Susan Rice

Federal judge orders Susan Rice, Ben Rhodes to answer written Benghazi questions in Clinton email lawsuit

A federal judge ruled Tuesday that former national security adviser Susan Rice and former deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes must answer written questions about the State Department’s response to the deadly 2012 terror attack in Benghazi, Libya, as part of an ongoing legal battle over whether Hillary Clinton sought to deliberately evade public record laws by using a private email server while secretary of state. U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth denied a request by the conservative group Judicial Watch to make Rice and Rhodes sit for depositions, but agreed to have them answer written questions. He also agreed to Judicial Watch’s request to depose the State Department about the preparation of talking points for Rice, then President Barack Obama’s ambassador to the United Nations, ahead of appearances on political talk shows the Sunday following the attack. That deposition is part of Judicial Watch’s inquiry into whether the State Department acted in bad faith by not telling a court for months that they had asked in mid-2014 for missing emails to be returned. Rice initially claimed on several talk shows that the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was triggered by protests over an anti-Islam video. The attack resulted in the deaths of four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens. “Rice’s talking points and State’s understanding of the attack play an unavoidably central role in this case,” Lamberth wrote in a 16-page order. Lamberth added that “State’s role in the [talking] points’ content and development could shed light on Clinton’s motives for shielding her emails from [Freedom of Information Act] requesters or on State’s reluctance to search her emails.” Lamberth also allowed Judicial Watch to seek written answers from Bill Priestap, the former assistant director of the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division. Priestap, who supervised the bureau’s investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server, retired from government service at the end of last year. “In a major victory for accountability, Judge Lamberth today authorized Judicial Watch to take discovery on whether the Clinton email system evaded FOIA and whether the Benghazi scandal was one reason for keeping Mrs. Clinton’s email secret,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Today, Judicial Watch issued document requests and other discovery to the State Department about the Clinton email scandal. Next up, we will begin questioning key witnesses under oath.” The judge’s order amounts to approval of a discovery plan he ordered last month. In that ruling, Lamberth wrote that Clinton’s use of a private email account was “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency” and said the response of the State and Justice Departments “smacks of outrageous misconduct.” As part of the discovery, Judicial Watch can depose Jacob Sullivan, Clinton’s former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff, and Justin Cooper, a longtime Bill Clinton aide who helped arrange the setup of Hillary Clinton’s private email address and server. Judicial Watch said the discovery period will conclude within 120 days. A post-discovery hearing will then be held to determine whether additional witnesses, including Clinton and her former Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills, may be deposed.

Drip drip drip…  With each new day, we continue to learn more about Susan Rice’s and Hillary’s lies to we-the-people as they tried to cover up their poor decisions and incompetence that led to the tragedy in Benghazi.  Ben Rhodes was just a Dem political hack, a “useful idiot,” who just repeated the talking point lie that the riots were a result of a reaction to an online video (that nobody saw).  Kudos to Judicial Watch for pushing this issue and using the courts to get answers we should have had years ago.

Susan Rice suggests race, gender bias linked to ‘unmasking’ backlash

Susan Rice, the Obama national security adviser under fire over her alleged involvement in the “unmasking” of Trump associates during the 2016 presidential election, suggested in a fresh interview that race and gender might be playing a role in the scrutiny she’s faced. In an interview with journalist Michael Tomasky for New York Magazine, Rice reportedly questioned the criticism she’s faced dating back to the Benghazi controversy. “Why me? Why not Jay Carney, for example, who was then our press secretary, who stood up more?” she asked. Tomasky noted in the piece that Carney “isn’t an African-American woman, of course” and apparently asked Rice whether that is the key factor. Rice, in response, left the door open: “I don’t know… I do not leap to the simple explanation that it’s only about race and gender. I’m trying to keep my theories to myself until I’m ready to come out with them. It’s not because I don’t have any.” But Rice mentioned other prominent female figures – like Hillary Clinton and Condoleezza Rice – who faced “ad hominem” attacks, suggesting a correlation. Asked about the comments, a Republican Capitol Hill source pushed back. “This is screaming out for attention… She’s saying I don’t know why they all started picking on me to begin with.” As to the suggestion of race and gender being a factor, the source countered, then “why would there be a subpoena for a white male?”


