Obama Official Admits to MSNBC She Helped Spy On Trump

[Kaos]

Rice has been caught saying two different things in multiple occasions about multiple things. Bannon has given one statement about his exit from the NSC. LYIN SUSAN.

And you obviously don't know much about this guys background if you don't know why he was put in this position. Call him what you want but he's a master chess player on policy steering. I'm not sure you fully understand how the NSC functions and who can be on it.

He's still the chief strategist. That would indicate there was no animosity. Or bad blood. He's moving back to only being a strategist. That has all the markings of this being purely strategic. If there had been a skirmish or a dust up then he would be gone completely like Flynn.

You are again getting way too caught up in the semantics of the reporting. You are taking headlines and de facto op eds as gold. They are not.

Fucking screeder....

[AUChizad]

Rice has been caught saying two different things in multiple occasions about multiple things. Bannon has given one statement about his exit from the NSC. LYIN SUSAN.

First of all, it's clearly NOT the only statement from him as there are multiple stories out there that he's pissed about it and threatened to resign over it.

Secondly, despite your insinuation, the one statement you are clinging to is NOT contradictory to the fact that it was not his idea to leave. You keep saying it is, but it isn't. The only thing it supports is the theory you're buying that the Breitbart guy is in a unique position to "expose" Rice in some way that NOBODY ELSE on planet earth is capable of doing. Which you continue to cling to from here.

And you obviously don't know much about this guys background if you don't know why he was put in this position. Call him what you want but he's a master chess player on policy steering. I'm not sure you fully understand how the NSC functions and who can be on it.

He's still the chief strategist. That would indicate there was no animosity. Or bad blood. He's moving back to only being a strategist. That has all the markings of this being purely strategic. If there had been a skirmish or a dust up then he would be gone completely like Flynn.

I am well versed on Bannon and I'm fairly certain I knew who he was before you did. You certainly seem to hold him in high esteem. I do not. So the reason he and only he could expose Rice, and also the reason that he only needed 75 days to do it, and the reason why once those 75 days were over he had to pull the parachute ripcord to gracefully stunt-dive out of the NSC is because he's a "master chess player". No one else can do whatever vague thing it is you're hinting he can do. He's just smarter than 99.9% of humanity and everyone else in that .01% just weren't up to Trump's standards. Got it.

You are again getting way too caught up in the semantics of the reporting. You are taking headlines and de facto op eds as gold. They are not.

As is usual, Kaos Jedi mind tricked you into thinking I'M the one getting caught in the weeds over this. He's the one who responded to my mostly-about-Flynn post by "pantsshitting" about how wildly idiotic I am to say Bannon was forced out as did LITERALLY every SINGLE publication that covered the story. It's all #FakeNews unless it came from FreedomFries.AngryBaldEagleInAMAGAHat.biz/Pepe.

[AUChizad]

There is more to the bannon resignation than meets the eye. Some believe he was a hired gun to do something very specific in a short amount of time. Which seems to line up with his statement.

Steve Bannon statement: "Susan Rice operationalized the National Security Council. I de-operationalized it"

Where in that quote does it say "And now that I've completed my mission, I'm going to leave the role of my own volition. Trump begged me to stay, but nay, I must ramble on"?

[GH2001]

First of all, it's clearly NOT the only statement from him as there are multiple stories out there that he's pissed about it and threatened to resign over it.

Secondly, despite your insinuation, the one statement you are clinging to is NOT contradictory to the fact that it was not his idea to leave. You keep saying it is, but it isn't. The only thing it supports is the theory you're buying that the Breitbart guy is in a unique position to "expose" Rice in some way that NOBODY ELSE on planet earth is capable of doing. Which you continue to cling to from here.
I am well versed on Bannon and I'm fairly certain I knew who he was before you did. You certainly seem to hold him in high esteem. I do not. So the reason he and only he could expose Rice, and also the reason that he only needed 75 days to do it, and the reason why once those 75 days were over he had to pull the parachute ripcord to gracefully stunt-dive out of the NSC is because he's a "master chess player". No one else can do whatever vague thing it is you're hinting he can do. He's just smarter than 99.9% of humanity and everyone else in that .01% just weren't up to Trump's standards. Got it.
As is usual, Kaos Jedi mind tricked you into thinking I'M the one getting caught in the weeds over this. He's the one who responded to my mostly-about-Flynn post by "pantsshitting" about how wildly idiotic I am to say Bannon was forced out as did LITERALLY every SINGLE publication that covered the story. It's all #FakeNews unless it came from FreedomFries.AngryBaldEagleInAMAGAHat.biz/Pepe.

