Top Obama Adviser [Susan Rice] Sought Names of Trump Associates in Intel

[Brian4Liberty]

Top Obama Adviser Sought Names of Trump Associates in Intel (http://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-03/top-obama-adviser-sought-names-of-trump-associates-in-intel)
By Eli Lake - April 3, 2017


White House lawyers last month learned that the former national security adviser Susan Rice requested the identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump transition and campaign, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

The pattern of Rice's requests was discovered in a National Security Council review of the government's policy on "unmasking" the identities of individuals in the U.S. who are not targets of electronic eavesdropping, but whose communications are collected incidentally. Normally those names are redacted from summaries of monitored conversations and appear in reports as something like "U.S. Person One."

The National Security Council's senior director for intelligence, Ezra Cohen-Watnick, was conducting the review, according to two U.S. officials who spoke with Bloomberg View on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly. In February Cohen-Watnick discovered Rice's multiple requests to unmask U.S. persons in intelligence reports that related to Trump transition activities.
...
The intelligence reports were summaries of monitored conversations -- 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. One U.S. official familiar with the reports said they contained valuable political information on the Trump transition such as whom the Trump team was meeting, the views of Trump associates on foreign policy matters and plans for the incoming administration.
...
But Rice's multiple requests to learn the identities of Trump officials discussed in intelligence reports during the transition period does highlight a longstanding concern for civil liberties advocates about U.S. surveillance programs. 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.
...
Indeed, much about this is highly unusual: if not how the surveillance was collected, then certainly how and why it was disseminated.
...
More: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-03/top-obama-adviser-sought-names-of-trump-associates-in-intel

-----

[Edit: Ron Paul discusses]

Susan Rice Spy Scandal: Was Trump Right? And What It Means. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfhDqeGiacs)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfhDqeGiacs

[ghengis86]

This is huge! Watergate x 1,000. And not a peep on the front page of CNN or their Political page! Lolololol

[enhanced_deficit]

Not looking good for last regime's handlers if allegations are confirmed.

Going by this controversial meme, same advisor was implicated in spreading lies about Benghazi 9/11 attack.


http://susan.politifake.org/image/political/1503/benghazi-bergdahl-based-the-best-information-have-date-what-politics-1427321992.jpg

[AngryCanadian]

This is huge! Watergate x 1,000. And not a peep on the front page of CNN or their Political page! Lolololol

Yup other libaerl news sites are still catching on when will CNN?

[MRK]

Senator Rand Paul‏
@RandPaul

Smoking gun found! Obama pal and noted dissembler Susan Rice said to have been spying on Trump campaign.

https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/848940890236256260

[Madison320]

Here's the part that get's me about all of this. The FBI or whoever admits that they have been investigating Trump. But they say they weren't looking at his phone/email conversations. So what exactly were they doing? I'm guessing that 99.99% of "investigating" is looking at electronic communications!

[r3volution 3.0]

The intelligence reports were summaries of monitored conversations -- 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. One U.S. official familiar with the reports said they contained valuable political information on the Trump transition such as whom the Trump team was meeting, the views of Trump associates on foreign policy matters and plans for the incoming administration.

No one else finds it odd that Trump people were discussing sensitive campaign information with foreign officials?

[enhanced_deficit]

Senator Rand Paul‏
@RandPaul



https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/848940890236256260


https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/681152691461042177/_PrgDgFA_bigger.jpg Senator Rand Paul‏ Verified account @RandPaul (https://twitter.com/RandPaul)

Smoking gun found! Obama pal and noted dissembler Susan Rice said to have been spying on Trump campaign.



Retweets 8,173
Likes 10,904


9:50 AM - 3 Apr 2017





Media neocons, war lobbies, Obama/Rice , Syria/Benghazi lobbies etc probably not going to be happy with this tweet.

[ghengis86]

No one else finds it odd that Trump people were discussing sensitive campaign information with foreign officials?

The campaign was over; it was the transition team. What were they discussing?

[r3volution 3.0]

The campaign was over; it was the transition team. What were they discussing?

I have no idea. The anonymous source quoted in the article said they were discussing "valuable political information." My point is, if this was the sort of information which would have been politically valuable to the Dems (that's the thesis here, right?), why discuss it with foreign officials? It's just odd. "Hey PM of Malaysia, let me lay out for you my political strategy for the first 100 days, which is super sensitive and must not be shared with all those people you know in the Democratic Party..." Doesn't make much sense.