Judicial Watch Seeks Docs on Obama White House Spying Scandal

With the news last week of the unprecedented spying on Americans by the National Security Agency under President Obama’s direction, it has become even more critical that we get to the truth about any Obama administration surveillance of Donald Trump and his campaign and the subsequent illegal leaking of classified information in an effort to undermine the Trump administration. We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice and the National Security Agency (NSA) for information about Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice’s communications with the two agencies concerning the alleged Russian involvement in the 2016 presidential election, the hacking of DNC computers, the suspected communications between Russia and Trump campaign/transition officials, and the unmasking of the identities of any U.S. citizens associated with the Trump presidential campaign or transition team who were identified pursuant to intelligence collection activities (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice and National Security Administration (No. 1:17-cv-01002)). You can see our FOIA request forms the basis for the new lawsuit and is comprehensive:

Click on the text above to read the rest of this article by Tom Fitton.

Opinion: CNN really is ‘very fake news’

Fact: Susan Rice, the Obama administration’s national security adviser, directed the “unmasking” of NSA intercepts of Donald Trump’s aides and associates. In other words, the Obama administration used the intelligence community’s spying on Mr. Trump, and Ms. Rice then demanded that the names of those captured on intercepts be given to her. Fact: Names of some Trump aides have been leaked to the media and subsequently published. In one case, Michael Flynn, appointed by Mr. Trump as national security adviser, was forced to resign after reports revealed he misled Vice President Mike Pence about discussions with the Russian ambassador. Other names of Trump officials have also circulated amid reports that they have connections to the Russians. Only a fool would refuse to connect these two dots. Enter CNN. After the Rice bombshell hit, the Clinton News Network went into hyperdrive to discredit the reports — despite the fact that there is very clearly some there there. “On this program tonight, we will not insult your intelligence by pretending” it’s legitimate, CNN host Don Lemon said on his show Monday night. “Nor will we aid and abet the people trying to misinform you, the American people, by creating a diversion. Not going to do it.” When morning show host Chris Cuomo interviewed a Democratic congressman, the “journalist” stated flatly that the bombshell — remember, it’s a FACT that Rice directed the “unmasking” of Trump officials — was “demonstrably untrue.” The network’s chief national security correspondent, Jim Scuitto — who was, by the way, a political appointee in the Obama White House — also dismissed the story as a nothingburger. He said the Trump White House had “ginned up” the story to distract from so-called damaging reports. “Again, to note by senior intelligence officials who work for both Democrats and Republicans, this appears to be a story, largely ginned up, partly as a distraction from this larger investigation,” Mr. Scuitto said. No surprise, but the “journalist” offered no “facts” or “evidence” for the claim. And on Tuesday’s “New Day,” anchor Alisyn Camerota begged Sen. John McCain of Arizona, CNN’s favorite RINO, to dismiss the story. “They say that this is a controversy. It shows that she has done something wildly out of the bounds of normalcy,” she said. “Is this business as usual for a national security adviser to ask for a name to be revealed, an American name, if she wants to know more, or is this some sort of a controversy?” (For the record, Mr. McCain didn’t play along, saying the request “could have been politically motivated.”) Meanwhile, the three mainstream TV networks all but passed on the story, with ABC and NBC forgetting to report the bombshell, and CBS actually defending Ms. Rice. “We learned more today about the president’s allegation that he and his aides were caught up in Obama-era surveillance,” CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley said, throwing to reporter Margaret Brennan. “According to a former national security official, Trump associates were not the sole focus of Rice’s request, but they may have been revealed when she asked to understand why they were appearing in intelligence reports,” Ms. Brennan said. “However, Rice did not spread the information according to this former official, who insisted that there was nothing improper or political involved.” Well, she said “nuh uh”? Good enough for me! The networks did cover Ms. Rice saying she didn’t do it, although she added, “I don’t have a particular recollection of doing that more frequently after the election.” Ah, the perfect nonanswer. “The notion, which some people are trying to suggest, that by asking for the identity of the American person is the same as leaking it — that’s completely false,” Ms. Rice said. “There is no equivalence between so-called unmasking and leaking.” Unless there is. Democrats clearly have a ton of intelligence on Mr. Trump and his aides, which they’re dripping out in dribs and drabs. And the fact — there’s that word again — that names of the “unmasked” are leaking means someone’s leaking them out (Captain Obvious here). Here’s the crux: The whole Trump-Russia collusion story first tossed up by Hillary Clinton is cover for the illegal surveillance the Obama administration did to help Mrs. Clinton in the 2016 election. Now they need cover, so they’re making it seem like the Russians were bent on destroying American democracy. Simple. You won’t hear THAT on CNN.

