Susan Rice is who we thought she was

[fskimospy]

ok so then it should be an easy process of finding the one who received her request then and provided the information, how does that absolve her of responsibility of disseminating that information from that point onward?

You have no evidence that she is the one who disseminated it outside of authorized channels. If you do, please provide it.

Are you now implicitly saying that your previous accusation against her that she was the sole individual that possessed this was false? Please confirm.

 

[hal2kilo]

Instead of being snarky and defensive maybe you should just admit that what you said there was wrong. You said you were open to changing your mind, so here's your chance to prove it.

As to how unmasking works, does this even really need to be explained? Rice is a consumer of intelligence, she is not someone who generates it. That's the NSA's job. When a consumer of intelligence gets a report it will reference 'US Person 1' or whatever. Rice can then direct the NSA to unmask that individual at which point they will replace 'US Person 1' with their actual name. I mean what, did you think she had some safe somewhere with everyone's name in it?

She actually can't direct anything. The IC does not always approve the unmasking requests.

 

[Thebobo]

ok so then it should be an easy process of finding the one who received her request then and provided the information, how does that absolve her of responsibility of disseminating that information from that point onward?

Diversion

 

[snarfbot]

You have no evidence that she is the one who disseminated it outside of authorized channels. If you do, please provide it.

Are you now implicitly saying that your previous accusation against her that she was the sole individual that possessed this was false? Please confirm.

the only evidence i have is that she already lied once regarding this, theres a video in the op where she claims to know nothing about this, when she was the one who unmasked him. or requested the unmasking. she claims she didnt leak it of course, but she lost her credibility because shes a liar.

its possible that there are more people who had this information, i concede that, if she was tipped off to it then by whom, shes the only one who can answer that.

 

[fskimospy]

Provide the evidence please or admit that you don't have any. I really am getting tired of morons on here who are too proud to admit they are wrong.

The FBI conducting an investigation into it is prima fascie evidence unless you are accusing them of grossly inappropriate behavior. Are you?

 

[fskimospy]

the only evidence i have is that she already lied once regarding this, theres a video in the op where she claims to know nothing about this, when she was the one who unmasked him. or requested the unmasking. she claims she didnt leak it of course, but its not valuable because shes a liar.

its possible that there are more people who had this information, i concede that, if she was tipped off to it then by whom, shes the only one who can answer that.

That video does not show her lying in any way, as wolfe already said you are misrepresenting it.

 

[HomerJS]

so susan rice used her authority to unmask the identities of us citizens caught up in incidental spying and leaked it to the press breaking the law, and then lied about it. to which your response is: "Diversion!"

your counterargument is profoundly weak then, and the only explanation would be that you're trolling or wearing very thick partisan blinders, either way the conversation is over.

Stupid and gullible in the same sentence. First part doing her job. Second part no evidence whatsoever. But I forgot Alex Jones and Fox News telling you what to think.

 

[emperus]

the only evidence i have is that she already lied once regarding this, theres a video in the op where she claims to know nothing about this, when she was the one who unmasked him. or requested the unmasking. she claims she didnt leak it of course, but she lost her credibility because shes a liar.

its possible that there are more people who had this information, i concede that, if she was tipped off to it then by whom, shes the only one who can answer that.

Here is the transcript of her interview and answer. Read it and admit that you're a Fox News Flunkie.

 

[Meghan54]

I've worked with classified material in the past, have you?

You know he hasn't by his self-inflicted ignorance.

I also worked with classified material while I was in the Army...had a security clearance....Top Secret with special intelligence access. Saw raw data all the time.

Snarfboy just is willfully ignorant on this subject, amongst many others, so trying to explain to him that many others in the chain of collection of intelligence actually see names, etc., prior to masking. Cannot work any other way.

 

[snarfbot]

Here is the transcript of her interview and answer. Read it and admit that you're a Fox News Flunkie.

so she totally denies having knowledge of the intelligence that she herself completed by unmasking.

how exactly is it misrepresenting that by calling that statement a lie?

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I'm suspicious when an inactive account suddenly becomes very active diverting from Trump/Russia ties.

*Edit was to clean up my grammar because Putin told me to.

 

[Jhhnn]

The best part of all of this is how easily conservatives fall for misdirection plays.

It all began from honest concerns about Russian hacking & meddling in the election. I mean, let's face it- they are not our friends. Yet our conservative friends don't even examine the idea that being on the same side of a political battle as the Russians might not be very smart, that it might not be good for America. They're trying to get as far away from that as possible.

Trump invites Russian hacking? No problem.

Various figures in the Trump entourage have strong Russian ties? No Problem.

Roger Stone apparently knows Podesta's email was hacked before the ROTW? No problem.

The Russians release hacked info thru Wikileaks in a obvious ploy to influence the election? No problem.

Russia deploys a troll army to tear down Clinton & puff up the Donald? No problem.

Flynn is forced out over Russian ties? No problem.

Sessions lies under oath about Russian contact? No problem..