[dannno]

Media neocons, war lobbies, Obama/Rice , Syria/Benghazi lobbies etc probably not going to be happy with this tweet.

http://c9.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/Obama%20%20golf%20course.jpg

[UWDude]

I have no idea. The anonymous source quoted in the article said they were discussing "valuable political information." My point is, if this was the sort of information which would have been politically valuable to the Dems (that's the thesis here, right?), why discuss it with foreign officials? It's just odd. "Hey PM of Malaysia, let me lay out for you my political strategy for the first 100 days, which is super sensitive and must not be shared with all those people you know in the Democratic Party..." Doesn't make much sense.


Because the Dems were looking for anything they could to hang Trump and his administration on.
Oh, and Trump family members were included. That is why Trump called Obama a "sick guy" in his tweet.

[r3volution 3.0]

Because the Dems were looking for anything they could to hang Trump and his administration on.
Oh, and Trump family members were included. That is why Trump called Obama a "sick guy" in his tweet.

Another interpretation would be that the anonymous source is exaggerating, and there was nothing of political value in the conversations between Trump people and foreign officials under surveillance for unrelated reasons, because that would make sense, since it's hard to imagine why Trump people would be sharing such information with foreign officials in the first place.

[dannno]

Another interpretation would be that the anonymous source is exaggerating, and there was nothing of political value in the conversations between Trump people and foreign officials under surveillance for unrelated reasons, because that would make sense, since it's hard to imagine why Trump people would be sharing such information with foreign officials in the first place.

It didn't even say they were sharing politically valuable information.

[UWDude]

It didn't even say they were sharing politically valuable information.


Yeah, he is arguing semantics. Even if that term was used, it could have broad meaning, he is trying to narrow it down into something nefarious.


Another interpretation would be that the anonymous source is exaggerating, and there was nothing of political value in the conversations between Trump people and foreign officials under surveillance for unrelated reasons, because that would make sense, since it's hard to imagine why Trump people would be sharing such information with foreign officials in the first place.

That is basically what happened. The best they could come up with was "muh Russia!"

[r3volution 3.0]

It didn't even say they were sharing politically valuable information.

...


The intelligence reports were summaries of monitored conversations -- 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. One U.S. official familiar with the reports said they contained valuable political information on the Trump transition such as whom the Trump team was meeting, the views of Trump associates on foreign policy matters and plans for the incoming administration.

[dannno]

...

Right, it says the intelligence reports contained valuable political information on the Trump transition. It didn't say the Trump transition team was sharing valuable political information with Russian officials.

[r3volution 3.0]

Right, it says the intelligence reports contained valuable political information on the Trump transition. It didn't say the Trump transition team was sharing valuable political information with Russian officials.

I didn't say anything about Russians. I just said foreign officials. And that's exactly what the article said.


the intelligence reports were summaries of monitored conversations -- 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. One U.S. official familiar with the reports said they contained valuable political information on the Trump transition such as whom the Trump team was meeting, the views of Trump associates on foreign policy matters and plans for the incoming administration.

If the reports contained "valuable political information" that's because the conversations they were SUMMARIZING did.

[AZJoe]

No one else finds it odd that Trump people were discussing sensitive campaign information with foreign officials?

Silly R3, No one has even alleged Trump people were "discussing sensitive campaign information with foreign officials." They merely alleged conversation (minimal a that) with the Russian diplomats. [oh nooo - diplomacy - don't want to develop rapport, or possibilities for good relations and trade - how disastrous]
The .01% or less of communication with Russian diplomats was merely a pretext to cast a dragnet over the other 99.99 percent of communications that actually did contain sensitive campaign information.

What is peculiar is why merely conversing with a diplomat would be so sensationalized. Obama while running for president in 2008 met with diplomats from Afghanistan, Iraq, Jordan, Israel, Germany, France, UK and probably more. He even held rallies and campaign speeches in foreign countries such as Germany. Of course many major presidential candidates now take a requisite meeting with Israel government leaders. Candidate Trump had a private closed door session with the president of Mexico. Candidate Hillary had such conversations with diplomats from Egypt, Japan, and Ukraine. But hey even limited diplomacy with a Russian diplomat - oh my, time for hysterics.

Its also quite interesting that the same folks getting all bent out of shape over even speaking to a Russian diplomat are quick to completely ignore the real elephants of foreign involvement in US politics: Saudi Arabia and Israel, or McCain or Graham's love-fest outings and photo shoots with ISIS and Al Qaeda, or campaign activities on behalf of neo-nazi coup, or Hitlary's mega millions from foreign governments.

The real story here is the Stasi-Gate: the use of the stasi to spy on political opponents.

