So NOW it's Susan Rice that's guilty, since the Obama thing didn't work out

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by JayMysterio, Apr 5, 2017.

  1. JayMysterio macrumors 6502

    JayMysterio

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    Location:
    Rock Ridge
    #1
    http://www.vox.com/world/2017/4/4/15177640/susan-rice-unmasking

    "Susan Rice, President Obama’s final national security adviser, has all of a sudden become public enemy No. 1 in Trumpworld. In a Wednesday interview with the New York Times, President Trump suggested that she had criminally misused classified information for political purposes.

    “Do I think [she committed a crime]? Yes, I think,” the president told the Times’ Glenn Thrush and Maggie Haberman. “It’s such an important story for our country and the world. It is one of the big stories of our time.”

    Trump’s comments are in reaction to a series of recent reports — published in Fox News, Bloomberg View, and elsewhere — that have claimed that Rice asked the intelligence community to provide the names of Trump transition officials who had been caught speaking to foreigners who were under surveillance by US spies. Typically these names are redacted in transcripts, but high-level US officials can request them on occasion — a process called “unmasking.” Even if these reports these are true, there is no evidence that Rice’s behavior was illegal (it’s unclear what crime, precisely, Trump thinks she Rice committed)."

    Sigh! :rolleyes: Can we hurry and get to blaming Hilary again, so we know we've blamed everyone?
     
  2. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #2
    They're just doing anything they can to distract the media and public.

    Good luck with that ploy.
     
  3. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #3
    Both Obama, and Rice along with any future person(s) Trump makes baseless accusations about, need to sue Trump for defamation. I would.
     
  4. JayMysterio thread starter macrumors 6502

    JayMysterio

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    Location:
    Rock Ridge
    #4
  5. A.Goldberg macrumors 68000

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #5
    If this is legitimate, that the Obama Administration was spying on Team Trump, it would have serious implications. If this is all just nonsense, I think it will have a high likelihood of ruining any last bit of credibility Trump possesses (hard to imagine he has any left... the boy who cried wolf).

    The media is so split on this issue. CNN barely acknowledgs it and has essentially dismissed it entirely. Fox is going nuts. Bloomberg I believe is the network that originally broke the story.

    I think it's seriously a matter worth investigating due to the severity of the charges. The truth always comes out in wash though.
     
  6. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #6
    As I said about the Russian investigation, let's get to the bottom of it as quickly as possible and deal with the people involved if they are.
     
  7. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #7
    When interviewed today by the New York Times, trump deflected questions about evidence to back his claims, saying something like, "you [the NYT] have the information."

    Again ... the man is a pathological liar. How many times do we need to see it before it finally sinks in?
     
  8. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #8
    Possible since they did not expect trump to win by such a landslide
     
  9. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #9
    There's an ongoing investigation as to whether he was lieing or not. If it comes out as true that members of his team were targeted for unmasking and disseminated it's going to be a new ballgame.

    I expect Rice to plead out if she has to testify though.
     
  10. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #10
    I think there needs to be a take a number to be investigated machine for all the crap that needs to be investigated under trumps regime. it has to be some kind of record to have so many investigations in so little time.
     
  11. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #11
    Well when both sides make claims without solid evidence it makes it pretty easy to start up an investigation.
     
  12. A.Goldberg macrumors 68000

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #12
    Well that is what the investigation would be for. If the Trump administration had all the evidence there would be no need to investigate :confused: It's not Trump who reported this story originally. It's absolutely wrong for him to call her guilty, but I think this is one of those examples of Trump poorly phrasing his response. I interpret his words to mean more investigation is required.

    I will say I think Donald Trump has a "reality distortion field" (I believe that's the correct term loosely applied, often applied to Steve Jobs). Trump will try to say things and say them over and over again until facts can be uncovered to fit the narrative. But in the end the facts don't usually fit well and thus creates the need for "alternative facts". Just keep pushing the same story until facts get uncovered that fit loosely.

    There is a lot of talk of improprieties on both sides during this election... some of which has turned out to be true, some of it displaying concerning patterns. Given the amount of intelligence governments have through technology, I find it important to ensure fraudulent means are not being utilized to sway elections. Whether that be Russian hacking, fake news, improper use of US intelligence, etc. Maybe this is all one giant goose hunt, but I think it's important to know what we're dealing with, especially for the future.
     
  13. forcesteeler macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    #13
    This is the same guy that said Obama spied on him, When ask for evidence he has nothing?

    Damn Donald Trump is the ultimate Con Man, You got idiots that would believe anything he said!.
     
  14. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #14
    Susan Rice, at the time this was alleged to have occurred, was the National Security Adviser to (then) President Obama.

    By law, whenever NSA surveillance reveals a US citizen or resident either mentioned, or in direct contact with a foreign target, the NSA is required to redact the name, and simply refer to them as "US person 1", "US person 2" etc. in the transcripts they release to intelligence customers such as Congress.

    However, it certainly is not unknown or unprecedented for individuals and agencies with the appropriate clearance to request the NSA reveal those redacted names. And as Natl. Security Adviser, Rice certainly would have both.

    It certainly is not a crime for a person with the appropriate clearance to ask for - and receive - the redacted information. And there certainly is no evidence to suggest that Rice then became the source of the leaks that revealed names of Flynn and other Trump campaign officials.

    There is no "smoking gun" to suggest that Susan Rice committed a crime. There isn't even a gun at all.
     
