Media Ignore, Downplay Susan Rice ‘Unmasking’ Revelations. Here Are 3 Major Reasons The Story Matters.
HOANG DINH NAM/AFP/Getty Images
Despite bombshell reports yesterday claiming that Obama National Security
Advisor Susan Rice “unmasked” members of the Trump campaign and Trump
transition team while reviewing raw intelligence, that such unmasked
information was widely distributed among top members of the Obama
administration, and that Rice asked for continuous updates on communications
between foreign targets and the Trump team after Trump won the Republican
nomination, the media have decided that the story simply isn’t worth covering.
CNN’s Don Lemon stated that the media should not “aid and abet the
people” creating a “diversion” over Susan Rice. As Newsbusters reports, CBS’
Margaret Brennan cited sources stating that Rice’s activity was perfectly normal
and not improper. The New York Times echoed that claim. ABC News
and NBC News didn’t cover the story at all.
people” creating a “diversion” over Susan Rice. As Newsbusters reports, CBS’
Margaret Brennan cited sources stating that Rice’s activity was perfectly normal
and not improper. The New York Times echoed that claim. ABC News
and NBC News didn’t cover the story at all.
But the story is huge.
Here are three reasons why.
1. The Obama Administration Targeted The Trump Team. The story is huge
because it’s just more evidence that the Obama administration used government
to target its political opposition. There’s no evidence Rice did anything illegal here.
But it’s certainly an abuse of power to use the power of unmasking to keep tabs
on your political opposition without any evidence of wrongdoing, as Rice
reportedly did. If they’d found anything nefarious but non-criminal, what would
they have done about it? Would that information have died a quiet death amidst
the other intelligence reports spreading around the top levels of the Obama
administration? Or would it have made its way to the press, as information
about Mike Flynn’s innocuous contacts with the Russian Ambassador did after
the election? As The Wall Street Journal editorial board states, “Ms. Rice would
have had no obvious need to unmask Trump campaign officials other than
political curiosity.”
because it’s just more evidence that the Obama administration used government
to target its political opposition. There’s no evidence Rice did anything illegal here.
But it’s certainly an abuse of power to use the power of unmasking to keep tabs
on your political opposition without any evidence of wrongdoing, as Rice
reportedly did. If they’d found anything nefarious but non-criminal, what would
they have done about it? Would that information have died a quiet death amidst
the other intelligence reports spreading around the top levels of the Obama
administration? Or would it have made its way to the press, as information
about Mike Flynn’s innocuous contacts with the Russian Ambassador did after
the election? As The Wall Street Journal editorial board states, “Ms. Rice would
have had no obvious need to unmask Trump campaign officials other than
political curiosity.”
2. Rice Lied. Last month, Rice told PBS Newshour that she knew “nothing”
about surveillance of the Trump team. But she knew that the Trump team was
caught up in incidental surveillance, obviously. We know that Rice has a habit
of lying to protect her former boss, President Obama. Was this just another
instance of such lying?
about surveillance of the Trump team. But she knew that the Trump team was
caught up in incidental surveillance, obviously. We know that Rice has a habit
of lying to protect her former boss, President Obama. Was this just another
instance of such lying?
3. This Makes The Left’s Trump-Russia Theories More Strained. We’ve
been hearing for months that Team Trump had nefarious ties with the Russian
government, that collusion took place between the Trump campaign and
Russian sources in order to coordinate the release of damaging information
from the DNC hacks. But if Rice was monitoring all intelligence that came
up regarding the Trump campaign, then where’s the evidence that any of
this supposedly nefarious activity was occurring?
been hearing for months that Team Trump had nefarious ties with the Russian
government, that collusion took place between the Trump campaign and
Russian sources in order to coordinate the release of damaging information
from the DNC hacks. But if Rice was monitoring all intelligence that came
up regarding the Trump campaign, then where’s the evidence that any of
this supposedly nefarious activity was occurring?
The Rice story is a major story. It doesn’t mean that Americans don’t have a
right to be suspicious of supposed connections between Trump and Russia;
it also doesn’t mean that Trump had his wires “tapped” or was the target of
“spying,” as Tucker Carlson put it last night on Fox News. But Trump and his
team were a political target of the Obama administration, and they apparently
did everything they could within the law, including abuse of power, to dig up
information on the Republican running against their former Secretary of State.
right to be suspicious of supposed connections between Trump and Russia;
it also doesn’t mean that Trump had his wires “tapped” or was the target of
“spying,” as Tucker Carlson put it last night on Fox News. But Trump and his
team were a political target of the Obama administration, and they apparently
did everything they could within the law, including abuse of power, to dig up
information on the Republican running against their former Secretary of State.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for commenting. Your comments are needed for helping to improve the discussion.