[UWDude]

Mike Cernovich was the first to break this story, and did so 12 or more hours before Eli Lake and Bloomberg. He also claims the Washington Post and New York Times knew over a week ago it was Susan rice who had ordered the unmaskings, but they decided not to publish one of the biggest scoops in US presidential history.

this is one of his newer tweets:
https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/849032245725679617
https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/849032245725679617

MaggieNYT We know who leaked everything to you illegally and have proof. :)

He isn't bluffing folks. His sources are real and accurate.

Fact of the matter is, they did all this spying thinking President Hillary Clinton would cover it up like she and President Obama covered everything else up.

[UWDude]

Rand Paul weighs in again:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-03/rand-paul-rice-should-testify-under-oath-if-obama-ordered-her-unmask-trump-team


“If it is allowed, we shouldn’t be allowing it, but I don’t think should just discount how big a deal it is that Susan Rice was looking at these and she needs to be asked, ‘Did President Obama ask her to do this? Was this a directive from President Obama? I think she should testify under oath on this.” Paul told reporters.

“I think she should be asked under oath, did she reveal it to The Washington Post. I think they were illegally basically using an espionage tool to eavesdrop or wiretap — if you want to use the word generally — on the Trump campaign,” Paul said.

[enhanced_deficit]

http://c9.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/Obama%20%20golf%20course.jpg

Dissembler-in-chief.





https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8fv5dmVYAAx9Df.jpg
RICE 'UNMASKED' (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/03/susan-rice-requested-to-unmask-names-trump-transition-officials-sources-say.html)


http://www.drudgereport.com/i/logo9.gif (http://www.drudgereport.com/)

[UWDude]

Cernovich sasy he got the info from sources inside the media that refused to publish. In particular, he says his sources are mostly IT guys. In this case, botht he New York Times and Bllomberg knew Rice had ordered the unmaskings, but decided not to print, because it would help Trump.

He also says "this is the warm up, more is to come, slowly but surely"

[jmdrake]

No one else finds it odd that Trump people were discussing sensitive campaign information with foreign officials?

Sorry...but how does "Ways the DNC is screwing Bernie Sanders" = "sensitive campaign information?"

[Brian4Liberty]

Not looking good for last regime's handlers if allegations are confirmed.

Going by this controversial meme, same advisor was implicated in spreading lies about Benghazi 9/11 attack.

http://susan.politifake.org/image/political/1503/benghazi-bergdahl-based-the-best-information-have-date-what-politics-1427321992.jpg

In fairness to a standard lying official, they can do that all they want unless they are under oath. But I suppose just saying that means you are colluding with Putin to undermine these good and honest politicians and bureaucrats.

[Brian4Liberty]

Susan Rice is changing her tune today. A couple of weeks ago, she knew nothing about any unmasking. Today it's "oh, that unmasking". Now her defense is that she didn't leak any of the information she procured. She may have leaked, she may not have, but clearly their strategy was to disseminate the unmasked info as far and wide as possible so that "leakers" would be harder to identify. She and Obama leaked it internally, so that it could then be leaked and used publicly.

[AZJoe]

Rand Paul: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-03/rand-paul-rice-should-testify-under-oath-if-obama-ordered-her-unmask-trump-team

The Kentucky senator called the unmasking an “enormous deal” ... "I think they were illegally basically using an espionage tool to eavesdrop or wiretap — if you want to use the word generally — on the Trump campaign,” ... "Is there a possibility that Susan Rice was politically motivated? Let’s ask her why she was opening up all of the conversations with Trump transition figures.”

[Brian4Liberty]

...
Fact of the matter is, they did all this spying thinking President Hillary Clinton would cover it up like she and President Obama covered everything else up.

No doubt that was their primary plan. It would help Hillary win, which they all thought would happen anyway, and she would bury it nice and deep.

Fallback plan, which they probably thought was unlikely, was to make sure that this was all leaked, in hope that something would stick and they could divert, obstruct and possibly impeach Trump. It worked to take down Flynn, and it has worked to the extent that they and their MSM partners could screech 24x7 for weeks about "Russia!"

Unfortunately for them, their conspiracy left fingerprints, and they are being exposed, and in danger of some real consequences.

[Jan2017]

Susan Rice at the center again - and again politically motivated as it was in 2012. (Don't tell MSNBC)

Susan Rice Is Still Lying
Susan Rice at the center of another scandal? Yes, and she's lying about it on TV again.

(2012) . . . Evidence flowed in that she and the president and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knew it was a terrorist attack.
But everyone claimed otherwise for more than a week. They had an election to win. The media gently helped them lie.
http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/l-brent-bozell-iii/susan-rice-still-lying