Remember how the mainstream media scoffed last spring when President Trump claimed the Obama administration spied on his campaign? As it turns out, Trump was right – the FISA Court authorized monitoring of Trump campaign aide Carter Page and, perhaps more egregiously, the FBI monitored Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort during and after the campaign. But still, few in the mainstream media have acknowledged this, preferring instead to stand by their original narrative. Similarly, the mainstream media ignored Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice when she copped to authorizing the unmasking of Trump campaign officials in intelligence reports – an act of political retribution that Rice justified by claiming she was just trying to determine why a crown prince of the UAE was paying a clandestine visit to New York. As it turns out, nearly a year after the scandal surrounding Rice’s unmasking, DNI Dan Coats – America’s top intelligence official – has ordered tighter restrictions on how the names of Americans kept secret in intelligence reports can be revealed during presidential transitions, according to documents seen by Reuters.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Dec 8, 2017.
Remember how the mainstream media scoffed last spring when President Trump claimed the Obama administration spied on his campaign? As it turns out, Trump was right – the FISA Court authorized monitoring of Trump campaign aide Carter Page and, perhaps more egregiously, the FBI monitored Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort during and after the campaign. But still, few in the mainstream media have acknowledged this, preferring instead to stand by their original narrative. Similarly, the mainstream media ignored Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice when she copped to authorizing the unmasking of Trump campaign officials in intelligence reports – an act of political retribution that Rice justified by claiming she was just trying to determine why a crown prince of the UAE was paying a clandestine visit to New York.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Dec 8, 2017.
For the better part of a year now Americans have speculated over precisely what pressing national security issue may have prompted the Obama administration to take the extreme measure of unmasking the names of Trump officials captured in foreign intelligence reports…you know, because bypassing the typical warrant process and violating an American citizen’s fourth amendment protections is kind of a big deal. So what was it…intelligence concerning an imminent terrorist attack…concrete evidence that Putin stole Hillary’s emails? No, according to CNN, National Security Advisor Susan Rice ultimately made the call to unmask Trump officials because Obama was offended that the crown prince of the United Arab Emirates traveled to New York last December, after the election mind you, without giving him a heads up first.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Sep 13, 2017.
In the days following the September 2012 terrorist attack on the Benghazi embassy in Libya, the Clinton State Department and Obama White House launched an all-out media propaganda blitz designed to convince Americans that the whole thing had been sparked by an ‘insensitive’ YouTube video that Muslims in Libya apparently found offensive. As you’ll undoubtedly recall, Susan Rice became the face of that propaganda blitz after appearing on every major TV network to blatantly lie to the American public.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Sep 13, 2017.
The United States shows the world such a ridiculous face that the world laughs at us. The latest spin on ‘Russia stole the election’ is that Russia used Facebook to influence the election. The NPR women yesterday were breathless about it. We have been subjected to ten months of propaganda about Trump/Putin election interference and still not a scrap of evidence. It is past time to ask an unasked question: If there were evidence, what is the big deal? All sorts of interest groups try to influence election outcomes including foreign governments. Why is it OK for Israel to influence US elections but not for Russia to do so? Why do you think the armament industry, the energy industry, agribusiness, Wall Street and the banks, pharmaceutical companies, etc., etc., supply the huge sum of money to finance election campaigns if their intent is not to influence the election? Why do editorial boards write editorials endorsing one candidate and damning another if they are not influencing the election? What is the difference between influencing the election and influencing the government? Washington is full of lobbyists of all descriptions, including lobbyists for foreign governments, working round the clock to influence the US government. It is safe to say that the least represented in the government are the citizens themselves who don’t have any lobbyists working for them. The orchestrated hysteria over ‘Russian influence’ is even more absurd considering the reason Russia allegedly interfered in the election. Russia favored Trump because he was the peace candidate who promised to reduce the high tensions with Russia created by the Obama regime and its neocon nazis – Hillary Clinton, Victoria Nuland, Susan Rice, and Samantha Power. What’s wrong with Russia preferring a peace candidate over a war candidate? The American people themselves preferred the peace candidate. So Russia agreed with the electorate.
For months now, many have speculated that Obama’s former National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, was the controversial figure behind all the unmaskings of Trump associates in the waning days of Obama’s final term in the White House. That said, new details seem to suggest that Rice’s successor as U. N. Ambassador, Samantha Power, may emerge as the administration’s convenient scapegoat is this particular scandal. As the Washington Free Beacon points out today (via some anonymous sources so take it with a grain of salt), Power appears to be central to efforts by top Obama administration officials to identify individuals named in classified intelligence community reports related to Trump and his presidential transition team. If true, Power’s role in the unmasking efforts would be particularly questionable since it’s nearly inconceivable that her position as the U. N. ambassador would require such sensitive unmasking activities. “Unmasking is not a regular occurrence – absolutely not a weekly habit. It is rare, even at the National Security Council, and ought to be rarer still for a U. N. ambassador,” according to one former senior U. S. official who spoke to the Washington Free Beacon. “It might be defended when the communication in question relates directly to U. N. business, for example an important Security Council vote,” explained the former official, who would only discuss the matter on background. “Sometimes it might be done out of other motives than national security, such as sheer curiosity or to defend a bureaucratic position. Or just plain politics.”
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Jul 20, 2017.
