En Garde in the bunker…
Following on from yesterday’s piece Susan Rice & Treachery Undercover – When a Rice Obama partnership, a shady politician or any other kind of political aide says something along the lines of “I do not recollect doing or saying ‘X'” it generally means that they did indeed say or do “X”, but by refusing to flat-out deny it (citing instead a flagging memory) they leave themselves an out if and when proof emerges. When pressed further on how someone in a position of power could forget or “not recollect” doing or saying “X” they usually roam off into that territory where they are so busy that they can’t keep track of every wiretap ordered; bribe taken; intern sexually assaulted, etc., etc. That’s when a Rice Obama collusion to deceive falls into play.
In other words, it’s a pretty good technique. The Rice Obama partnership is availing itself of this “protection” now that the Rice part of the equation has been “outed” with her actions. Also interesting is her claim that “I didn’t leak nothing to nobody.” Affirmative action will produce these kinds of wince-worthy double-negatives in elected officials, mistakes that a white or Asian high-school student should be embarrassed about making!
But I digress.
“I do not recollect doing or saying ‘X'” is legalese for “you don’t seriously expect me to incriminate myself and admit the wrongdoing.” Hilary used the cop-out a lot when the FBI interrogated (sorry “interviewed”) her in the investigation of her e-mail scandal. More believable however is the likelihood that it was simply a case of them having a nice sit down coffee klatsch to talk about the weather and how to make that unpleasantness go away. Which in fact, it did.
“The communications of these individuals were apparently collected incidentally during the course of electronic monitoring of communications involving foreign officials of interest” – Joseph Klein from his piece in FrontPage (link at bottom)
You have to love the expression “apparently collected incidentally”, because these supposedly “incidental collections” were not incidental at all. Given that the Rice Obama collusion couldn’t directly spy on Trump and his team, they had to pretend the spying was really all about Russia.
Obama and Rice never strayed too far away from each other, so who instructed what to whom and for what purpose?
Don’t take my word for it, the Bloomberg and FrontPage reports say it all – “One U.S. official familiar with the reports said they contained valuable political information on the Trump transition such as who the Trump team were meeting with, the views of Trump associates on foreign policy matters, and plans for the incoming administration.”
What has any of that got to do with Trump allegedly colluding with Russia to win the election?
“The allegation is that somehow, Obama administration officials utilized intelligence for political purposes, that’s absolutely false” – Rice to MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell.
That blatant lie is wearing very thin. We are supposed to believe the same administration that hijacked the IRS, DOJ, NLRB and EPA to hound its political enemies, couldn’t possibly hijack intelligence agencies for similar purposes.
Here’s the salient point that nails the Rice Obama partnership. If she had not requested the NSA to unmask the dozens of reports, catalogued all the Trump Tower phone records etc., there would never have been the leaks … period!
And now she has told so many lies and contradicted herself, that if she testifies under oath, her own attorneys may not be able to help her from perjuring herself. Unfortunately, the DOJ would have to step in by this time because Congress has no power to press charges.
Get set for a lengthy process on this one – The Rice Obama collusion isn’t going away any time soon!
Click on either Logo to get the full scoop on both articles … Eli Lake in Bloomberg, and Joseph Klein in FrontPage.
