Yes, that would be the same Susan Rice who made herself famous fordelivering outright lies on national television about the Benghazi terrorist attack, the nature of which the Obama administration was eager to deliberately distort for political reasons in the thick of a campaign. It would also be the same Susan Rice described by Newsweek as President Obama's \"right-hand woman\" in 2014. As Isaid on air yesterday, this whole Russia meddling\/wiretap saga has become so convoluted and bereft of verifiable facts that it's quite difficult to keep following the plot. Here's my stab at a succinct summation: Ourintelligence agencies and members of relevant committees onboth sides of the aisle all agree that Moscow tried to meddle in the 2016 election. Theirclearpreference was to help Donald Trump and damage Hillary Clinton, whom they assumed would win anyway. The Kremlin has also deployed their propaganda and subterfuge toundermine Republicans, too. Their overarching goal is to undercut faith in the American system. And while there isno factualbasis forPresident Trump's counter-claim that his predecessor ordered his phones to be tapped, there are real indications that some people within Trump's orbit were monitored in some way -- and the series of one-sided leaks on that front does look to many like a deliberate push within elements of the government to damage Trump's presidency. There is alsono evidence that the Trump campaign coordinated or colluded with the Russians. <\/p>\n
One of the latest twists in all of this wasthe claim by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, a Republican, that Trump-tied officials whose communications had been incidentally intercepted (they themselves hadnot been targeted) as a part of foreign surveillance operations had their redacted identities \"unmasked\" last year. Who did this, and why -- especially since the intercepted communications in question allegedly had nothing to do with Russia? Late last week,Fox News' Adam Housley added some meat onto those suspicious bones, citing unnamed sources: <\/p>\n
And nowEli Lake's reporting at Bloomberg appears to confirm what the rumor mill has been buzzing about for days --Rice was at the center of this: <\/p>\n
Lake writes that given what is known about what happened, both the incidental collection and the unmasking were likely conducted within the confines of the law, but the episode raises new questions about (a) why a senior Obama official was so keen to identify the US citizens mentioned or involved in these conversations, (b) whether those conversations had any genuine investigative value beyond political curiosity (Housley's sources say no), and (c) how the existence of some of these conversations ended up gettingmore widely disseminated, eventually leaking into the press. The piecealso reminds readers that Ms. Rice claimed ignorance on the entire subject when she was asked about it a few weeks ago: <\/p>\n
Perhaps there's an innocent explanation for all of this, and perhaps Rice believed she was answering that question accurately. But for previously-alluded-to reasons, it's hardly a stretch to imagine Rice flat-out lying on television. One of the indications that Chairman Nunes really had exposed something significant came last week camewhen the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff-- who has beenloudly attacking his GOP counterpart and spreadingunfounded claims and conspiracies related to the Russia probe -- got a look at the same documents Nunes saw (which led to Nunes'subsequent briefing of both President Trump and the newsmedia). AsRed State points out, Schiff emerged from that session fixated on process, while remaining notably mumon anything pertaining to content. It's not unreasonable to hypothesize that he read the documents and realized that something damaging lies within. Maybe that something was Barack Obama's lightning-rod NSA repeatedly requesting the unmasking of Trump officials' communications for dubious reasons. <\/p>\n
For months, Democrats have insisted that the Russian meddling side of this story is the only thing thatmatters. While I agree that probes into those disquieting issues are justified and important, I've also taken the national security leak element of the controversy quite seriously. These new developments demand further inquiry and real answers. And today's introduction of an untrustworthy partisan actor within the previous president's inner-most circle into the mix all but guarantees that this story is about to become more politically explosive. I'll leave you withthis column by the Wall Street Journal's Kim Strassel: <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
See the original post here: Yes, that would be the same Susan Rice who made herself famous fordelivering outright lies on national television about the Benghazi terrorist attack, the nature of which the Obama administration was eager to deliberately distort for political reasons in the thick of a campaign. It would also be the same Susan Rice described by Newsweek as President Obama's \"right-hand woman\" in 2014. As Isaid on air yesterday, this whole Russia meddling\/wiretap saga has become so convoluted and bereft of verifiable facts that it's quite difficult to keep following the plot Continue reading
\nOh My: Former Obama NSA Susan Rice Reportedly Directed Dubious 'Unmasking' of Trump Allies - Townhall<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"