Posted on 05/26/2019 9:31:40 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
When U.S. intelligence agencies gather information on foreigners, often the name of a U.S. citizen or entity will be collected. Under current U.S. law, information about innocent citizens gathered in this way is referred to as incidental collection. Their names and data must be masked to protect their privacy.
Authorized government officials, under certain conditions, may “unmask” the identity of an individual.
In October 2017, Powers testified before a closed session of the House Intelligence Committee. Then Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) spoke to Fox News’ Brett Baier afterward and said:
Her testimony is they [the unmasking requests] may be under my name, but I did not make those requests.
I think if she were on your show, she would say those requests to unmask may have been attributed to her, but they greatly exceed by an exponential factor the requests she actually made…So, that’s her testimony, and she was pretty emphatic about it.
So, we’ve got to get to the bottom of that. If there is someone else making requests on behalf of a principal in the intelligence community, we need to know that because we’re getting ready to reauthorize a program that’s really important to the country, but also has a masking component to it. When John Bolton served at the United Nations, he “unmasked” the identities of three individuals. In the year leading up to the 2016 presidential election, then-U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Powers unmasked over 260 Americans.
On September 20, 2017, Fox News reported that the remarkable number of Americans who had been unmasked at Powers’ request “was an attempt to uncover associates of President Trump. She was ‘unmasking’ at such a rapid pace in the final months of the Obama administration that she averaged more than one request for every working day in...
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
Great, just the kind of person we need in positions where they have absolutely no clue what they’re doing. However, I think that is pretty much the democrat way. Get in way over your head, sling as much sh*t up against the wall as possible, delegate someone else to clean it up and walk away.
Gezzz.
Release the Kraken!
She’ll be one dragged into grand jury testimony and it’ll probably come out that she never denied a single request. Then someone will ask if she even had training on the paperwork, and this will be an embarrassment.
From the article, her closed testimony before Congress was:
"Her testimony is they [the unmasking requests] may be under my name, but I did not make those requests."
So, she's not disputing the number of requests attributed to her, she's just disputing that she requested all of the unmaskings.
This means that others committed perjury or falsified government documents to hide their involvement in the illegal unmasking requests, using Powers as cover.
-PJ
I was thinking that Power would be a soft target to flip, but then I refreshed my knowledge of her background.She's married to Cass Sunstein, who was also in the Obama administration. He's a Harvard and Columbia lawyer, so he'd be a strong protector of his wife.
She was born in London to Irish parents, and naturalized in 1993.
She supports Palestine over Israel, and was the first American UN Ambassador to refuse to block a resolution against Israel.
She was the strongest advocate for the Obama Administration to intervene in Libya, resulting in the death of Khaddaffi.
Her husband Sunstein wrote a 2008 paper on conspiracy theories. From Wikipedia:
Sunstein co-authored a 2008 paper with Adrian Vermeule, titled "Conspiracy Theories," dealing with the risks and possible government responses to conspiracy theories resulting from "cascades" of faulty information within groups that may ultimately lead to violence. In this article they wrote, "The existence of both domestic and foreign conspiracy theories, we suggest, is no trivial matter, posing real risks to the government's antiterrorism policies, whatever the latter may be." They go on to propose that, "the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups",[37] where they suggest, among other tactics, "Government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action."[37] They refer, several times, to groups that promote the view that the US Government was responsible or complicit in the September 11 attacks as "extremist groups."The authors declare that there are five hypothetical responses a government can take toward conspiracy theories: "We can readily imagine a series of possible responses. (1) Government might ban conspiracy theorizing. (2) Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories. (3) Government might itself engage in counterspeech, marshaling arguments to discredit conspiracy theories. (4) Government might formally hire credible private parties to engage in counterspeech. (5) Government might engage in informal communication with such parties, encouraging them to help." However, the authors advocate that each "instrument has a distinctive set of potential effects, or costs and benefits, and each will have a place under imaginable conditions. However, our main policy idea is that government should engage in cognitive infiltration of the groups that produce conspiracy theories, which involves a mix of (3), (4) and (5)."
