While there are considerable updates on the recently released bombshell over Rice's unmasking, with Senator Rand Paul demanding Rice be forced to testify under oath on whether this was a directive that came from Barack Obama, and whether she was also the source that leaked information to the Washington Post, among other questions, one of the biggest revelations came from the man that broke this story, Mike Cernovich, which forced "some" media outlets into covering it, albeit with a lot of spin as they continue to try to protect Obama.
Cernovich reveals that his "sources," came directly from mainstream media employees that knew their respective outlets had the information and were refusing to report it. Considering how many "leaked" reports the MSM has been publishing of late, it is ironic to see their total freakout now that the shoe is on the other foot and the leaks are coming from within their own organizations.
Looks like the MSM has their own leaks to plug.
MEDIA MELTDOWN
While some in the establishment media has rushed to defend Rice, others have completely ignored the news, as detailed by Newsbusters, where ABC and NBC, completely covered it up as of April 3rd, with CBS offering a defense of Rice. The reason for ABC's lack of coverage is a no-brainer, as Susan Rice is married to ABC News Executive Producer Ian Cameron.
CNN on the other hand, simply melted down throughout the day, attempting to tell their viewers to basically ignore the story, claiming it is "fake scandal," despite the fact that it has been confirmed now by other sources, including some in the establishment media, even if their "stories" were attempts to spin it.
While MSNBC has often been criticized for its unapologetic liberal bias, it shocks me to report that today, during its "Morning Joe" segment, they actually dedicated nearly 12 minutes to a panel discussion, not downplaying, nor ignoring how big of an issue this could potentially be, while criticizing those attempting to claim "theres nothing to see here, move along, and highlighting the fact that the unmasking done by Susan Rice was of "political information," as well as "who the Trump team was meeting" with, the "views of Trump associates on foreign policy" and the "plans of the incoming administration."
One of the hosts, Joe Scarborough also takes the New York Times (who had the story for at least 48 hours, and refused to report on it before Cernovich exposed Rice) to task for burying their story on page A16, to which he expresses his belief that it should have been front page news.
So, here are words I never thought to utter: Watch the MSNBC panel discussion below.
JUST THE FACTS
While it is very easy to speculate on why Rice requested the unmasking of American citizens names from surveillance, and why that information was leaked, and who leaked it, there are a set of facts, known to date, and every once in a while it is good to separate the two for the record.
No Evidence of Collusion Between Trump Team And Russia: Despite that the Rice requests for unmasking goes back at least a year before the 2016 election, and included "detailed spreadsheets of intercepted phone calls with unmasked Trump associates in perfectly legal conversations with individuals," we know that Obama's Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, admitted publicly, that as of his last day on the job, which was January 20, 2017, there was "no evidence" of collusion between Trump and Russia.
We also know that as this past Sunday, the CNN, House Intelligence Committee top Democrat Rep. Adam Schiff, admitted no "definitive" proof has been turned up showing any collusion by Trump or his team with Russia to influence the 2016 election.
Even former CIA Director, and Clinton surrogate, Michael Morell, who once called Trump a "dupe" of Russia, said in mid-March, "On the question of the Trump campaign conspiring with the Russians here, there is smoke, but there is no fire, at all. There's no little campfire, there's no little candle, there's no spark. And there's a lot of people looking for it."
There was no collusion and there is no evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia, and given the massive amount of leaks that have come out of the intelligence community since President Trump took office, had there been any evidence whatsoever, chances are it would have been "leaked" already.
Susan Rice Was The Obama Official That Ordered The Unmasking: Considering the amount of coverage on this bombshell, whether it is critical or apologetic for Rice, or attempts to justify her actions on the part of MSM outlets like NYT, or attempts to distract from this news by Wapo, it has been established that she did order the unmasking.
Obama Facilitated Wide Dissemination Of Raw Intelligence Before Leaving Office: Via The Electronic Frontier Foundation, January 12, 2017: "New rules issued by the Obama administration under Executive Order 12333 will let the NSA—which collects information under that authority with little oversight, transparency, or concern for privacy—share the raw streams of communications it intercepts directly with agencies including the FBI, the DEA, and the Department of Homeland Security."
Intelligence Community Leaked Information From Rice's Unmasking: While there have been a number of "leaks" reported on by the establishment media, geared towards harming Trump's first months as President, the fact that Gen. Michael Flynn (ret.), was not only named, but the content of telephone conversations were leaked, offers substantial proof that the information came as a direct result of the unmasking process, and considering the limited amount of people that could access that information, leads to the inescapable conclusion that those leaks came directly from the intelligence community.
OBAMA WILL NOT BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE
Barack Obama will not be held legally responsible for the illegal and felonious dissemination of classified information. Unmasking the names, then arranging to allow wide dissemination of said information in order for it to be "leaked" to the press because "no evidence" of Russia/Trump collusion was found, may show a distinct lack of concern for national security, a deliberate attempt to sabotage the Trump presidency, but without proof, in a court of law, proving beyond a reason doubt, that Obama was behind it, he will not be held accountable legally.
Does anyone really believe that if Rice is forced to testify under oath in front of Congress, that she will actually say Obama ordered the unmasking for "political" purposes? She is already setting up her defense with denials now, denying that "Obama administration officials utilized intelligence for political purposes," in her first interview since her name was revealed.
Furthermore, does anyone believe that Obama himself allowed his signature to be on any orders of "unamsking," or any type of orders to "leak" the information obtained by said unmasking?
So no, Obama will not be held legally accountable for what has happened, and if the reporting since Rice was "unmasked" herself is anything to go by, the majority of the people that still read or listen to establishment news, won't hold him accountable either in the court of public opinion, because the media is refusing to tell them the truth.