Veteran journalist Joseph Curl was responsible for that outstanding op/ed.  Joseph is spot on about CNN and it’s so-called journalists.  We’ve always known it to be a member of the dominantly liberal mainstream media, and has held the nickname of the “Clinton News Network” for it’s unabashed liberal bent.  But, the way they’re handling the Susan Rice scandal/bombshell is beyond disgraceful, and shows them not only to be liberal…but a producer of nothing by liberal “fake news.”  Excellent work, Joseph!

McCarthy: Susan Rice’s White House Unmasking: A Watergate-style Scandal

The thing to bear in mind is that the White House does not do investigations. Not criminal investigations, not intelligence investigations. Remember that. Why is that so important in the context of explosive revelations that Susan Rice, President Obama’s national-security adviser, confidant, and chief dissembler, called for the “unmasking” of Trump campaign and transition officials whose identities and communications were captured in the collection of U.S. intelligence on foreign targets? Because we’ve been told for weeks that any unmasking of people in Trump’s circle that may have occurred had two innocent explanations: (1) the FBI’s investigation of Russian meddling in the election and (2) the need to know, for purposes of understanding the communications of foreign intelligence targets, the identities of Americans incidentally intercepted or mentioned. The unmasking, Obama apologists insist, had nothing to do with targeting Trump or his people. That won’t wash. In general, it is the FBI that conducts investigations that bear on American citizens suspected of committing crimes or of acting as agents of foreign powers. In the matter of alleged Russian meddling, the investigative camp also includes the CIA and the NSA. All three agencies conducted a probe and issued a joint report in January. That was after Obama, despite having previously acknowledged that the Russian activity was inconsequential, suddenly made a great show of ordering an inquiry and issuing sanctions. Consequently, if unmasking was relevant to the Russia investigation, it would have been done by those three agencies. And if it had been critical to know the identities of Americans caught up in other foreign intelligence efforts, the agencies that collect the information and conduct investigations would have unmasked it. Because they are the agencies that collect and refine intelligence “products” for the rest of the “intelligence community,” they are responsible for any unmasking; and they do it under “minimization” standards that FBI Director James Comey, in recent congressional testimony, described as “obsessive” in their determination to protect the identities and privacy of Americans. Understand: There would have been no intelligence need for Susan Rice to ask for identities to be unmasked. If there had been a real need to reveal the identities — an intelligence need based on American interests — the unmasking would have been done by the investigating agencies. The national-security adviser is not an investigator. She is a White House staffer. The president’s staff is a consumer of intelligence, not a generator or collector of it. If Susan Rice was unmasking Americans, it was not to fulfill an intelligence need based on American interests; it was to fulfill a political desire based on Democratic-party interests.

Exactly!!  Well said, Andrew.  Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy is a former federal prosecutor who has prosecuted Islamic terrorists, and understands this process better than most.  His analysis here is spot on.  Having spent over 2 decades in the Intelligence Community (IC), myself, I can also attest to the veracity of what Andrew is saying here.  The National Security Advisor is just that; an advisor.  He/she is NOT an investigator or an intelligence agent.  He/she is a consumer of intelligence; NOT a producer of it.  So, the ONLY reason why Susan Rice (who has ZERO intelligence experience, or credentials) would ask to unmask the identities of Americans in these reports would be solely for political reasons.  Furthermore, IF she actually did what is being alleged, she should go to federal prison for the rest of her natural existence.  And, why are CNN, MSNBC, and other colluding members of the dominantly liberal mainstream media doing everything they can to NOT cover or report on this HUGE scandal?!?  Why aren’t reporters all over this?!?  Had this been a Trump or Bush official (maybe Dick Cheney?) who had done this, it’d be everywhere, and we all know it.  The hypocrisy is simply unreal..  Typical liberal media..