The following video was published by X22Report on Jul 18, 2017 Obamacare failed, it was being replaced with the same insurance, let it fail and then people will see the true nature of what this insurance ponzi scheme has created. New study and it shows America pays the most of insurance and it is dead last in providing health care to its people. Susan Rice and the creator of the dossier have backed out of testifying in front of congress. Legislation has been passed to go after human trafficking. US admits that NK does not have the capability to hit the US. Turkey close to signing deal with Russia for the S-400 missile system. Lebanon military preparing to take control of the border with Syria. The Pentagon releases new report, it concludes that the US empire is collapsing.
The following video was published by X22Report on Jul 13, 2017 The health bill that is being pushed is the same as Obamacare, they are trying to convince the public that it is different. The walls are closing in around the elite, the case against Trump Jr has now turned and the focus is on Obama, Loretta Lynch, Susan Rice, Comey and many others. China is building a base in Djibouti which will expand the belt and road initiative. Ukraine is ripe for another coup. The US says it liberated Mosul, but it was really the Iraqi’s, the US (deep state) created this problem and just sat and watched the IS take over Iraq. Trump is working on another ceasefire with Russia. Marcron and Trump announced the mission is not to remove Assad. The coalition is not making lists of the IS paid mercenaries, the lists are also being compiled of those who were involved in this agenda.
For months now, Senator Lindsey Graham has been trying to get an answer to a very simple question, namely ‘if his conversations are ‘incidentally’ captured while he’s overseas talking with a foreign leader who’s being surveilled by the U. S. intelligence community and his name is subsequently unmasked, is he, as a United States citizen and/or as a U. S. Senator, legally entitled to know that he’s been unmasked?’ And while the entire world is being distracted by the “Russian meddling” narrative, Graham’s question highlights the single most important issue that should be “top-of-mind” for Americans as it gets to the heart of whether the various intelligence agencies in this country can be transformed into political weapons of mass destruction. As we pointed out a couple of months ago, the timing of Susan Rice’s requests to unmask conversations conducted by Trump officials that were ‘incidentally collected’, and the subsequent leaking of that information to the press, would seem to highlight the urgent need for clarity on this topic (see “Confirmed: Susan Rice “Unmasked” Trump Team“).
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Jun 27, 2017.
Back in April, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA request for documents related to the unmasking of ‘the identities of any U. S. citizens associated with the Trump presidential campaign or transition team’ by Obama’s National Security Advisor Susan Rice. Unfortunately, and quite conveniently for members of the Obama administration, Judicial Watch has been informed by the National Security Council that records related to their request can not be shared because they ” have been transferred to the Barack Obama Presidential Library” and will “remain closed to the public for five years.” Here is the full letter received from the National Secruity Council: “Documents from the Obama administration have been transferred to the Barack Obama Presidential Library. You may send your request to the Obama Library. However, you should be aware that under the Presidential Records Act, Presidential records remain closed to the public for five years after an administration has left office.”
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Jun 20, 2017.
Susan Rice vehemently dismissed Russian President Vladimir Putin’s denials that Russia meddled in the 2016 U. S. presidential election, during a Sunday morning interview on ABC’s “This Week”. Following Putin’s comments during a press conference last week that “patriotic minded” private Russian hackers unconnected to the government could be behind major hacks that interfered in other nation’s elections… ‘If they are patriotically minded, they start making their contributions – which are right, from their point of view – to the fight against those who say bad things about Russia,’ And denials of any Russian government involvement in hacking… “We don’t engage in that at the state level.”
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Jun 4, 2017.
While it was not surprising that as part of the ongoing probe into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 elections, the House Intel Committee issued a total of seven subpoenas on Wednesday as the WSJ reported, what was surprisng is that in addition to four subpoenas focusing purely on the Russia investigation, the Republican-led committee also issued three subpoenas focusing on “unmasking” questions, involving how and why the names of associates of President Donald Trump were unredacted and distributed within classified reports by Obama administration officials during the transition between administrations. As part of the “unmasking” investigation, in addition to the NSA, the House committee also subpoeaned the FBI and the CIA for information on how and why Trump-linked names were exposed to the entire US intel community, and led to an avalanche of “unnamed sources” stories. Recall that typically information about Americans intercepted in foreign surveillance is redacted, even in classified reports distributed within the government, unless a compelling need exists to reveal them. Unmasking requests aren’t uncommon by top intelligence community officials but Republicans want to know whether any of the unmaskings of Trump campaign officials during the transition were politically motivated. According to the WSJ, Republicans on the committee have been pushing for a thorough investigation of how the names of Trump campaign officials became exposed in classified intelligence reports based off intelligence community intercepts. Specifically, the three “unmaksing” subpoenas seek information on requests made by former national security adviser Susan Rice, former CIA Director John Brennan and former United Nations Ambassador Samantha Power for names to be unmasked in classified material.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on May 31, 2017.
Before we get into the meat of this post, it’s important to refresh our memories on what the unmasking scandal is and why it’s important. In order to do that, let’s revisit excerpts from last month’s post, If What Susan Rice Did Wasn’t Illegal, It Should Be: U. S. citizens who are caught up incidentally in foreign intelligence surveillance are typically subject to minimization rules to conceal their identities, though there are some exceptions. Individuals can be exempt from the minimization rules if their identities are necessary to understand the value of the foreign intelligence. Paul used Monday’s development to renew his push for reform of a controversial provision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that allows the U. S. intelligence community to target non-Americans outside the United States without a warrant. The provision, Section 702, is up for renewal later this year.