(04-03-2017 02:19 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: (04-03-2017 02:13 PM)TechRocks Wrote: (04-03-2017 01:59 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: I will Crimson because you guys have STILL failed to realize that Rice was likely well within any applicable laws. Sorry.
Look! Over there! Shiny!
Again, please explain to me why the National Security Adviser would be prohibited from unmasking Americans swept up in surveillance of foreign actors if warranted for national security issues?
It's right there in the Bloomberg piece you're basing all your glee on my good man.
Man, if you're playing dumb, you've got a huge lead.
You keep arguing points NO ONE has tried to make. NO ONE has said Rice was prohibited from unmasking Americans swept up in surveillance of foreign actors if warranted for national security issues.
What is illegal is passing that information on to those not authorized to have it, like in the case of Flynn's conversation at the end of December which was leaked to the press. That's illegal.
Until today there was lots of speculation about who might have leaked that info and other data to the press. Until today there was lots of speculation as to whether the White House knew anything at all about said information or if the WH could possibly have been involved in the leaking. Maybe it was a mole in the NSA, maybe the CIA, maybe the FBI, maybe all of them.
Today, we now have ONE NAME, more possibly to come, of who was unmasking names from the intelligence. And who is it? None other that Obama's right hand woman.
I know you like playing obtuse, but the potential traps in this story are YUGE.
Oh, almost forgot, this is getting very ugly for Trump.