New Board

For refugees from MyWay and Tek Board II, and for anyone else wishing to participate.


    Susan Rice: Criminal

    Share
    avatar
    sinister_midget
    Admin

    Posts : 1887
    Join date : 2016-08-26
    Age : 64
    Location : Home

    Susan Rice: Criminal

    Post  sinister_midget on Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:35 pm

    DID SUSAN RICE SPY ON TRUMP OFFICIALS FOR MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD?

    After months of denials, the pretext for Susan Rice’s eavesdropping on Trump officials has finally been made public. It had been widely known that Obama’s former National Security Adviser had contrived to unmask the names of top Trump officials who had been spied on by the administration. And the same media that still treats Watergate as the Great American Scandal had claimed that there was nothing “improper” in an Obama loyalist eavesdropping on members of the opposition party.

    Every time Obama Inc. was caught eavesdropping on opposition politicians, it presented its spin in a carefully packaged “scoop” to a major media outlet. This time was no different.

    When Obama Inc. spied on members of Congress to protect its Iran nuke sellout, it packaged the story to the Wall Street Journal under the headline, “U.S. Spy Net on Israel Snares Congress”. The idea was that Obama Inc. was “legitimately” spying on Israel, that it just happened to intercept the conversations of some members of Congress and American Jews, and that the eavesdropping somehow meant that its victims, Jewish and non-Jewish, rather than its White House perpetrators, should be ashamed.

    The White House had demanded the conversations between Prime Minister Netanyahu, members of Congress and American Jews because it "believed the intercepted information could be valuable to counter Mr. Netanyahu's campaign." This was domestic surveillance carried out under the same pretext as in the Soviet Union which had also accused its dissident targets of secretly serving foreign interests.

    Obama and his minions had used the NSA to spy on Americans opposed to its policies. Including members of Congress. They did this by conflating their own political agenda with national security.

    Since Obama’s spin was that the Iran Deal was good for national security, opponents of it were a “national security” threat.

    And its fig leaf for domestic surveillance was that a “foreign leader” was involved.

    Now get ready for a flashback.

    Susan Rice’s excuse for unmasking the names of top Trump officials in the Obama eavesdropping effort was that they were meeting with the crown prince of the United Arab Emirates. The carefully packaged CNN story, which reeks of the Goebbelsian media manipulations of “Obama whisperer” Ben Rhodes, tries to clumsily tie the whole thing to the Russians. But for once it’s not about Russia. It’s about Islam.

    The UAE has become best known for being the first regional Muslim oil state to turn against the Muslim Brotherhood and the entire Arab Spring enterprise. It helped mobilize opposition to the Qatari agenda. The ultimate outcome of that effort was that Egypt was stabilized under a non-Islamist president and the Islamist takeover in Libya is looking rather shaky. The Saudi coalition against Qatar, the sugar daddies of Hamas, Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood, has its origins in that effort.

    When Obama Inc. spied on members of Congress before, it was to protect Iran. This time around, the gang that couldn’t spy straight was trying to protect the Muslim Brotherhood. The Iran Deal was never about stopping Iran’s nuclear program. It certainly does not do that. Nor was it ever meant to do it.

    Instead the real goal of the Iran negotiations was a diplomatic arrangement with the Islamic terror state. The fruits of that arrangement can be seen from Beirut to Baghdad. They are written in blood and steel across Syria, Israel and Yemen. And that arrangement had to be protected at all costs.

    Even if it meant spying on Americans. Even if it meant spying on members of Congress.

    The arrangement that Susan Rice was protecting by spying on top Trump officials was even older and dirtier. It goes back to Obama’s Cairo speech and the resulting bloody horrors of the Arab Spring.

    Both times Obama Inc. was caught spying on American officials to protect its dirty deal with Islam.

    Obama officials had spied on Americans to protect Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood. That’s more than a mere crime. It’s treason. Imagine if Watergate had been about the White House spying on Democrats for the KGB. That is the sheer full scope of what we appear to be dealing with here.

    Both high-level eavesdropping incidents involve an effort by Obama Inc. to protect Islamist enemies.

    These efforts checked all the right and wrong legal boxes. The orders were carried out by men and women who know all the loopholes. Each decision was compartmentalized across a network. There were always pretexts. And a media eager to fight for the right of the left to spy on the right.

    It is as unlikely that Susan Rice will be held accountable for pulling off a crime that makes Watergate into the gold standard of governmental ethics as it is that Hillary will ever go to jail for abusing classified information. The network, which some dub the swamp, has excelled at defending its own.  That’s why current National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster protected Susan Rice’s access to classified information and nurtured all the Obama holdovers behind the leaks while purging those who tried to expose them.

    It is also why Susan Rice’s testimony did not leak until CNN was able to roll out its carefully packaged spin.

    Conservatives excel at zeroing in on abuses like Hillary’s email account, the Rice unmasking and the Benghazi cover-up, but falter when it comes to exposing the motives behind them. And so the investigation of the abuses quickly vanishes into a thorny thicket of alibis, technical legalities, cover-ups and licenses. And a baffled public reads about hearings that delve into acts rather than motives.

    It is vital that we understand not only what Rice did, but why she did it. It is important that we expose the pattern of misconduct, not just the individual act.

    Susan Rice’s eavesdropping would have remained hidden if Flynn and his appointees hadn’t temporarily obtained the keys to the kingdom. And the network quickly worked to have Flynn forced out and replaced with McMaster. And McMaster has steadily forced out Flynn’s appointees so that there are no more leaks like the one that exposed the Rice eavesdropping. The swamp looks after its own.

    Unless there are fundamental changes at the NSC and beyond, we will never know the full scope of the Obama eavesdropping operation. But we still do know a great deal about what motivated it.

