Posted on 04/04/2017 10:06:51 AM PDT by ForYourChildren
Sounds to me as though about eight years ago, or whenever the Obama Administration appointed Rice the position of National Security Advisor they figured anybody as dumb as her they could use someday to take a fall for the cause. /s
Only CNN Idiots confuse Unmasking and Leaking. And, perhaps some Dem Senators and Congressmen.
Also, FYI and for CNN Idiots:
ob·fus·ca·tion
noun
The action of making something obscure, unclear, or unintelligible.
"when confronted with sharp questions they resort to obfuscation"
Doesn’t it depend on whether unmasking is pursuant to a national security investigation?
subpoena her to testify under oath!
No idea about the legal aspects, but it has certainly derailed the narrative and put the Rats on defense. Even if she escapes prosecution she will damage Obamsa legacy, and for rats that may be worse punishment.
Sorry; wrong link.
Rand Paul suggested she testify under oath.
She will plead the 5th when that happens. No doubt.
Why the /s ?
Your statement is absolutely correct.
Violating these provisions does more than violate mere regulatory restrictions; violating these provisions violates the Constitutional rights of Americans. That is why the law criminalizes such action when taken “under color of law” by rogue agents.
The law imposes criminal sanctions on government officials who “engage in electronic surveillance under color of law except as authorized” by statutes and governing regulations implementing those statutes. This same criminal law makes a person “guilty of an offense” if she intentionally “discloses or uses information obtained under color of law by electronic surveillance, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained” in a manner “not authorized” by law. Notably, the law enforcement defense is limited to “law enforcement or investigative officer” cleared to do so by a search warrant or court order. The crime imposes a term of imprisonment up to sixty months in a federal prison. The point of the law criminalizing rogue agents either intercepting Americans’ conversations illicitly or unmasking they identities illegally is to protect against rogue government agents from abusing the most powerful surveillance means ever developed to invade the free speech, free thought, free expression and intimate privacy rights of all Americans.
“I leaked nothing to nobody”, translated: “I leaked something to everyone.”
“If I did leak, it was unintentional depending on what the definition of unintentional is”
A top unknown source within the Democrat party has said “we don’t know anything about anything”
Rice is adopting the strategy that has served her so well in the past — deny, deny, deny, and lie.
The game is that she be eloquent and wordy enough in her spiel that the politicians and the MSM will have enough other collateral topics to ask her about and ignore and evade the principal subject.
Susan Rice!!! You have some ‘splainin to do. All that education, and you dare to use a double negative?
“I leaked nothing to nobody.”
Rice is responding SPONTANEOUSLY to a YouTube VIDEO!!
Look out folks!!!
Why is an educated woman reverting back to her ancestor style language?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.