Report: H.R. McMaster Believes Susan Rice Did Nothing Wrong in Unmasking Requests

[exGOPer]

you keep lying about the seth rich argument stuff. you misrepresented what fox news claimed and I disabused of it.

If you are working for the president and you order an improper drone strike which kills your political competition. You don't get to excuse your conduct by saying you did not have the authority to order the drone strike.

here was see how nefarious susan rices actions must have been.


http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...aign-members-obama-administration-fbi-cia-nsa

Understand: There would have been no intelligence need for Susan Rice to ask for identities to be unmasked. If there had been a real need to reveal the identities — an intelligence need based on American interests — the unmasking would have been done by the investigating agencies. The national-security adviser is not an investigator. She is a White House staffer. The president’s staff is a consumer of intelligence, not a generator or collector of it. If Susan Rice was unmasking Americans, it was not to fulfill an intelligence need based on American interests; it was to fulfill a political desire based on Democratic-party interests.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...aign-members-obama-administration-fbi-cia-nsa

I claimed that Fox News didn't have a source and now it's completely proven that they didn't.

Both of your links are fake news, Rice had no power to unmask, any article that makes that claim is fake news and should be dismissed. Who cares what they say anyway, Mcmaster said they were ok and that's where it ends.

 

[exGOPer]

mean that it is a lawful exercise of their power.

Do name the law Rice broke with the unmasking requests.

Expecting nothing but crickets.

 

[jem]

look you fucking troll.

you are misrepresenting the argument. you were dead ass wrong as to to whether fox news claimed to have law enforcement sources other than wheeler and you still have not proven crap.
you are lying annoying dnc troll ass with zero credibility and you constantly misrepresent arguments. you are a total joke ass troll.

2. the claim was that the law enforcement source said the FBI had thousands of emails.
this claim was very very specific.
"The federal investigator, who requested anonymity, said 44,053 emails and 17,761 attachments between Democratic National Committee leaders, spanning from January 2015 through late May 2016, were transferred from Rich to MacFadyen before May 21." you have not proven that claim about a federal law enforcement source was not true.

3. Finally don't forget... McCabe's wife took 750 g from hillarys bag man and the Wassermans brother is in charge of the case at DOJ.

nothing about the facts coming out of the FBI or the DOJ which are pro hillary or pro dnc can be considered credible due to the fact those agencies have conflicts of interest you would not even expect to see in Chicago.

The federal investigator, who requested anonymity, said 44,053 emails and 17,761 attachments between Democratic National Committee leaders, spanning from January 2015 through late May 2016, were transferred from Rich to MacFadyen before May 21.

that seems like a pretty detailed piece of info... the kind that I would bet will someday be proven to be accurate...
especially in light of the fact... the emails were leaked and Rich was murdered.
and that Julian Assange heavily hinted it was Rich.

that makes your smell test info seem like a herring maybe not a red herring but a herring.

 

[exGOPer]

look you fucking troll.

you are misrepresenting the argument. you were dead ass wrong as to to whether fox news claimed to have law enforcement sources other than wheeler and you still have not proven crap.
you are lying annoying dnc troll ass with zero credibility and you constantly misrepresent arguments. you are a total joke ass troll.

2. the claim was that the law enforcement source said the FBI had thousands of emails.
this claim was very very specific.
"The federal investigator, who requested anonymity, said 44,053 emails and 17,761 attachments between Democratic National Committee leaders, spanning from January 2015 through late May 2016, were transferred from Rich to MacFadyen before May 21." you have not proven that claim about a federal law enforcement source was not true.

3. Finally don't forget... McCabe's wife took 750 g from hillarys bag man and the Wassermans brother is in charge of the case at DOJ.

nothing about the facts coming out of the FBI or the DOJ which are pro hillary or pro dnc can be considered credible due to the fact those agencies have conflicts of interest you would not even expect to see in Chicago.

May want to read up on the Wheeler lawsuit con, that source was made up

 

[jem]

many have argued that as a consumer of intel rice did not really have a need for the unmasking.

so

1. she showed consciousness of guilt when she initially denied knowing anything about unmasking intelligence reports.