Good god dude....I give up.

[GH2001]

Where in that quote does it say "And now that I've completed my mission, I'm going to leave the role of my own volition. Trump begged me to stay, but nay, I must ramble on"?

Have fun with this one. You can argue with yourself now.

[AUChizad]

Screed my ass.  We don't agree.  I'm right, you're wrong but that's okay.  I accept that. You'll figure it out one day.   Certainly doesn't mean that I'm any less intelligent or perceptive than you are just because you shit your pants in a rage.  It's insulting and unnecessary. 

You're ruining the board again.

And another thing?

We DID agree until you lost your everloving shit that I dared to quote EVERY SINGLE HEADLINE IN AMERICA that Bannon was ousted from his position.

I said from the beginning that I thought Rice APPEARED to be more guilty than the Trump administration based on what we know now. That just wasn't enough for you, so you had to start hurling insults about how I need to "educate myself" about something you believe in your mind that is 100% unequivocally bullshit. You cannot ALLOW any sort of level-headed notion that maybe we don't have enough facts at this juncture to proclaim that everyone on the Trump staff are choir boys incapable of wrongdoing.

THAT is how we got here. But I'm ruining the board.

[AUChizad]

Have fun with this one. You can argue with yourself now.

So, it's not there?

Just checking.

[AUChizad]

Aaaand, Nunes is under investigation and just stepped down from the Russia probe, as one does when they are 100% innocent.

[AUChizad]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2017/04/06/susan-rice-is-a-pawn-in-trumps-effort-to-tear-down-the-system/?tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.7c45a66ed442

Nunes is out of the Russia probe, and the Susan Rice spin collapses
By Jennifer Rubin April 6 at 10:13 AM

President Trump’s wild accusation and the right-wing media’s eagerness to support the claims of the Trump White House, working in cahoots with House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), that there was nefarious “unmasking” of Trump associates picked up in surveillance of Russian officials has proved to be a colossal flop. Nunes wound up discrediting himself and implicating White House staffers in a half-baked scheme to deflect attention from the president.

Right-wing outlets (from Fox News to Breitbart to the New York Post) took the bait from Nunes and his associates, dragging Susan Rice into the matter — without evidence of a crime. Indeed, no evidence of impropriety exists and no evidence ties Rice to the leaking of Michael T. Flynn’s name. Given that the White House does not want to release the documents shared with Nunes that allegedly provide the basis for its tale, we can surmise that Nunes really had no evidence of much of anything.

The blatant effort to confuse and distract from the biggest political scandal of our lifetimes — Russian efforts to manipulate our election process and potential coordination with the campaign of the beneficiary of Russia’s “active measures” — does not come as any surprise. However, certain right-wing media outlets’ willingness to echo Trump’s defamatory misdirection tactics remains as distressing as ever. (It was just this sort of echo chamber effect that Russia used during the campaign to help Trump, as Clint Watts recently explained.) Chin-stroking pundits were obliged to say, “Well, both these things are important” (as if the Rice narrative has a factual basis), and the damage thereby done. A serious investigation with extensive factual support becomes no more credible than Trump’s latest tweet.

The episode highlights a worrisome development with regard to our intelligence community. Jack Goldsmith and Benjamin Wittes of Lawfareblog.com explain we run the risk of undoing the “grand bargain” (i.e. intelligence services get robust powers in exchange for equally robust oversight) that allows our intelligence community to operate within a democratic government. They explain:

Today’s crisis is sparked by allegations, both by President Trump and by some House Republicans, of political misuse of the intelligence community by the Obama administration. Whether the allegations are entirely false or turn out to have elements of truth, they put the intelligence community in the cross-hairs, since some of the institutions that are supposed to be key legitimators are now functioning as delegitimators. After all, entirely appropriate investigations of counterintelligence can easily look like inappropriate political meddling, and if the President and the House Intelligence Committee chairman are not merely not defending the intelligence community but are actively raising questions about its integrity, the bargain itself risks unraveling.

And seen in this light, House Speaker Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) stubborn insistence on standing behind Nunes to perpetuate the assault on the integrity of the investigative process stands out as nothing less than unconscionable. Once again, Ryan’s partisanship has undermined his credibility.

