One of the most overlooked aspects of the Trump surveillance controversy is the fact that ‘incidental’ intelligence might’ve made its way to the White House by way of ‘foreign intelligence’ aka British. Both parties seem to simply mention this in passing, as if it were okay. How on earth is this acceptable to our government to know that foreign intelligence agencies are spying on US citizens?
In an interview with Andrea Mitchell today, Susan Rice said “I leaked nothing to nobody.” But, she did offer some interesting insight into what actually happened, which was completely different from how she described the events in a recent interview with PBS when she stated that she knew nothing of any sort of surveillance done on Trump.
Firstly, Rice ceded the point that ‘unmasking’ was ordered by her during her years with Obama, saying “there were occasions when I would receive a report in which a U.S. person was referred to. Name not provided, just U.S. person. And sometimes in that context, in order to understand the importance of the report, and assess its significance, it was necessary to find out, or request, the information as to who that U.S. official was.” Rice argued it was necessary for her and other officials to request that information, on occasion, to “do our jobs” to protect national security.
She admitted to ordering the unmasking of Trump and his team during this exchange with Mitchell: “Did you seek the names of people involved in — to unmask the names of people involved in the Trump transition, the people surrounding the president-elect in order to spy on them and expose them?” Rice replied: “Absolutely not for any political purposes to spy, expose, anything.”
She denied being the source of leaks that helped ABC News break the Flynn story. It’s important to note that Rice’s husband, Ian Cameron, is an executive at ABC News. When was the last time ABC News broke any story, let alone one of national importance? I’m sure it was just a mere coincidence.
“I leaked nothing to nobody, and never have, and never would.” She added that to discuss particular targets would be to reveal classified information. She later walked back her denial. Mitchell: “The allegation is that you were leaking the fact that he spoke to the [Russian] ambassador and perhaps to others.” Rice: “I can’t get into any specific reports … what I can say is there is an established process.”
Entrenched in denial, Rice furthered the notion that Obama had not ordered surveillance on Trump, saying “absolutely false … there was no such collection [or] surveillance on Trump Tower or Trump individuals … directed by the White House or targeted at Trump individuals.”
She did not deny that there might have been some surveillance by other agencies, however. She said it was impossible for the White House to order such surveillance, but that the Department of Justice could have done so.
When Mitchell said “The President, his associates, their names could’ve been bandied about by foreign officials, they could’ve been picked up in incidental collection… and you could’ve asked for American #1, American #2, however it’s identified, to be unmasked to know how significant it was.”
Rice: “That’s exactly right.”
Here's the money shot in the Mitchell-Rice interview. Rice admits to 'incidental' Trump intelligence and her order to unmask. pic.twitter.com/nUuAq2bWnM
— The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) April 4, 2017
She admitted to unmasking Trump and his team, without offering valid reasons as to why this was done. Clearly, more detailed answers need to be ascertained by a Senate panel.
Full interview.
If you enjoy the content at iBankCoin, please follow us on Twitter
Let’s try this:
Foreign Agent calls Trump flunky.
Foreign Agent calls Trump flunky.
Foreign Agent calls Trump flunky.
NSA discerns pattern of Foreign Agent calling Trump flunky and records this as a masked name.
Rice, a coordinating top national security official, is provided with a report from the NSA that includes mention that a known foreign agent keeps on calling this same American. Obviously the NSA knows who this person is and possibly indicated he or she is involved in presidential politics.
Rice requests the NSA to unmask the name to get a better sense of the potential threat. NSA can decline the request pursuant to very strict privacy regulations. The name is unmasked.
What’s wrong with this scenario? Don’t you want to know why a foreign intelligence official is calling a political operative? I do regardless of party.
IF Rice leaked this name to the press then that’s different. But there is absolutely no evidence she did so. I have no problem having her testify to this effect.
But at this point the Rice scenario is a strawman to deflect attention from Trussiagate.
^^THIS.
What a turnaround for iBankCoin? A well respected financial commentary site to a cesspool of fake news garbage devoid of common sense.
Let’s assume you are correct. Trump is a Russian agent, just for the sake of argument.
That does not give them license to spy on him one year prior to the inauguration without getting a search warrant. This is preposterous.
How is inauguration coming into play here? You are making a claim that he could NOT have been a russian agent one year prior to inauguration.
That search warrant is called a FISA warrant.
Amusing. Since there is supposed to be a record of the reason for unmasking, let’s see them. You don’t just get to unmask for curiosity’s sake.
“Don’t you want to know why a foreign intelligence official is calling a political operative.” Hmm, so talking to the Ambassador of another country allows your government to spy on you. Interesting.
It’s not true until it’s denied.
“I leaked nothing to nobody, and never have, and never would.”
Besides, it sounds like confession with those double negatives.
Exactly. She is not denying leaking anything to anyone…that would have been easier to say. I wonder why?
She admitted to doing it, two weeks after saying she knew nothing about it. This is a vile piece of human refuse who blamed Benghazi on a youtube video and who got us into war with Libya.
Her husband is an executive producer at ABC. Seriously, when was the last time ABC broke a story?
They broke the Flynn story how?
What a coincidence.
The old excuse: “I din du noffin”! LOL!!! 😉