Posted on 04/04/2017 9:48:59 PM PDT by Trump20162020
WASHINGTON — She has been here before. After the 2012 attack on an American diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya, Susan E. Rice was at the center of conflict, her statements scrutinized and criticized. Now she finds herself back in the cross hairs as her handling of intelligence involving President Trump’s associates comes into question.
A longtime Democratic foreign policy official who served as President Barack Obama’s last national security adviser, Ms. Rice has become an inkblot test in the controversy over Russian meddling in last year’s election. Republicans see a partisan who mined intelligence reports to spy on Mr. Trump’s team. Democrats see a scapegoat tarred for doing her job and used as a distraction from an F.B.I. investigation into Mr. Trump’s associates.
At issue are her requests for the identities of Americans caught up in electronic surveillance of foreigners, as cited in reports provided to her by intelligence agencies: Americans who were affiliated with Mr. Trump. Ms. Rice went public in her own defense on television and Twitter on Tuesday, neither confirming nor disputing that she made such requests but arguing that any she might have made were proper and necessary, not part of political espionage against the Trump campaign.
“The allegation is that somehow the Obama administration officials utilized intelligence for political purposes,” Ms. Rice told the journalist Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC. “That’s absolutely false.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Not even going to read it.
“Political crosshairs”? How about “may have broken the law”? It’s all just politics when Dems get caught.
“tarred for doing her job”
Here we go again. But spying on political opponents without a court order is not in her job description.
Team Obama never does goes all in trying to block a story unless someone is in danger of going to prison.
If it made to the NYT, they are in serious trouble.
Time for McCain to ride to the rescue again.
The fact that the NYT is even commenting on this means the Obama camp is in trouble. The NYT is the cover for the Marxists and the attack dog for Nationalists.
From the paper that had the story, but tried to sit on it and hide the truth from the American people.
McCain must immediately give Rice immunity for her testimony.
Only then can we learn the truth!
Ha, ha.
A proper headline would point out she’s been caught lying twice about different international scandals.
Note the utter falsity and deception carefully crafted into NYT White House Correspondent Peter Baker's article.
He focuses on the scrutiny and criticism of Rice's statements, rather than describing in detail how Rice, acting under Obama's direct orders, deliberately lied to the nation about how the Benghazi attack was motivated by some video that nobody had ever seen, rather than the terrorist attack that the Obama regime knew it was from the start.
People who get their news from the liars at the New York Times are either uninformed or misinformed, due to deliberate omissions and deceptions such as this one.
Note the utter falsity and deception carefully crafted into NYT White House Correspondent Peter Baker's article.
Baker focuses on the scrutiny and criticism of Rice's statements, rather than describing in detail how Rice, acting under Obama's direct orders, deliberately lied to the nation about how the Benghazi attack was motivated by some video that nobody had ever seen, rather than the terrorist attack that the Obama regime knew it was from the start.
The intent of propaganda such as this is to deliberately distract the reader in order to shield Obama and his agents from culpability. The slant of the article is "as usual, it's those terrible Republicans and Trumpists who are making a lot of noise and false accusations about our Dear Leader and Savior Barack Obama."
People who get their news from the liars at the New York Times such as Peter Baker end up being either uninformed or misinformed, due to deliberate omissions and deceptions such as this one.
I like to use the term “malinformed”...which fits the NYT.
I think the “Russian meddling in our election” theme has been played for months in an attempt to avert attention from the meddling done by the Obama administration and Hillary campaign.
My scorecard reads:
1. no Russian meddling
2. widespread corruption by Obama and Hillary
I love it!
It perfectly captures the journalistic malpractice which is the default modus operandi for the crew of leftist disinformation demagogues on the payroll of the New York Times.
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.