Goldsmith and Wittes point out that “if the intelligence community had been in any way targeting the Trump team last year for collection, that should be bad news for the Trump team, since it would imply, in normal circumstances, wrongdoing. Indeed, the whole point of the narrative appears to be to discredit the Russia investigation (or some elements of it) by shifting the story away from Trump connections to the Russian wrongdoing to alleged wrongdoing in the investigation of the Russia matter.” They continue, “This appears to be Trump’s larger aim: To muddle the legitimacy of the intelligence community, and of FISA as a tool in this context, all with the aim of delegitimizing the Russia investigation and, perhaps, of delegitimizing broader internal executive branch checks on the presidency.”

The episode underscores the degree to which we are vulnerable when those in positions of authority — Nunes, Trump, Ryan, the leakers — abuse their trust and turn the most consequential national security investigation of our lifetimes into a circus. Goldsmith and Wittes reiterate that “if the President and the House Intelligence Committee Chairman can discredit an investigation of foreign interference in an American election and collusion with that effort by the president’s campaign by alleging improper political misuse of the intelligence authorities by the prior administration, if leaking FISA intercepts is an accepted way to go after a political opponent, and if nobody can credibly say who’s telling the truth and who’s lying, then the grand bargain has truly failed, with consequences that are hard to fathom.” We should hope that the FBI and the Senate Intelligence Committee — as well as the House Intelligence Committee probe minus Nunes — have the skill and integrity to produce a result in which we can all have confidence.

Jennifer Rubin writes the Right Turn blog for The Post, offering reported opinion from a conservative perspective.  Follow @JRubinBlogger

[Saniflush]

. But I'm ruining the board.

Well now wait a minute, everyone is gonna have to remember that we only have a wall and not a case.

[Kaos]

And another thing?

We DID agree until you lost your everloving shit that I dared to quote EVERY SINGLE HEADLINE IN AMERICA that Bannon was ousted from his position.

I said from the beginning that I thought Rice APPEARED to be more guilty than the Trump administration based on what we know now. That just wasn't enough for you, so you had to start hurling insults about how I need to "educate myself" about something you believe in your mind that is 100% unequivocally bullshit. You cannot ALLOW any sort of level-headed notion that maybe we don't have enough facts at this juncture to proclaim that everyone on the Trump staff are choir boys incapable of wrongdoing.

THAT is how we got here. But I'm ruining the board.

a) I lost nothing. No shit, no pants, no nothing.  I merely laughed at you. Suggested maybe you should look past the headlines. That apparently unleashes a torrent of linked diarrhea and sprayed insults from YOU.  You weren't insulted until you started making the mocking caricature impressions and ranting like a ... well.. bitch. 

2) Yeah, you're ruining the board with your screaming.  It's unseemly.  Dial it back a notch.  Take a breath. Change the Depends.

>) I've told you this before but you're not the sole arbiter of what's sane, logical, rational or level-headed. In fact, you often can't even see any of those things from the limbs upon which you perch yourself.  That's a lesson you're going to have to learn before this is over. 

#anotherthing) Your default position when anyone disagrees with you is to resort to treating those with whom you disagree as inferior both intellectually and culturally. 

@you'reahobokiller

PS:  As of this post, there are 11 responses on this page.  Care to guess how many are yours?  SIX.  More than half.

That qualifies -- in anyone's book -- as shitting the pants, crapping the slacks, ranting, screeding, frothing, screeching or whatever you want to call it. 

#ruiningtheboard

[Kaos]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2017/04/06/susan-rice-is-a-pawn-in-trumps-effort-to-tear-down-the-system/?tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.7c45a66ed442

 

Washington Post

[chinook]

Washington Post

 and an opinion article for the win.

[AUChizad]

and an opinion article for the win.

From a Republican.

[chinook]

From a Republican.

yeah, so? 

[AUChizad]

a) I lost nothing. No shit, no pants, no nothing.  I merely laughed at you. Suggested maybe you should look past the headlines. That apparently unleashes a torrent of linked diarrhea and sprayed insults from YOU.  You weren't insulted until you started making the mocking caricature impressions and ranting like a ... well.. bitch. 

You "merely" excised the one sentence where I say we don't KNOW at this point that the Trump administration is completely clean from my lengthy post about how it seems more likely Rice was acting nefariously and replied to it with the : taunt : emoji.

When I again reiterated my position that I tend to believe the Democrats were more likely guilty of "unethical tactics", with the caveat that that doesn't necessarily preclude the Trump team from being "involved in treasonous activities", you replied very diplomatically with "fuuuuuuck you for even using that term", told me to "stop reacting and think for a minute", and ranted about my bias for NOT saying one side is 100% guilty and the other is 100% innocent without the need to see any proof of that whatsoever.