  15. A.Goldberg macrumors 68000

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #15
    All you said is true however a pattern of unmasking Trump officials at every chance in her position is suspicious... if that is indeed the case. Is it typical to unmask the names of your political opponent in communication whenever possible? I guess the question is why would you go out of your way to to do that.

    Trump is not the one who initially brought this situation to light. The media did.
     
  16. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #16
    I'm not sure any "pattern" of unmasking Trump officials exists, and certainly not that Susan Rice is the source of such information.

    A little perspective is in order. At the time this was alleged to have occurred, Susan Rice was working closely with people in the Trump campaign on the transition. She was briefing her potential replacements as to the critical national security issues that they would soon be taking on. As Natl. Sec. Advisor, she is notified that (for example) the Russian Ambassador is overheard discussing the potential reversal of US sanctions with "US person #1" and "US person #2."

    Under those circumstances, it is entirely appropriate that she ask exactly who is in direct communications with the Russian Ambassador. She needed to know who she could trust with our nation's most closely guarded secrets, and those people who were likely to casually pass them on to agents of a foreign power.

    If there is wrongdoing or criminal activity here, it's the fact that so many Trump people were regularly discussing issues of critical national security with agents of a foreign power not totally allied to the interests of the United States.

    That is the crime. Not the fact that Susan Rice was doing her job.
     
  17. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #17
    I think you're looking at this backwards. Rice is given reports that cite people anonymously. So how could she unmasking trump officials "at every chance" when she doesn't know the identity of who she is unmasking? How can she target people when she doesn't know the identity of those she's supposedly targeting?

    And your claim that the media brought it up, not trump, ignores the possibility of that rumor being fed to the press by sources working for the White House.
     
  18. A.Goldberg macrumors 68000

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #18
    Its my understanding that situation has come to light because of a pattern in the unmasking requests by Rice. Now, what one person considers a pattern and what another person considers a pattern can be two different things. I'm not sure how you can discount the possibility of a pattern without actually seeing the evidence- which of course we don't have. The interpretation however comes from the National Security Council.

    If someone says there is a pattern who is privy to the evidence, "I don't think there is a pattern" doesn't sound like a qualified response. Unless you have direct knowledge of the findings and the inner workings of unmasking requests, I'm not sure how one can draw that conclusion.

    The only way to determine the meaning of this all I believe is to do an investigation. One of two things happens. It's found Rice utilized her position and power to uncover political information. OR Team Trump fails again at finding evidence of espionage and looks bad.

    My opinion is simply based on what's stated in the initial Bloomberg report. I find it cocerning a month ago Rice refuted any incidental monitoring of the Trump team. My interest has nothing to do with politics, just a concern for the proper freedoms of Americans and the election process. Like I said... if it turns out to be nothing, then it's nothing.
     
  19. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #19
    Now the investigators are under investigation. We are going to have so many investigations going on, that nothing else will get done. Some would say maybe that's a good thing, but I don't think it is. I just think it's a mess.

    That's what happens when a chaos candidate gets elected: chaos. Making America Crazy Again.
     
  20. PracticalMac macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #20
    Of course it deserves a complete investigation, but Trump is tossing so many wrenches it gets derailed every time any progress is made.

    So far everything revealed by proper sources said Obama did not order any wiretaps on Trump, there was no direct taps in Trump Tower, nothing directly aimed at Trump or his team. Rice used her legal authority to unmask (but not reveal) a few names, but again not a direct investigation at/of Trump.

    As long as Trump keeps Tweeting, Russia will be a front page item.
     
  21. JayMysterio thread starter macrumors 6502

    JayMysterio

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    Location:
    Rock Ridge
    #21
    I think where your pattern theory runs into problems, is what it's based on...

    “The standard for senior officials to learn the names of U.S. persons incidentally collected is that it must have some foreign intelligence value, a standard that can apply to almost anything,” Lake writes. “This suggests Rice's unmasking requests were likely within the law.

    Moreover, his story contains a vital detail to understanding this. He notes that the intercepted conversations “were primarily between foreign officials discussing the Trump transition, but also in some cases direct contact between members of the Trump team and monitored foreign officials.”

    This means that Rice wasn’t sifting through the Trump administration’s internal conversations to find their secrets. Either the Trump transition officials were sharing these vital secrets with foreign officials, on calls they should have known were being monitored, or the foreign officials had learned this information somewhere else and were discussing it among themselves."

    The pattern that Rice was using was based on communications with foreign officials, that happened to include Trump team officials.

    Also thing to consider is that the Bloomberg report also featured the 'anonymous source', that tends to be selectively favored. I guess in this case, they are back to being okay.
     
  22. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #22
    This. The pattern is emerging because of the collusion of the trump officials with the Russians, not because Rice was targeting them. That's the most logical conclusion.
     
  23. noekozz macrumors 6502a

    noekozz

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Location:
    212/201
    #23
    I just find it sad that we're forced to investigate every tweet or statement this lunatic makes. When are people going to finally stop listening to the boy who cried wolf every other day. smh. Lump this accusation along with the rest, you know, inauguration crowd, 3M illegal votes, Obama wiretaps.... at some point people will just become numb to this nonsense.

    About the only positive thing this man has done so far is getting rid of Steve Bannon (although he'll now be like Casper the ghost in the WH), and I'm pretty sure it wasn't 100% his decision alone.
     
  24. eatrains macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2006
    #24
    Does anyone seriously believe conservative conspiracy theories anymore?
     
  25. jpietrzak8 macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #25
    Umm... This particular boy who is crying wolf also happens to be the leader of the most powerful military on the planet. It's kinda dangerous to not listen to what he's saying...
     

Share This Page