The phony Susan Rice story, explained

[bigtree]

ThinkProgress? @thinkprogress 17m17 minutes ago
The phony Susan Rice story, explained http://thkpr.gs/1a72785b100e

Bloomberg’s Eli Lake reported Monday that Rice requested the “unmasking” of third parties whose information is collected during targeted surveillance of other individuals. Conservative media jumped on the claim and reported that it corroborates Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee’s allegation that information about Trump’s transition team had been “incidentally collected” during U.S. government surveillance of foreign officials.

But the reports, which originated from the far-right, fringe corners of the internet, do not reveal any illegal activity or violation of privacy laws. They also provide no support for President Trump’s still entirely-unsubstantiated claim that the Obama administration’s surveillance targeted Trump officials.

The unmasking of unidentified Americans in intelligence reports is within the scope of the job of a national security advisor like Rice. According to Kate Martin, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, Rice’s actions are likely legal and probably do not even raise privacy concerns if the individuals were part of the Trump transition team...

Conversations by foreign government officials are routinely surveilled, and those speaking with ambassadors should expect that their conversations may be wiretapped.

Given Russia’s involvement in the U.S. election, it’s not surprising that Rice would look at intelligence reports on Russia, including conversations by Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. If those conversations were with Americans, it follows that Rice would ask for the names to understand more about the conversation...


read more: https://thinkprogress.org/susan-rice-explained-1a72785b100e

[mopinko]

1. like those suckers arent peaking at shit to their little hearts content. susan rice

was doing her damn job. i get it that they dont know what that means, but. ..

[kentuck]

2. Wouldn't the FISA Court have a role in civilian names on documents?

Susan Rice could not order any surveillance on her own, is that correct?

[AngryAmish]

4. No and yes.

[golfguru]

10. As National Security Adviser

to POTUS, I believe she could order surveillance. But that is not the question. It is outing the American citizens who were caught on FISA orders which could be a problem.

[LiberalFighter]

16. The names were not being outed. Only those with clearance know the names.

[calimary]

3. This is all one needs to know:

"...But the reports, which originated from the far-right, fringe corners of the internet..."

Automatically screams "BOGUS!!!!" and "FAKE NEWS!!!"

[bigtree]

9. it's an orchestrated roll-out

...originating in the WH and furthered by republican chairman Nunes.

Highlights the direct connections between the Bannon WH and right-wing media sources.

[forgotmylogin]

5. They're wringing their hands over this dramatically.

The bottom line is, the Obama administration was in charge. They wouldn't flinch if their own people did the same thing since it's entirely within the scope of the job.

[PdxSean]

6. The phony story isn't for your eyes or ears.

The story is for redistribution by faux news and Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and other right wing media outlets to distribute to their uninformed, gullible, captive audiences who believe Hillary Clinton has killed 40 people and is part of a pedophile ring operating out of a pizza shop in New York City. The phony Susan Rice story is just as much a red herring wrapped in a lie as was and is the Hillary "Lock Her Up!" Clinton emails have proved to be, and it will be just as effective given the entertainment media's inability to do "journalism."

In short, sane and reasonable people know the stories are bullshit, but sane and reasonable people are not the target audience.

[bigtree]

8. I think it is for the general public

...preempting future accusations or prosecutions of Trump associates or the president.

They're hoping to muddy the water on future revelations of misconduct or criminality specifically associated with these reports.

[JI7]

11. yup, like the email crap. most people don't look at details. but they hear stuff and really

important news people like cnn are reporting on it so it must be something.

these people aren't reading newspaper araticles. cnn will give equal airtime to liars instead of just reporting facts .

[TrishaJ]

14. "Masking" and "Unmasking"

remind me of "hanging chads" and "dimpled chads." GOP is trying to muddy the waters with the public, as they successfully did in 2000.

[uponit7771]

15. +1, The Kremlin KKKlan are throwing anything they can against the wall

[DUgosh]

7. I'm predicting

Something more - that's very bad is coming out. This is 45/140 bringing manufacturing jobs to the US, by manufacturing "evidence" to support his wiretap diversion.

[bigtree]

12. kick

[Vinca]

13. Thanks to the Internet vote, none of us has any expectation of privacy.

If a name was unmasked, I'd like to know why it came up in a surveillance of an intelligence target in the first place. Maybe this will force them to make more of it public.