he said would be done. we would have a wall be built full speed ahead, obama care would be gone, travel bans from 7 terrorists supporting nation, and the list would go on and on.

a reply to: carewemust

Yeah we do. No one. It never happened. She did her job. That's all.
I love that the worse it looks for trump the harder he pushes back with his fake news bull crap.

Funny in her interview yesterday she said exactly what I said about the incidental collection. Exactly.
Seems that I had a better understanding of the situation. Again.

March 22,

"I know nothing about this."

- Susan Rice, on the unmasking of Americans

Burn Rice, burn.