I then ask how you can be so sure amid all of the resignations and recusements from the Trump team (this before Nunes).

You respond to THAT by calling me flippant, hysterical, and "no better than Trevor Noah, that CNN mommy partsicle Don Lemon or that assflapping Bill Maher". Then you tell me the unequivocal fact that Bannon was forced to resign isn't true, which is akin to telling me the sky isn't blue, and then snidely tell me to "do some research".

I respond by showing you that literally, every single news story reports that what I said is true and what you said is false.

Because it triggers you to be proven unquestionably, flatly WRONG about something, you went off the rails from there calling me a "sheep" for believing the lamestream media including Fox & Breitbart. I'm smug for dealing with facts and reality while you ramble on about some shit that factually never happened with absolutely no source to back up your fantastically false claims. It's not at all smug for you to repeatedly post a slew of  emojis followed by mocking invocation of the name of every publication imaginable because YOU know better, despite not even so much as offering up ANY substantiation to your insane claim.

2) Yeah, you're ruining the board with your screaming.  It's unseemly.  Dial it back a notch.  Take a breath. Change the Depends.

The "I know you are but what am I" defense. Solid. Replying to your bullshit with facts is not screaming, tone police. I know this is your go-to defense when you've painted yourself into an embarrassing corner and I don't just let you out of the headlock. Congrats if that works on your sycophants.

>) I've told you this before but you're not the sole arbiter of what's sane, logical, rational or level-headed. In fact, you often can't even see any of those things from the limbs upon which you perch yourself.  That's a lesson you're going to have to learn before this is over. 

As I said. Disagree all you like, but thinking your side is impervious to guilt and the other side is incapable of anything but evil without any need to see all of the evidence first...that's not "sane, logical, rational, or level headed". It just isn't. I say so and the Oxford English dictionary says so.

#anotherthing) Your default position when anyone disagrees with you is to resort to treating those with whom you disagree as inferior both intellectually and culturally. 

@you'reahobokiller

Link? If anything I've shown restraint in the face of you calling me an idiotic hysterical sheep.

PS:  As of this post, there are 11 responses on this page.  Care to guess how many are yours?  SIX.  More than half.

That qualifies -- in anyone's book -- as shitting the pants, crapping the slacks, ranting, screeding, frothing, screeching or whatever you want to call it. 

#ruiningtheboard

Wow who'da thought in a 2-on-1 back and forth between you and GH2001 vs. myself I'd have almost exactly half of the responses??? Clearly this is evidence that I don't want dialogue and just want to drag the conversation in the mud.

And with that? Fuck you. Congrats, you brought me there. Now you can pretend you didn't say the same thing to me 2 1/2 pages ago.

[Kaos]

yeah, so?

He doesn't get and never has that our contempt isn't for republicans or democrats. Or that those working against our duly elected president come from both sides of the aisle.

It's the same old same old, status quo, shit in my hand and tell me it's a ham sandwich, politics as usual establishment we rejected.  It's the inexorable slide toward big govenment and no personal accountability that's part and parcel of both parties we oppose. It's the cultural and ideological shift away from traditional (normal) ethics and morality we refuse.  We've watched our foreign policy and our identity slip from nationalism and patriotism to globalism and imperialism.  We said enough.

Not to democrats. Not to republicans.  To all. 

Trump may not be the perfect answer.  But my hope is that he kickstarts the revolution. We are the majority.  Like it or not.  All the fragile little snowflakes offended because I refuse to use binary pronouns like "ze" are the minority. 

[Kaos]

You "merely" excised the one sentence where I say we don't KNOW at this point that the Trump administration is completely clean from my lengthy post about how it seems more likely Rice was acting nefariously and replied to it with the : taunt : emoji.

When I again reiterated my position that I tend to believe the Democrats were more likely guilty of "unethical tactics", with the caveat that it that doesn't necessarily preclude Trump team from being "involved in treasonous activities", you replied very diplomatically with "fuuuuuuck you for even using that term", told me to "stop reacting and think for a minute", and ranted about my bias for NOT saying one side is 100% guilty and the other is 100% innocent without the need to see any proof of that whatsoever.

I then ask how you can be so sure amid all of the resignations and recusements from the Trump team (this before Nunes).

You respond to THAT by calling me flippant, hysterical, and "no better than Trevor Noah, that CNN mommy partsicle Don Lemon or that assflapping Bill Maher". Then you tell me the unequivocal fact that Bannon was forced to resign isn't true, which is akin to telling me the sky isn't blue, and then snidely tell me to "do some research".