    Susan Rice and the White House didn’t just eavesdrop on the political opposition. There was an agenda so urgent that they were willing to pull out all the stops to protect it.

    Even right down to committing what has become the ultimate crime in the White House.

    It was the same agenda that dragged us into a war in Libya. The same agenda that was at the heart of the diplomatic efforts of the administration over eight years. That agenda was empowering Islamists.

    The Obama edition of Watergate wasn’t committed merely for domestic political gain. It was carried out for a reason that was encompassed in his address to the United Nations after the Benghazi massacre.

    “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

    This foul slogan led to the first arrest of a filmmaker for political speech in almost a century. It led to the sordid betrayal of our national security and our allies. And to domestic espionage against Americans.

    The future must not belong on those who spy on Americans to protect Islamism.

    I've been ambivalent about McMaster. I see people blasting him constantly as being part of the problem. But Trump sticks by him.

    I'd say as long as there are questions, he should be removed. At the very least, moved away from NSC. Maybe then we can get tot he bottom of the crooked Obama/Rice games.


    _________________
    One of the most important reasons for studying history is that
    virtually every stupid idea that is in vogue today has been tried
    before and proved disastrous before, time and again.
    --  Thomas Sowell
    avatar
    sinister_midget
    Admin

    Posts : 1887
    Join date : 2016-08-26
    Age : 64
    Location : Home

    Re: Susan Rice: Criminal

    Post  sinister_midget on Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:40 pm

    Reminder: Susan Rice Lied About Her Role In The Obama Admin Unmasking Scandal

    On March 22, Rep. Devin Nunes made his ham-fisted disclosure that the Obama administration had conducted incidental surveillance collection and unmasking of Trump administration officials. It was a revelation that ignited widespread criticism from nearly every corner of Washington

    “I have seen intelligence reports that clearly show that the president-elect and his team were, I guess, at least monitored,” the House intelligence chairman said at the time. “It looks to me like it was all legally collected, but it was essentially a lot of information on the president-elect and his transition team and what they were doing.” Nunes went on to claim that the information was spread across a number of agencies and had “little or no apparent intelligence value.”

    Perhaps Nunes’ reasons were partisan. Perhaps his framing was exaggerated. We’ll see. But if CNN’s reporting is correct, everything Nunes claimed that day was basically true. Which is a lot more than we can say for others.

    On the same day, former National Security Adviser Susan Rice was interviewed by PBS’s Judy Woodruff and asked to respond to Nunes’ accusation that she had unmaskedthose Trump officials in the waning days of the Obama administration. Here is the exchange:

    Woodruff: We’ve been following a disclosure by the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Devin Nunes, that in essence, during the final days of the Obama administration, during the transition, after President Trump had been elected, that he and the people around him may have been caught up in surveillance of foreign individuals in that their identities may have been disclosed. Do you know anything about this?

    Rice: I know nothing about this. I was surprised to see reports from Chairman Nunes on that count today.

    As we now know, Rice wasn’t surprised. At all. Wednesday, CNN reported that Obama’s former national security adviser told House investigators that she had unmasked those senior Trump officials in an effort “to understand why the crown prince of the United Arab Emirates was in New York late last year.” According to the report, the Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al Nahyan had circumvented some diplomatic courtesy, which, apparently, was enough justification to spy on American citizens.

    The meeting had reportedly come on the heels of efforts by UAE officials to create a back-channel communication between Russia and incoming Trump administration. According CNN, the get-together, which included Michael Flynn, Jared Kushner, and Steve Bannon, was completely Russia-free:

    ‘The meeting was about ascertaining the Trump team’s view of the region and sharing the UAE’s view of the region and what the U.S. role should be,’ a senior Middle East official told CNN. ‘No one was coming in to sell anything or arrange anything.’

    Trey Gowdy and other House members seem okay with this precedent, so I guess there’s nothing to see here. “I didn’t hear anything to believe that she did anything illegal,” Florida Rep. Tom Rooney explained to CNN. Unless Rice or some other Obama official admits to leaking classified information, this statement is surely true.

    Then again, there has been a constant conflating of illegality and abuse by those covering this story. Unmasking is a legitimate power. Few argue it should be illegal. The question is, was it abused for political purposes. When it was convenient, Bernie Sanders, Al Franken, the American Civil Liberties Union, and numerous others on the Left warned that Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance could be legally weaponized for political gain. There is no genuine oversight. We are asked to have faith in those in power.

    Has Rice earned that trust? This, after all, is the woman who went on national television and repeated a bunch of Ben Rhodes-authored falsehoods regarding the September 11, 2012, Benghazi terror attacks, claiming they were a “spontaneous reaction” to “hateful and offensive video.” This is the woman who went on PBS to lie about her role in unmasking, although there was apparently nothing wrong with it. Rice didn’t tell Woodruff “I can’t disclose that kind of sensitive information,” or “no comment,” she told her “I know nothing about this.” Rice is extraordinarily comfortable lying to the American people.

    As I’ve noted many times, I’m willing to believe the worst about the Trump administration. This a courtesy I try to extend to every administration. So I do hope that Rice explained to House investigators how this unmasking helped protect Americans from foreign threats since unmasking is typically reserved for law enforcement in anti-terror or espionage investigations. Otherwise, it sure looks like members of an incoming Republican administration were spied on by a Democratic political operative who happened to find a meeting suspicious. Some of us troglodytes might view this kind of thing as an abuse of power. So it’ll be interesting to hear Gowdy and others explain why it wasn’t.


    _________________
    One of the most important reasons for studying history is that
    virtually every stupid idea that is in vogue today has been tried
    before and proved disastrous before, time and again.
    --  Thomas Sowell

      Current date/time is Sun Sep 24, 2017 9:33 pm