Susan Rice requested to unmask names of Trump transition officials, sources say

Multiple sources tell Fox News that Susan Rice, former national security adviser under then-President Barack Obama, requested to unmask the names of Trump transition officials caught up in surveillance. The unmasked names, of people associated with Donald Trump, were then sent to all those at the National Security Council, some at the Defense Department, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and then-CIA Director John Brennan – essentially, the officials at the top, including former Rice deputy Ben Rhodes. The names were part of incidental electronic surveillance of candidate and President-elect Trump and people close to him, including family members, for up to a year before he took office. It was not clear how Rice knew to ask for the names to be unmasked, but the question was being posed by the sources late Monday.

Wow..  IF these allegations against Susan Rice are true, then she should be arrested and put in a federal prison.  One thing IS certain..  Trump was right.  He and his people WERE spied on by the Obama administration.  Why and how are still unknown..  This story is developing..

White House’s Susan Rice: U.S. national security agencies are too white

In a White House often accused of being stacked with loyalists, President Obama’s national security adviser said Wednesday there are too many white people in key government posts, endangering national security because they think alike. Speaking at Florida International University’s commencement, Susan E. Rice, who is black, said a diversified government workforce is more likely to yield “better outcomes” than a predominantly white one. Referring to criticism that the U.S. national security workforce is “white, male and Yale,” Ms. Rice told the graduates, “In the halls of power, in the faces of our national security leaders, America is still not fully reflected.” “By now, we should all know the dangers of ‘groupthink,’ where folks who are alike often think alike,” she said. “By contrast, groups comprised of different people tend to question one another’s assumptions, draw on divergent perspectives and experiences, and yield better outcomes.” Her comments were reminiscent of Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who said in a speech in 2001, before Mr. Obama appointed her to the high court, “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.” Ms. Rice elaborated in her speech on how having more minorities in the national security field would better protect the homeland. “Intelligence analysts, diplomats and military officers who are native speakers may pick up subtle nuances that might otherwise go unnoticed,” she said. “Diplomats who can read cultural cues may better navigate the political and social currents of a foreign nation. In sum, leaders from diverse backgrounds can often come up with more creative insights, proffer alternative solutions and thus make better decisions.” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Mr. Obama agrees with that sentiment. “The president certainly believes that our government is most effective and is making the best decisions when we have a government that looks like the country,” he said. Mr. Obama has been criticized for increasingly surrounding himself with an inner circle of aides who think like him and reject advice outside the West Wing, particularly from the Pentagon. In his second term, he is said to rely most heavily on a handful of trusted advisers, including chief of staff Denis McDonough, a former NSC official; Ms. Rice and her deputy, Ben Rhodes; U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power; Treasury Secretary Jack Lew; and Vice President Joseph R. Biden. The president often hits back at his critics, saying he doesn’t surround himself with “yes men” and that he presses his advisers for all points of view during internal policy debates. Still, former Defense secretaries of both parties such as Leon Panetta and Chuck Hagel have said they felt shut out sometimes by the president’s cadre of West Wing advisers.

Susan Rice is a nauseating, anti-white, black racist. She should have been fired, or impeached, for her brazen lies she told in the aftermath of the Benghazi disaster. Remember the whole nonsense about the video? Well, for at least a couple weeks after the truth was known, she went on all the networks furthering the lie that Benghazi was started because of that fictitious video. Yep.. That was Susan Rice. What a tool..

Did Susan Rice Disclose Classified Info on Iran?

Bloomberg’s Eli Lake reports Tuesday that the Obama administration kept secret until the beginning of April Iran’s two to three month breakout time for a nuclear weapon, saying “the administration only declassified this estimate at the beginning of the month, just in time for the White House to make the case for its Iran deal to Congress and the public.” Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, speaking to reporters on Monday, said that the administration has held this assessment for “quite some time.” Lake says that Brian Hale, a spokesman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, confirmed Monday “that the two-to-three-month estimate for fissile material was declassified on April 1.” However, at least one member of the administration publicly spoke about the two-to-three-month breakout time frame prior to April. On March 2, 2015, National Security Advisor Susan Rice addressed the annual AIPAC meeting and said the following [emphasis added]: This is my third point—a good deal is one that would verifiably cut off every pathway for Iran to produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon. Every single one. Any deal must prevent Iran from developing weapons-grade plutonium at Arak, or anywhere else. Any deal must prevent Iran from enriching uranium at its nuclear facility at Fordow—a site we uncovered buried deep underground and revealed to the world in 2009. Any deal must increase the time it takes Iran to reach breakout capacity—the time it would take to produce a single bomb’s worth of weapons-grade uranium. Today, experts suggest Iran’s breakout window is just two to three months. We seek to extend that to at least one year. Rice’s disclosure suggests that either DNI spokesman Brian Hale is incorrect in his assertion that the assessment was declassified on April 1, or Rice revealed classified information. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Rice’s March disclosure.

