You would think there would be at least one republican who could conduct a hearing and really put the screws to the democrats, but no, there isn't. Maybe Cruz. Put him in charge of this investigation.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Susan Rice’s White House Unmasking: A Watergate-style Scandal
- Thread starter Tsing Tao
- Start date
Normally I wouldnt be to quick to quote Rush Limbaugh, but in this case he is spot on, im trying to quote him but basically he says "Its not as if there isnt already a pattern of behaviour here from the Obama administration," they were spying on everyone, they went after reporter James Rosen, and tapped his shit when he put out a negative article from a leaker, tapped Merkel, etc... etc.... plus you have all the other misuses of power, like the IRS targeting conservatives, its not as if its a stretch to think they did the same thing we already know they did, repeatedly.
Bottom line, from my understanding the president can declassify anything, i think Trump should just declassify all the conversations where Rice unmasked people in his administration, so we can see what they were talking about, that way americans can see exactly what the conversations were that she thought were so crucial to national security.
These Conversations that havent managed to turn up anything so far,( as evidenced by the fact that through all the leaks they still have nothing on Trump or any of his people,) so i think that would be the way to bring the spotlight to it. If they were just talking about golf or something Rice is in deep shit.
Bottom line, from my understanding the president can declassify anything, i think Trump should just declassify all the conversations where Rice unmasked people in his administration, so we can see what they were talking about, that way americans can see exactly what the conversations were that she thought were so crucial to national security.
These Conversations that havent managed to turn up anything so far,( as evidenced by the fact that through all the leaks they still have nothing on Trump or any of his people,) so i think that would be the way to bring the spotlight to it. If they were just talking about golf or something Rice is in deep shit.
Last edited:
This pattern had its origin under the G.W. Bush administration in the wake of 9/11 and has continued under the Obama administration, and I'm certain is continuing today under the Trump administration. This is what the Snowden revelations were about. To suggest that this is somehow unique to the Obama administration is to mislead. What may have started as the use of routine NSA eavesdropping to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election may have ensnared the Trump administration. As a result, Trump and his confidants may now be the focus of the investigation as much as Russian operatives and their possible connections to Putin, and his confidants.Normally I wouldnt be to quick to quote Rush Limbaugh, but in this case he is spot on, im trying to quote him but basically he says "Its not as if there isnt already a pattern of behaviour here from the Obama administration," they were spying on everyone, they went after reporter James Rosen, and tapped his shit when he put out a negative article from a leaker, tapped Merkel, etc... etc.... plus you have all the other misuses of power, like the IRS targeting conservatives, its not as if its a stretch to think they did the same thing we already know they did, repeatedly.
Bottom line, from my understanding the president can declassify anything, i think Trump should just declassify all the conversations where Rice unmasked people in his administration, so we can see what they were talking about, that way americans can see exactly what the conversations were that she thought were so crucial to national security.
These Conversations that havent managed to turn up anything so far,( as evidenced by the fact that through all the leaks they still have nothing on Trump or any of his people,) so i think that would be the way to bring the spotlight to it. If they were just talking about golf or something Rice is in deep shit.
Trump's fawning over Putin during the campaign, and Trump's campaign operatives' intervention to get the Republican Party's Platform stance on U.S. sanctions softened in the wake of Russia's hostile annexation of Crimea hasn't gone unnoticed. Is there more than a casual connection between Russian interference in the U.S. election and the Trump campaign, a quid pro quo? Perhaps; perhaps not. But one would have to be deaf dumb and blind not to notice, and not to wonder.
Last edited:
This pattern had its origin under the G.W. Bush administration in the wake of 9/11 and has continued under the Obama administration,
Except that the Bush administration wasnt notorious for abusing the authority, and they werent notorious for weaponising the government against political opponents. Sure Bush is to blame for starting it, but it went to a whole new level under Obama.
Nixon had no knowledge of the Watergate break in until after it occurred. But his attorney general knew, thought it was an incredibly stupid idea, said so, but did not tell the President nor do anything to stop it. Others in the administration had advance knowledge as well, and did nothing to stop it. Nixon would have served out his term had he thrown everyone with prior knowledge, or directly involved, under the bus. It was the cover-up that he actively participated in that did him in. When he told Haldeman that "...when the President does it, it is not illegal," his arrogance sealed his fate.
Trump's mental disorder would seem to make him even more likely to succumb to arrogance. We shall see.
Trump's mental disorder would seem to make him even more likely to succumb to arrogance. We shall see.
It is not clear to me that this is not an "alternative fact" , which in other contexts might be confused with opinion.but it went to a whole new level under Obama.
Nixon had no knowledge of the Watergate break in until after it occurred. But his attorney general knew, thought it was an incredibly stupid idea, said so, but did not tell the President nor do anything to stop it. Others in the administration had advance knowledge as well, and did nothing to stop it. Nixon would have served out his term had he thrown everyone with prior knowledge, or directly involved, under the bus. It was the cover-up that he actively participated in that did him in. When he told Haldeman that "...when the President does it, it is not illegal," his arrogance sealed his fate.
Trump's mental disorder would seem to make him even more likely to succumb to arrogance. We shall see.
So are you saying that Obama is Nixon, and he had no knowledge, or he did have knowledge but was better at covering it up?
Cause Susan Rice qualifies as this thing going right to the top, unless you believe he didnt know what one of his top confidantes was doing.
It is not clear to me that this is not an "alternative fact" , which in other contexts might be confused with opinion.
The IRS targeted political opponents under his watch.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRS_targeting_controversy
The NSA targeted reporters/political opponents under his watch:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...788030e6b44_story.html?utm_term=.3990ceeab7b5
Sheryll Atkinson:
While not provable seems pretty obvious based on precedent.
