It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

CNN Goes on Rampage Against Susan Rice Bombshell, Instructs Viewers to Ignore Story

page: 22
115
<< 19  20  21    23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 06:25 PM
link   
The real question no one is asking is how to get Susan Rice to Farkas.
Farkas, she barely knows us.




posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 06:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: [post=22098866]Gryphon66[/post

As National Security Advisor she had clearance AND the authority to ask for unmasking.




No, she did not have that authority on her own.

To say she did not need approval is a blatant lie.

Susan Rice:

Two weeks ago she was Captian Schultz "I know nothing"

Two days ago - "I did it, but not for political purposes"

Predicition

Next week - "I dont recall"

Three weeks in front of Sentate and Congress "I plead the 5th"

She is a proven liar, shall I post the video from Benghazi?
edit on 5-4-2017 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 06:30 PM
link   
a reply to: burntheships

What's the security clearance of the National Security Advisor?

She answered a question on PBS about Nunes claims. She said she knew nothing about that ... and neither did anyone else at the time.

She answered subsequent questions about the unmasking process.

You're full of mud, you misquoted what she said, and you're now a blatant liar on multiple points.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: burntheships

"Shall I post the video from Benghazi?"

Why not ... that's the only thing any of you have against Rice.

Go ahead ... look even more out of touch with the current discussion.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 06:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

What's the security clearance of the National Security Advisor?


Irrelevant.



She answered a question on PBS about Nunes claims. She said she knew nothing about that ... and neither did anyone else at the time.


No, she is trying to rewrite her appearance.

Sorry, its on video. She made big mistake.
Cant fix on twitter.



She answered subsequent questions about the unmasking process.


Squirming in her seat. No answer as to if she would be
willing to testify in front of Congress under oath.

Trey Gowdy on Susan Rice lies on Benghazi Video



Here she is lying two weeks ago.






edit on 5-4-2017 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 07:07 PM
link   
a reply to: burntheships

Rice's security clearance was irrelevant???

You're wasting my time.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 07:11 PM
link   
Here's the article at PBS that actually offers the video with the first question that Rice responded to.

PBS

It is very clear that in the March 22 interview Rice is answering a specific question about the Nunes documents.

She stated clearly that she knew nothing about that. Neither did anyone else at that point, except the two hacks in the White House that gave Side Show Nunes his little prop.

In her second interview she's talking about the necessary access she had to classified material as the National Security Advisor. She also outlines the process by which items are unmasked, which involves requesting that unmasking from the relevant IC member.

Anything else is the dumbest lie the right has told yet.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 07:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: burntheships

Rice's security clearance was irrelevant???


Yes, it is irrelevant. So in this instance is her "position"
in that neither one gave her authority to access raw intelligence
without direction or oversight.



You're wasting my time.


It is mutual.



In the first question, PBS NewsHour’s Judy Woodruff asked Rice about Nunes’ disclosure that Trump “and the people around him may have been caught up in surveillance of foreign individuals and that their identities may have been disclosed. Do you know anything about this?” Woodruff added.

“I know nothing about this" I was surprised to see reports from Chairman Nunes on that count today,” Rice answered.

www.pbs.org...


So....she lied. She claimed she knew nothing about "Trump and the people around
him may have been caught up in surveillance...."


edit on 5-4-2017 by burntheships because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-4-2017 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 07:24 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

People who Actually watch Anything on CNN should be Convicted of a Crime Against Humanity and Jailed for their Own Good .



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 07:24 PM
link   
Ask yourself a question: did Susan Rice view classified unmasked intelligence material?

If she did, what would she have to have to do so?

Why that's right, the appropriate security clearance to do so.

Duh.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 07:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: RickinVa

People who Actually watch Anything on CNN should be Convicted of a Crime Against Humanity and Jailed for their Own Good .


Let that authoritarian freak flag fly!