I respond by showing you that literally, every single news story reports that what I said is true and what you said is false.

Because it triggers you to be proven unquestionably, flatly WRONG about something, you went off the rails from there calling me a "sheep" for believing the lamestream media including Fox & Breitbart. I'm smug for dealing with facts and reality while you ramble on about some shit that factually never happened with absolutely no source to back up your fantastically false claims. It's not at all smug for you to repeatedly post a slew of  emojis followed by mocking invocation of the name of every publication imaginable because YOU know better, despite not even so much as offering up ANY substantiation to your insane claim.
The "I know you are but what am I" defense. Solid. Replying to your bullshit with facts is not screaming, tone police. I know this is your go-to defense when you've painted yourself into an embarrassing corner and I don't just let you out of the headlock. Congrats if that works on your sycophants.
As I said. Disagree all you like, but thinking your side is impervious to guilt and the other side is incapable of anything but evil without any need to see all of the evidence first...that's not "sane, logical, rational, or level headed". It just isn't. I say so and the Oxford English dictionary says so.
Link? If anything I've shown restraint in the face of you calling me an idiotic hysterical sheep.
Wow who'da thought in a 2-on-1 back and forth between you and GH2001 vs. myself I'd have almost exactly half of the responses??? Clearly this is evidence that I don't want dialogue and just want to drag the conversation in the mud.

And with that? Fuck you. Congrats, you brought me there. Now you can pretend you didn't say the same thing to me 2 1/2 pages ago.

^
Poopy diaper.

[RWS]

Aaaand, Nunes is under investigation and just stepped down from the Russia probe, as one does when they are 100% innocent.

I really think you need to understand the "why" behind this, though.  You seem to be fairly reasonable in regards to the whole Russia thing, so I will put it the best that I can.  Back when Nunes came out and said that he had information that reveals that people from the Trump team were surveilled, he was asked if the information that he had resulted from a FISA request or by some other means, he said it appeared that it had to do with FISA.  That in and of itself is considered "classified".  He's being "investigated" because someone (MoveOn.org) filed a written complaint with the Office of Congressional Ethics that he revealed classified information.   The House Intelligence Committee has a rule that says it is mandatory for an investigation to take place if there is an allegation that a member of the committee improperly shared classified information.  This is the investigation we are talking about.

Let's be realistic here.  The "classified information" he mentioned is going to be declassified by the conclusion of the Russia probe.  It's not like the guy sold military secrets.  He simply said that the information collected on a presidential candidate and/or his team was the result of a FISA request.  He's doing the right thing by stepping down, because the left is going to do anything they can to turn this thing sideways.  This sham investigation into Nunes would take away from what is going to eventually happen, which is the public is going to find out that some shady shit took place under Obama those last 6 months.

I really don't think they are going to find some sort of collusion by the Trump campaign.  Apparently they were monitoring his campaign, and it started somewhere around summer 2016.  As much as the left wants Trump gone yesterday, I find it hard to believe that if there was a smoking gun out there, it hasn't been leaked.   

[Kaos]

I really think you need to understand the "why" behind this, though.  You seem to be fairly reasonable in regards to the whole Russia thing, so I will put it the best that I can.  Back when Nunes came out and said that he had information that reveals that people from the Trump team were surveilled, he was asked if the information that he had resulted from a FISA request or by some other means, he said it appeared that it had to do with FISA.  That in and of itself is considered "classified".  He's being "investigated" because someone (MoveOn.org) filed a written complaint with the Office of Congressional Ethics that he revealed classified information.   The House Intelligence Committee has a rule that says it is mandatory for an investigation to take place if there is an allegation that a member of the committee improperly shared classified information.  This is the investigation we are talking about.

Let's be realistic here.  The "classified information" he mentioned is going to be declassified by the conclusion of the Russia probe.  It's not like the guy sold military secrets.  He simply said that the information collected on a presidential candidate and/or his team was the result of a FISA request.  He's doing the right thing by stepping down, because the left is going to do anything they can to turn this thing sideways.  This sham investigation into Nunes would take away from what is going to eventually happen, which is the public is going to find out that some shady shit took place under Obama those last 6 months.

I really don't think they are going to find some sort of collusion by the Trump campaign.  Apparently they were monitoring his campaign, and it started somewhere around summer 2016.  As much as the left wants Trump gone yesterday, I find it hard to believe that if there was a smoking gun out there, it hasn't been leaked.

Hahaha.

A known goat fucker is more grounded, sensible, rational and sane than an alleged hobo killer.