Obama admin/DOJ targeted leakers like no one in history this is according to left wing sources, its not alternative facts, its the left wing media suddenly getting amnesia due to hatred of Trump.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015...ime-of-all-prior-u-s-presidents-combined.html
Is the ACLU lying?
ACLU legislative counsel Gabe Rottman noted last October:
The Obama administration has secured 526 months of prison time for national security leakers, versus only 24 months total jail time for everyone else since the American Revolution.
Obama admin sets new record for denying FOIA requests.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/obama-administration-sets-new-record-withholding-foia-requests/
And now we know that his administration was spying on the incoming president without a centella of evidence, the guy who just so happened to opposed every single one of his ideas, on his watch.
But hey he always claimed he knew nothing about it, so i guess he is innocent.
These are only alternative facts if the only stations youve been listening to are propublica and NPR for the last 8 years.
Last edited:
So are you saying that Obama is Nixon, and he had no knowledge, or he did have knowledge but was better at covering it up?
Cause Susan Rice qualifies as this thing going right to the top, unless you believe he didnt know what one of his top confidantes was doing.
I don't see a connection between Nixon and Obama. I am not aware of anything that Obama has done that might be criminal, under U.S. law at least, for which any evidence has been proffered. Not yet anyway. (There seems to be a surfeit of innuendo however.) My comment re Nixon was simply to remind us how much trouble one can get in if they think they are above the law and actually act on that. It seems to me that Trump's narcissism might make him susceptible to arrogant behavior that could potentially get him in a lot of trouble. That's what ultimately brought Nixon down. He eventually participated in crimes thinking that as President he could get away with it.
You mentioned Rice. It would be highly illegal to use the National Security apparatus for partisan political purposes. She strikes me as a very stable and extremely competent person, and not in he least arrogant or unbalanced. I can't imagine she would risk doing something so foolish that would wreck her integrity and ruin her for life.. What led Nixon to criminal activity, who, like Trump, suffered from a personality disorder, was his belief that things that were crimes when ordinary people did them were not crimes when the president did them. I don't see either Rice or Obama doing that sort of thing. But, nevertheless the conspiracy and "deep state" folks will have a field day.
There are two committees investigating, plus the FBI, and god knows who else. I am confident we will get down to the facts eventually.
Funny how no 'unmasking' was done for the Hillary campaign
By Jack Hellner
Why hasn't anyone asked James Clapper, James Comey, or Susan Rice why no calls were inadvertently picked up on Hillary Clinton or any of her campaign team? If the government had been worried about collusion, wouldn't they have listened in on both sides?
Former national security adviser Susan Rice went to that probing investigative reporter Andrea Mitchell for her only interview. Mitchell asked Rice if the leaking or unmasking was done for political reasons. Rice was offended, and she said no one from the Obama administration would dream of doing that for political reasons. Then Mitchell said, did you leak anything?, and the brilliant Rice said, I didn't leak nothing on nobody. Andrea then must have thought, I did my job, and we know Susan has never lied before.
CNN and a lot of the media aren't covering the Rice story at all, but when the Associated Press, the New York Times, and others report it, many say the Trump administration is trying to divert attention from the Trump-Russia collusion story. The media present the Trump-Russia collusion story as true even though there is absolutely nothing yet to show that. They present the claim that Trump was spied on as a false story even though we have 100% proof that Trump people were listened to and that the information was leaked to the press.
Anyone who believes that Trump wasn't specifically targeted for political reasons probably still believes that the Benghazi killings were caused by a video, that Obama had no idea the IRS was targeting political opponents, that Obama had no idea Hillary was violating the law by using a non-secure server until three years after she left, that Obama had no idea his administration was gun-running to Mexico, and that Hillary and her aides had no intent to break the law.
The media and Democrats should be absolutely ashamed that they haven't had any concern about facts for a long time. If there is any collusion, it is between the media and Democrats to destroy Trump, no matter what the facts are.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog...asking_happened_for_the_hillary_campaign.html
By Jack Hellner
Why hasn't anyone asked James Clapper, James Comey, or Susan Rice why no calls were inadvertently picked up on Hillary Clinton or any of her campaign team? If the government had been worried about collusion, wouldn't they have listened in on both sides?
Former national security adviser Susan Rice went to that probing investigative reporter Andrea Mitchell for her only interview. Mitchell asked Rice if the leaking or unmasking was done for political reasons. Rice was offended, and she said no one from the Obama administration would dream of doing that for political reasons. Then Mitchell said, did you leak anything?, and the brilliant Rice said, I didn't leak nothing on nobody. Andrea then must have thought, I did my job, and we know Susan has never lied before.
CNN and a lot of the media aren't covering the Rice story at all, but when the Associated Press, the New York Times, and others report it, many say the Trump administration is trying to divert attention from the Trump-Russia collusion story. The media present the Trump-Russia collusion story as true even though there is absolutely nothing yet to show that. They present the claim that Trump was spied on as a false story even though we have 100% proof that Trump people were listened to and that the information was leaked to the press.
Anyone who believes that Trump wasn't specifically targeted for political reasons probably still believes that the Benghazi killings were caused by a video, that Obama had no idea the IRS was targeting political opponents, that Obama had no idea Hillary was violating the law by using a non-secure server until three years after she left, that Obama had no idea his administration was gun-running to Mexico, and that Hillary and her aides had no intent to break the law.
The media and Democrats should be absolutely ashamed that they haven't had any concern about facts for a long time. If there is any collusion, it is between the media and Democrats to destroy Trump, no matter what the facts are.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog...asking_happened_for_the_hillary_campaign.html