Latest news

If there were nefarious Trump-Russia ties, Rice’s actions prove we’d have known about them BEFORE the election

There is no way this alleged Trump-Russia collusion would not have leaked before Election Day if it was real

(NationalSentinel) Political Corruption: In some intelligence circles online – we’re talking about you, John Schindler of the New York Observer – there is still wild speculation that President Donald J. Trump and his inner circle had some nefarious ties to Vladimir Putin’s government in the months leading up to the election.

But the actions of Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice are proving if those ties existed, we’d have known about them long before Nov. 8.

Why?

Because, as former U.S. attorney and national security prosecutor Andrew McCarthy notes at National Review Online, Rice’s efforts to unmask Trump transition team members and campaign associates had nothing to do with “national security” or “intelligence.” It was a political operation all the way, and as such, had there been any evidence of legitimate Trump campaign – Russia collusion, or anything improper or illicit – Rice  & Co. would have “unmasked” all of it to destroy Trump’s chances for good and ensure a Hillary Clinton victory.

In fact, if there were evidence illegality, who seriously believes Obama would not have ordered his politicized Justice Department to investigate with the intention of indicting suspected Trump campaign officials?

McCarthy notes that White House political appointees don’t do criminal or national security investigations. White Houses don’t do them; the FBI, the NSA and the CIA does them. The White House can request them, but the White House doesn’t do them, which makes Rice’s effort to build intelligence “spreadsheets” and unmask Trump campaign officials highly irregular and suspicious:

Why is that so important in the context of explosive revelations that Susan Rice, President Obama’s national-security adviser, confidant, and chief dissembler, called for the “unmasking” of Trump campaign and transition officials whose identities and communications were captured in the collection of U.S. intelligence on foreign targets?

Because we’ve been told for weeks that any unmasking of people in Trump’s circle that may have occurred had two innocent explanations: (1) the FBI’s investigation of Russian meddling in the election and (2) the need to know, for purposes of understanding the communications of foreign intelligence targets, the identities of Americans incidentally intercepted or mentioned. The unmasking, Obama apologists insist, had nothing to do with targeting Trump or his people.

That won’t wash.

We have to remember that Obama himself downplayed the Russian hacking angle in the weeks after Trump’s victory – which nobody expected and which everyone, including the president himself, believed was in the bag for Clinton.

It was only after Clinton lost that the narrative ‘Russia hacked the election to help Trump’ became a thing, which Obama exacerbated by imposing BS sanctions on Moscow in his final days in office, after, according to him, Russia had been engaged in cyber warfare throughout his presidency.

McCarthy notes further:

Consequently, if unmasking was relevant to the Russia investigation, it would have been done by those three agencies. And if it had been critical to know the identities of Americans caught up in other foreign intelligence efforts, the agencies that collect the information and conduct investigations would have unmasked it. Because they are the agencies that collect and refine intelligence “products” for the rest of the “intelligence community,” they are responsible for any unmasking; and they do it under “minimization” standards that FBI Director James Comey, in recent congressional testimony, described as “obsessive” in their determination to protect the identities and privacy of Americans.

Understand: There would have been no intelligence need for Susan Rice to ask for identities to be unmasked. If there had been a real need to reveal the identities — an intelligence need based on American interests — the unmasking would have been done by the investigating agencies.

The national-security adviser is not an investigator. She is a White House staffer. The president’s staff is a consumer of intelligence, not a generator or collector of it. If Susan Rice was unmasking Americans, it was not to fulfill an intelligence need based on American interests; it was to fulfill a political desire based on Democratic-party interests.

Rice was Obama’s right hand, essentially; if she’s doing the asking of intel agencies to unmask Americans caught up in legitimate conversations, are the agencies going to refuse?

This was a political operation all the way, but it was a post-election operation. If the Trump-Russia collusion angle were real, you better believe that damaging evidence on Trump would have been released weeks or months before the Nov. 8 election. It was only after Clinton lost that the Obama/Democrat machine swung into action in an effort to besmirch, discredit and undermine the incoming administration, using it as a way to help “explain” to the party’s base why Clinton didn’t pull it off.

If President Trump wants to get to the bottom of this massive scandal – and he should because it is necessary to restore Americans’ faith in their government – he needs to order the Justice Department to look into this.

Because we know this time, at least, it can’t be blamed on an anti-Muslim video.

1 Trackback / Pingback

  1. So-called Trump “Russia scandal” is an Obama political operation, new evidence proves it | News Flash U.S.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: