Top Republican: Controversy surrounding Susan Rice unmasking was 'created' by Devin Nunes

Top Republican: Controversy surrounding Susan Rice unmasking was 'created' by Devin Nunes

On occasion I am surprised by someone in the new GOP. In this instant it's Burr..........maybe he had a "brief" moment of honesty and patriotism? He has basically called the Nunes unmasking fiasco BS............as it always was.

 

What we pretty much new already.

 

Susan Rice is a stooge. She is a nasty woman.

 

Nunes didn't "create" anything. He was presented official documentation, and gave his honest assessment. The documents related to recorded surveillance of Flynns phone conversations. The conversations, allegedly "inadvertantly" intercepted by the NSA. Details such as WHEN, and HOW they were collected were revealed to Nunes. More importantly, WHO, and WHEN unredacted versions were provided to Susan Rice. WaPo & NYT published details that could only be known to select individuals privy to the unredacted text. Nunes didn't "create" anything, he exposed it.

 

Boy, and I naively thought the unmasking controversy was created by the person(s) illegally unmasking american citizens for political purposes, in other words by Susan Rice.

 

Too bad then that Republican Sen. Richard Burr, along with the rest of the Senate Intelligence Committee disagree.

 

Surely you did not read the OP article:

But clearly there were individuals unmasked. Some of that became public which it's not supposed to, and our business is to understand that, and explain it." Current and former US intelligence officials have acknowledged that leaking the identities of US persons named in intelligence reports is illegal.

What part of "Susan Rice's unmasking was illegal" don't you understand now?

 

Looking for where in the article it makes the claim Rice was responsible

 

It's a recognized undisputed fact that she does not even attempt to deny.... The real issue is whether that unmasking was criminal, who leaked the unmasked names to the media and whether "incidental" eavesdropping of Trump's campaign was legal.

 

Your story is changing my friend.

 

Not one iota. She unmasked the names, there are open issues related to incidental spying on Trump's campaign and leaking names/intercepts to the media..... The commission hopes to get to the bottom of it and is not jumping to conclusions. None of it appeared in any way shape or form legal and Obama/Hillary spying on Trump and unmasking their name is not exactly kosher.

 

Wait now it's Hillary? Who had no active role in government at the time?

 

There are 2 issues here and people are treating it as 1.

First, Flynn was unmasked. Absolutely nothing illegal about is as Rice had authority to do so. You can blame the law that allows someone to be unmasked for ANY reason, not the one that follows the law.

Second, information learned from the unmasking leaked to the tabloids. That is illegal and hopefully the FBI makes a serious effort to track down the leaker.

These cases make me question whether we allow the press too much freedom in How they protect leakers. It's one thing to protect a source that's giving info that the govt would prefer not to share, it's another thing to aid someone in the commission of a felony. Does a reporter have the freedom to meet with a child molester that's admitted his crimes and then hide that info from law enforcement?

 

Right, spying on Trump's campaign, unmasking and leaking their names had nothing to do with Hillary and her presidential bid. Do you want to buy Brooklyn bridge? It's a real bargain.

 

So your claim is Hillary is responsible or others for her.

If say Jeb was her opponent it wouldn't have mattered. Wouldn't have been anything to unmask.

 

The investigation will determine whether there was a conspiracy, crimes by high ranking members of Obama administration were obviously committed.

Unmasking is a crime, regardless of whether there is anything to unmask.

 

Don't hold your breathe.

 

Don't be too surprised. You know how those sneaky Republicans have been playing you for the past couple of years.

 

Really? Coming from the "154th time is surely the charm" crowd? Interesting

 

fyi, no such thing as too much freedom of press. it would a terrible precedent

 

Huh?

 

Devin Nunes "created" the unmasking that Susan Rice admittedly herself performed? That's an interesting and novel way of looking at things.
What is Richard Burr smoking?

And perhaps he could have cleared up some of this confusion by simply asking Rice if she had indeed misused her authority to unmask the identities of individuals for political gain.

But unfortunately Burr says he wants to "understand" what happened first,
which will be very difficult to do because he's missing a key element without Susan Rice's own account of what she did.
It's like trying to understand Monica Lewinsky's relationship with Bill Clinton
without asking her about her oval office "duties".

Why is the Intelligence Committee chairman going about this so unintelligently?

 

There won't be one.........they can't debunk Burr's comment or the article so a weak troll to distract ensues.........Trump sycophants aren't hard to figure out or lead over a cliff....Trump did and Putin lifted him over the finish line. Trump could not win without Russia rigging the election. Nunes is a useful idiot that has reached his end.

 

Where does it say Burr disagrees? Anything said behind close doors you or CNN would have no knowledge of, so they don't know what of any importance was said. CNN spinning any off hand comments by Burr is meaningless. It is known that she unmasked several Americans. What is of importance is that they were done for political reasons. If that question wasn't asked, expect additional inquires from other sources with more clout than the impotent house intel committee.