Sunstein and Vermeule also analyze the practice of recruiting "nongovernmental officials"; they suggest that "government can supply these independent experts with information and perhaps prod them into action from behind the scenes," further warning that "too close a connection will be self-defeating if it is exposed."[37] Sunstein and Vermeule argue that the practice of enlisting non-government officials, "might ensure that credible independent experts offer the rebuttal, rather than government officials themselves. There is a tradeoff between credibility and control, however. The price of credibility is that government cannot be seen to control the independent experts." This position has been criticized by some commentators[38][39] who argue that it would violate prohibitions on government propaganda aimed at domestic citizens.[40] Sunstein and Vermeule's proposed infiltrations have also been met by sharply critical scholarly critiques.[41][42][43][44]
When reading my bolded portions of the Sunstein paper, doesn't it seem to be the blueprint for the entire Obama conspiracy against Trump?
We have:
- The claim that Russian bots infiltrated Facebook and planted disinformation during the election.
- The targeting of foreigners who would be talking to Obama's domestic opponents, unmasking the Americans involved, and leaking the conversations to the media.
- The hiring of Steele to prepare the Trump disinformation dossier.
- Hiding the Clinton and DNC involvement behind Perkins Coie, who fronted to Steele.
- Using the American media to offer the "independent rebuttal" against the Trump administration's claims of a witch hunt.
Now I think that both Power and Sunstein were deep into the planning of the whole thing, based on Sunstein's own paper on the subject.
We need to find out who falsified government documents by requesting unmaskings in Powers' name.
-PJ
She wanted American boots on the ground in Israel to defend the Palis. She needs to go to jail.
And since the fix was in from the get-go, why spend millions when you could just sit at your desk, make crap up, pocket the millions.
I’m really wondering if that joke of a dossier was really to cover what they were getting up to with their contacts, travels...
If so, we’ve barely scratched the surface of this conspiracy. And the dossier is the LEAST of it.
She was born in London to Irish parents, and naturalized in 1993.
***************
Foreign born and yet has the authority to unmask American citizens? WTF!
I want this particular bitch to fry... people like her enable tyrannical behavior, and harsh punishment of her (among many others in this whole sordid mess) will serve as an object lesson: better to quit than obey illegal orders.
She says she didn’t do it.
I saw this guy the other day the police arrested for murder. He says he didn’t do it. There you go. No need for a trial.
Novel idea. Just start asking the perp if he/she did the deed. No need for trials/jurors/etc. Save lots of money.
I am with you, this elitist ruling class bitch is the embodiment of everything wrong in DC. She looks down her nose at us like we are the rabble who she must endure on her way into the castle.
And Lois Lerner was shutting down 501c organizations that Broncobama suspected of funneling money to political opponents including Bin Netanyahu
Anyone who has read “Plunkitt of Tammany Hall” is not surprised by anything that the DemonRATs have done and are doing.
<><>The claim that Russian bots infiltrated Facebook and planted disinformation during the election.
<><>The targeting of foreigners who would be talking to Obama's domestic opponents, unmasking the Americans involved, and leaking the conversations to the media.
<><>The hiring of Steele to prepare the Trump disinformation dossier.
<><> Hiding the Clinton and DNC involvement behind Perkins Coie, who fronted to Steele.
<><> Using the American media to offer the "independent rebuttal" against the Trump admin's claims of a witch hunt.
Sunstein is the author of Nudge— an in depth guide on how to use the internet to manipulate the public toward desired political outcomes.
He is most certainly involved and perhaps forged his wife’s singnature to do these things.
Me thinks you are correct. I would venture that political spying for nefarious purposes has a time honored role in any government. What we are witnessing is the perfect combination of technology, the Patriot Act, and zealots aligning against Trump and traditional America. Public hangings of the conspirators might discourage future bad behavior, but we have to remember that power corrupts. How does one put the genie back in the bottle forever?
I will never believe that he did/has the brains to come up with something like all of this, as I think he’s dumber than dip. But, he for damn sure is arrogant and malicious enough to enthusiastically play a leading role in this.
Just imagine what they would be doing if she had won. That’s a scary thought.
She is MARRIED to a Jew!! I have NO idea why Jews would hate Israel and want to see them destroyed!
My guess she was a convenient tool for the also Foreign Born Usurper in Chief.
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.