Donald concocts a story about Obama tapping his phone to distract from Sessions' lie? No problem.

The head of the Congressional committee tasked with investigating shuttles back & forth in obvious collusion with the Trump admin, spreading lies as he goes? No problem.

The National Security Adviser directs that names of the Trump entourage communicating with the Russians be unmasked for internal IC community purposes & the Congressional investigators get the same info for their investigation? OMFG! Huge Problem!

But only if you're truly desperate to enter denial & disregard the truth.

 

[snarfbot]

yea okay, i must be a rnc paid disinfo guy right, a shame all the leaks were for the dnc so theyre the only ones who are proven to use paid protesters and disinfo posters on forums and social media manipulating public discourse.

 

[theeedude]

I am OK gettiing her under oath and finding out who on Trump team was talking to the Russians.
She was national security adviser, if Russians were colluding with US politicians, it was her job to know who with.

 

[emperus]

so she totally denies having knowledge of the intelligence that she herself completed by unmasking.

how exactly is it misrepresenting that by calling that statement a lie?

All this may be complicated for you.
First off you have to understand (Unmasking does not equal disclosure)
Now, read the question. The question was referring to identities being caught up and disclosed. In the last sentence she admits that there was lawful legal surveillance with the potential of incidental collection. She is saying she has no idea what Nunes was talking about regarding disclosing people's identities. And also remember this interview was before the story was released. Unmasking identities and who was unmasked is classified info that she wouldn't be talking about.

Edit:
Btw here is part of an article from Wall Street journal
A Republican official familiar with deliberations by GOP lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee said that the names of two U.S. citizens who were part of Mr. Trump’s transition team have been unmasked in intelligence reports.

One is Mr. Flynn and the other hasn’t been identified, said the official. The report involving Mr. Flynn documented phone conversations he had in late December with the Russian ambassador to the U.S.

The official said Ms. Rice had requested the unmasking of at least one transition official—not Mr. Flynn—who was part of multiple foreign conversations that weren't related to Russia.

Mr. Flynn was forced to resign after misleading White House officials, including Vice President Mike Pence, about the nature of his conversations with the ambassador, which current and former officials said concerned the possible easing of Obama-era sanctions on Russia.

The Republican official and others said Ms. Rice wasn't the administration official who instigated Mr. Flynn’s unmasking.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

so she totally denies having knowledge of the intelligence that she herself completed by unmasking.

how exactly is it misrepresenting that by calling that statement a lie?

She acknowledges the normal course of duties and the statement of facts regarding the nonexistent illegal actions of Obama.

Nunes made a federal case if you will out of something. Is Nunes so out of touch with his own work that he doesn't understand the day to day lawful actions of that which he is involved in? I suppose he could have been that incompetent, but if that's not the case then he must have been referring to some extraordinary disclosure or was he just being a grandstanding hack? In any event Rice has no knowledge behind the rather silly allegations some insist on making.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

See its at it again with the paid protester stuff.

 

[hal2kilo]

I am OK gettiing her under oath and finding out who on Trump team was talking to the Russians.
She was national security adviser, if Russians were colluding with US politicians, it was her job to know who with.

I say let her testify away. She has nothing to hide.

 

[snarfbot]

All this may be complicated for you.
First off you have to understand (Unmasking does not equal disclosure)
Now, read the question. The question was referring to identities being caught up and disclosed. In the last sentence she admits that there was lawful legal surveillance with the potential of incidental collection. She is saying she has no idea what Nunes was talking about regarding disclosing people's identities. And also remember this interview was before the story was released. Unmasking identities and who was unmasked is classified info that she wouldn't be talking about.

so she knows nothing about it then? which would be a lie, and is what she said. or that she knows all about it and hes making a big stink about nothing, which is not exactly what she said, but i guess with some mental gymnastics you could take that interpretation, but then why say she knows nothing about it?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

See its at it again with the paid protester stuff.

Paid or free it's obviously not about subject but manipulation. Sometimes it is fun to play along.

 

[snarfbot]

I'm suspicious inactive account suddenly becomes very active diverting from Trump/Russia ties.

See its at it again with the paid protester stuff.

very good, youre adding alot to this discussion.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I say let her testify away. She has nothing to hide.

Indeed. Let's get that hero of the people, Nunes, to start up the hearings with her testifying unfettered by the Committee.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

It was a sarcastic response to your post there

But I'll repeat a good idea. Let her and the other members Nunes did not allow to testify to freely do so. Nunes should reverse his actions and restart the hearings. That should satisfy everyone if they want more information.

 

[snarfbot]

ill make sure to check back when everything is resolved, and remind you all of how wrong you were. thanks for playing folks.

 

[Jhhnn]

I'm suspicious inactive account suddenly becomes very active diverting from Trump/Russia ties.

Troll armies never sleep. They work in shifts around the clock & have been at it for years, creating a plethora of personas all across the internet & social media. Multiple shifting personas creates certain illusions useful to their employers. How many different people can you pretend to be in a 12 hour shift? How much packaged bullshit can you spread in the process?