2. so given that she probably had no real purpose as a non investigator to request the unmasking

3. (Also, I point out she could probably tell who most of these masked people were anyway without the unmasking.)

4. it becomes pretty easy to conclude that her denial shows she was aware her requests were nefarious.

So you right there you have the ability to try her for breaking numerous national security laws.

and, if those intelligence officers doing the unmasking were similarly positioned to understand rice had no legitimate purpose to request the unmasking even though she could...

you have all sorts conspiracies to violate national security laws.

for some of the actual laws you can click here.


http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/04/04/gregg-jarrett-did-susan-rice-break-law.html

Do name the law Rice broke with the unmasking requests.

Expecting nothing but crickets.

 

[exGOPer]

many have argued that as a consumer of intel rice did not really have a need for the unmasking.

so

1. she showed consciousness of guilt when she initially denied knowing anything about unmasking an intelligence reports.

2. so given that she probably had no real purpose as a non investigator to request the unmasking

3. she probably already really knew who these masked people were.

4. it pretty easy to conclude she was aware here requests were nefarious.

So you have the ability to try her for breaking numerous national security laws.

and, if those doing the unmasking were similarly positioned to understand rice had not legitimate purpose to request the unmasking even though she could...

you have all sorts conspiracies to violate national security laws.

for some of the actual laws you can click here.


http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/04/04/gregg-jarrett-did-susan-rice-break-law.html

I would take McMasters conclusion over some third rate fake news shill who makes up stuff and publish propaganda like the Rich hoax.

 

[jem]

I would not call this third rate - according to wikipedia He graduated magna cum laude from Claremont Men's College in 1977 with a degree in political science. He graduated from law school at the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, in 1980, and worked as a defense attorney for several years in San Francisco with the firm of Gordon & Rees LLP. He maintains his California bar license[2] and has taught law as an adjunct professor at New York Law School and lectured at other law schools.[3]

by comparison mcmaster... seems to have no legal training...

McMaster was born in Philadelphia on July 24, 1962.[1] He went to high school at Valley Forge Military Academy, graduating in 1980. He earned a commission as a second lieutenant upon graduating from the United States Military Academy at West Point in 1984. McMaster earned a Master of Arts and Ph.D. in American history from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC). His thesis was critical of American strategy in the Vietnam War, which was further detailed in his 1997 book Dereliction of Duty.[2]

I would take McMasters conclusion over some third rate fake news shill who makes up stuff and publish propaganda like the Rich hoax.

 

[exGOPer]

I would not call this third rate - according to wikipedia He graduated magna cum laude from Claremont Men's College in 1977 with a degree in political science. He graduated from law school at the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, in 1980, and worked as a defense attorney for several years in San Francisco with the firm of Gordon & Rees LLP. He maintains his California bar license[2] and has taught law as an adjunct professor at New York Law School and lectured at other law schools.[3]

by comparison mcmaster... seems to have no legal training...

McMaster was born in Philadelphia on July 24, 1962.[1] He went to high school at Valley Forge Military Academy, graduating in 1980. He earned a commission as a second lieutenant upon graduating from the United States Military Academy at West Point in 1984. McMaster earned a Master of Arts and Ph.D. in American history from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC). His thesis was critical of American strategy in the Vietnam War, which was further detailed in his 1997 book Dereliction of Duty.[2]

Fox's Jarrett calls grand juries 'undemocratic farce' one day after calling for one for Clinton

This is why Jarrett is a shill, he changes his opinion based on who he is writing about. What more proof do you need.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Clapper's 12 hand picked analysts, that were reported as all 17 intell agencies, wrote the report regurgitating Crowdstrike's russia narrative. They were probably the same analysts who sat around all day finding monitored russians that they could then get rice powers rhodes and brennan to request an unmasking.

If those 12 were to have the book thrown at them, I bet they would have some interesting tales to tell to reduce their sentences.

Oh man, if he republicans only had control of the DOJ we could prosecute these people and get to the bottom of it.