What a disgrace to everything America stands for!




posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 07:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Ask yourself a question: did Susan Rice view classified unmasked intelligence material?

If she did, what would she have to have to do so?


Authority to do so, which she "claims" she did not have.

She can fry, or the person who directed her will.
Maybe both.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 07:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

From your link:

In the first question, PBS NewsHour’s Judy Woodruff asked Rice about Nunes’ disclosure that Trump “and the people around him may have been caught up in surveillance of foreign individuals and that their identities may have been disclosed. Do you know anything about this?” Woodruff added.

“I know nothing about this. I was surprised to see reports from Chairman Nunes on that count today,” Rice answered. The full first question is unedited in the video above.


Are you saying that she is professing to know nothing about Nunes disclosing the information?

Because in the answer she gave, she admits to having seen the reports of the Nunes disclosure.




It is very clear that in the March 22 interview Rice is answering a specific question about the Nunes documents. 


Just what is that specific question?
Because the question I heard was asking what she knew about Trump and associates being inder surveillance.

.
edit on b000000302017-04-05T19:40:23-05:0007America/ChicagoWed, 05 Apr 2017 19:40:23 -0500700000017 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)

edit on b000000302017-04-05T20:00:07-05:0008America/ChicagoWed, 05 Apr 2017 20:00:07 -0500800000017 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 07:54 PM
link   
It is being reported by a member of the House Intelligence committee that the info being collected included a lot of personal stuff. This is unconscionable if you really think about it. Heads need to roll.


The intelligence reports at the center of the Susan Rice unmasking controversy were detailed, and almost resembled a private investigator’s file, according to a Republican congressman familiar with the documents.

"This is information about their everyday lives," Rep. Peter King of New York, a member of the House Intelligence committee said. "Sort of like in a divorce case where lawyers are hired, investigators are hired just to find out what the other person is doing from morning until night and then you try to piece it together later on.”


www.foxnews.com...



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 08:06 PM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords

It is gut wrenching sick.

I usually don't watch cable, but I am now following Hannity,
because he is really really angry, and he may just indeed
sue whom ever he can.

Obama did usurp many agencies, and used them for political
gain, in trade for Americans constitutional rights.

This is getting close to being second to 9/11 if taking
into account we add in the games from/with Clinton.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 08:16 PM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

What a waste of time. Okay, I'll play.

In the first interview, the first quesiton Rice was asked was if she knew anything about the unmasking of documents as alleged by Mr. Nunes.

She stated that she didn't know anything about the unmasking of those documents.

She did not state that she didn't know anything about unmasking as that was obviously, at times, part of her job.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 08:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Ask yourself a question: did Susan Rice view classified unmasked intelligence material?

If she did, what would she have to have to do so?


Authority to do so, which she "claims" she did not have.

She can fry, or the person who directed her will.
Maybe both.


She had to have the security clearance that fairly dishonestly claim that she didn't have.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords

From your article:



On the House Intelligence Committee, only the Republican chairman, Devin Nunes of California, and the ranking Democrat Adam Schiff, also of California, have personally reviewed the intelligence reports. Some members were given broad outlines.


Rep. King hasn't seen crap. Another day, another lie.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 08:24 PM
link   



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 08:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: butcherguy

What a waste of time. Okay, I'll play.

In the first interview, the first quesiton Rice was asked was if she knew anything about the unmasking of documents as alleged by Mr. Nunes.

She stated that she didn't know anything about the unmasking of those documents.

She did not state that she didn't know anything about unmasking as that was obviously, at times, part of her job.

It is a waste of time.... For me.
Address what I posted.
You say that she was answering whether she knew about unmasking now.
She wasn't asked about unmasking. She was asked what she knew about the surveillance of Trump and associates.
You are playing a very silly game involving a lot of mental gymnastics.
I posted the question and the answer from the link that you provided.



new topics

top topics



 
115
<< 19  20  21    23  24 >>

log in

join