Dr. Susan Rice has proven to be not only dishonest (i.e. her repeated lies about the origins of the tragedy in Benghazi, Libya after it was well known…and yet she continued to push the false narrative that it started because of some video that nobody had seen), but utterly incompetent. And, to think that Obama actually is dumb enough to take advice from her.. No wonder Obama’s foreign policy initiatives have been a complete disaster for the past 6+ years!

Intel, Military Sources Say 2009 NCIS Report Shows Bergdahl Planned Desertion

The Bowe Bergdahl prisoner swap is an unfolding disaster for the Obama Administration, and if the information leaked by senior military and intelligence sources to Fox News proves out, Bergdahl’s trial for desertion will be epic. According to those sources, the fabled NCIS (Naval Criminal Investigative Service) looked into Bergdahl’s disappearance in 2009, and found substantial evidence that he planned his desertion, looking for help from Afghans on a journey that was eventually going to end in a meeting with Russian gangsters in Uzbekistan. Plan B for Bergdahl seems to have involved hooking up with the Taliban, which is what eventually happened, although not the way he planned it. The evidence in question was reportedly obtained during a “forensic search” of Bergdahl’s computer by NCIS, which also spoke with both Bergdahl’s platoon mates and Afghans he had been in contact with. Appearing on Bill O’Reilly’s Fox News show, retired Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer gave NCIS much credit for shouldering the effort and risk involved in interviewing Afghans “outside the wire.” Shaffer seemed confident that more shoes would be dropping on Bergdahl in the days to come. O’Reilly and Shaffer agreed that these alleged desertion plans were far-fetched enough to question Bergdahl’s mental state, which might be part of his legal defense strategy. Fox News notes that Bergdahl’s lawyers were unwilling to discuss the leaked NCIS report on the record. The UK Daily Mail reports lead attorney Eugene Fidell has cited the contrary opinion of the Army major general investigating Bergdahl’s capture that he did not “intend to remain away from his base permanently.” A previous attempt to claim Bergdahl didn’t desert his post at all, but was rather attempting to journey overland to another Army base to report misconduct within his own unit, didn’t go over very well. Let’s be clear (as Fox News is) that word of this 2009 report is coming from two anonymous “senior sources.” It shouldn’t be necessary to speculate for long about the accuracy of these sources, since the report would certainly become part of the prosecution’s desertion case against Bergdahl. A hearing roughly comparable to a civilian grand jury is scheduled for July 8. If the NCIS report matches the description provided by Fox News’ sources, it’s going to be a gigantic problem for the Obama White House. It has resolutely insisted Bergdahl was a model soldier whose rescue from Taliban captivity was their top priority, and the entire Democrat Party joined the chorus. A contrary report showing evidence of premeditation and/or mental instability would mark Obama and his staff as incompetent at best, for somehow not being aware of the information, and deeply dishonest at worst.

No need to choose. It’s both. Obama, Susan Rice, and the rest of that inner circle in the White House are breathtakingly incompetent, and VERY “dishonest.”

Bergdahl charged with desertion, could face life in prison

Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, who was captured by the Taliban after abandoning his post in Afghanistan and then freed five years later in a controversial trade for five Guantanamo detainees, was charged Wednesday with desertion. U.S. Army Forces Command announced the decision at Fort Bragg in North Carolina. He was charged with misbehavior before the enemy, which carries a maximum sentence of up to life in prison. He was also charged with desertion, which carries a maximum of five years.

What a stunning embarrassment for Obama, Susan Rice, and the rest of those incompetent fools in that worthless administration.  Kudos to the Army for NOT buckling and giving into the pressure from the White House…and doing the right thing and charging this piece of garbage.