Former National Security Adviser Susan Rice insists her requests to unmask Trump associates were not politically motivated, saying her actions were a routine part of a “longstanding, established process.”
However, the unmasking went beyond former national security adviser Mike Flynn and Russia, and the content of the detailed reports suggests anything but routine.
That’s the take of Rep. Peter King, who sits on the House Intelligence committee. The Republican lawmaker told Fox News the intel gathered was similar to what a private investigator might collect in divorce cases.
“This is information about their everyday lives,” he said. “Sort of like in a divorce case where lawyers are hired, investigators are hired just to find out what the other person is doing from morning until night and then you try to piece it together later on.”
Only House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes and ranking Democrat Adam Schiff have seen the reports, but other members were given a broad outline of the content, according to a report by Fox News‘ Chief Intelligence Correspondent Catherine Herridge.
Meanwhile, President Donald Trump told the New York Times on Wednesday that Rice may have committed a crime.
“I think it’s going to be the biggest story,” the president said. “It’s such an important story for our country and the world. It is one of the big stories of our time.”
Rice said through a spokeswoman that she would not dignify “the president’s ludicrous charge with a comment.”
The reaction on social media suggests people are beginning to take this story more seriously, suggesting Watergate may pale in comparison.
Here’s a sampling of responses to a tweet from Fox News’ Brit Hume:
From Catherine Herridge –> https://t.co/xYWvaUeohH
— Brit Hume (@brithume) April 6, 2017
— David I. Ramadan (@DavidIRamadan) April 6, 2017
@brithume At what point in the evening on November 8th, 2016, do you think she first uttered “oh shit”?
— kevin kane (@kevinjosephkane) April 6, 2017
@brithume journalism demands to ask the Q-this was an admin that spied on senators to get their views on the Iran deal. Why wouldn’t they do this?
— Matt S (@MSchleupner) April 6, 2017
@brithume Why would non Russian affiliated conversations need to be unmasked? Answer is political and that they wouldn’t get caught w/Hillary in WH.
— Don Stanfill (@DonStanfill) April 6, 2017
— Jerry J (@JerJenkins4) April 6, 2017
@brithume When Catherine Herridge speaks, people know it’s the truth…very disturbing and way past watergate
— Bama Cash (@CashBama) April 6, 2017
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.