Every day, we’re learning more about Susan Rice’s involvement in the “unmasking” of President Donald J. Trump’s team. Intelligence was allegedly used for political reasons – Not only is it a felony to collect, but it’s another felony crime to disseminate such intelligence for political purposes.
Now, the Wall Street Journal Has a bombshell report: She was not alone!
As part of its daily wrap of the Susan Rice newsflow, which focused on her first media appearance since she was “outed” as the persona responsible for “unmasking” members of team Trump, the WSJ provides two new pieces of incremental information: i) in addition to Michael Flynn, at least one more member of the Trump transition team was “unmasked” in intelligence reports due to multiple foreign conversations that weren’t related to Russia; and ii) Rice wasn’t the administration official who instigated Mr. Flynn’s unmasking, confirming there is at least one more high-level official giving “unmasking” orders.
The WSJ then reports that Rice had requested the unmasking of at least one transition official — not Mr. Flynn — who was part of multiple foreign conversations that weren’t related to Russia.
And the punchline: “The Republican official and others said Ms. Rice wasn’t the administration official who instigated Mr. Flynn’s unmasking.”
In other words, the story that Susan Rice is the unmasker is incomplete as there is at least one more person exposing the identities of people in Trump’s circle, and that the NSA and other intel agencies have been surveiling, accidentally or otherwise, at least one, so far unnamed individual, from Trump’s circle. It may well be someone that the WaPo and NYT have already published about, or it may be someone who has yet to hit the newswire, delivering the latest twist of the ongoing intelligence-fed news cycle.
This is really interesting, considering Susan Rice said in interviews that even if she did ask to unmask someone, she can’t share that information.
But obviously the reports which brought down Flynn were shared, as major newspapers shared the details… including the New York Times.
That means there is someone else. A mysterious “other” that is clearly at the center of this scandal. Who could it be?
What do you think about this bombshell Wall Street Journal report? Please leave us a comment (below) and tell us.