. . . 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.–National Sentinel, April 5, 2017
What is so astonishing about the revelation that Ms. Rice was the one unmasking Donald Trump and his campaign before, during and after he won the presidency is that it doesn’t get any closer to Barack Obama himself.
Ms. Rice was Mr. Obama’s national security adviser, one of his closest aides. They spoke all the time. She worked directly for him. Here she was spying on Mr. Obama’s political enemies while in daily contact with him at the very height of the most contentious presidential election in memory. You don’t think she and the president discussed this?
The revelation that Ms. Rice was the operator behind the spying answers just one question. But it raises a thousand more.
When, exactly, did Ms. Rice start using the U.S. government’s spy operation as a weapon against Mr. Obama’s political opponents?
What conversations did she have with the president about the intel gleaned about Mr. Trump and other political enemies of Mr. Obama?
As was asked of an earlier president amid far smaller crimes: What did the president know, and when did he know it? . . . And a constitution crisis that raises dire questions about whether any American citizen is safe from the espionage thuggery of the politically powerful (begins).–Charles Hurt, Washington Times, April 6, 2017
Yes, Barack Obama’s silence is deafening. Which is to say the former president has really stepped into it this time. And Susan Rice is a very dubious defender of the former president. Recall that Ms. Rice is the same person that said the Benghazi attack that resulted in the death of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens was the resulted of a video, Innocence of Muslims. No, this clearly looks like a case of the President of the United States using his office and its intelligence apparatus to go after his political opponents, in which there is not one whit of difference between his actions and the former Gestapo of the Third Reich. I love it when the Zionist Fourth Estate now defends such malarkey, yet at every turn cries Anti-Semitism when things don’t go the Democrat’s way. Charles Schumer–SHAME; Dianne Feinstein–SHAME; Los Angeles Times–SHAME; Adam Schiff–SHAME.