Trey Gowdy: Samantha Power claims others unmasked in her name

Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power testified that the hundreds of unmasking requests made in her name, were made by other people. This was discovered by House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-SC) and revealed in an interview with Fox News' Bret Baier on "Special Report with Bret Baier,"

"Her testimony is they may be under my name, but I did not make those requests," Gowdy said of Power. She is one among those in the Obama administration who made requests to identify Americans whose names surfaced in foreign intelligence reports, known as unmasking.

 It was reported by Fox News last month that Power was unmasking at an incredibly rapid pace in the final months of Obama's leftist presidency. She averaged over one request for every working day last year and even went so far as to seek information in the days leading to Trump's inauguration.

Gowdy told Bret Baier, "I think if she were on your show, she would say those requests to unmask may have been attributed to her, but they greatly exceed by an exponential factor the requests she actually made. So, that's her testimony, and she was pretty emphatic about it."

Then he added, "So we've go to get to the bottom of that. If there is someone else making requests on behalf of a principal in the intelligence community, we need to know that because we're getting ready to reauthorize a program that's really important to the country, but also has a masking component to it."

Power was interviewed Friday for a closed-door session with House Intelligence Committee investigators looking into the 'unmasking' of Trump associates under the Obama crowd.

So who's to blame for allowing someone else to use her name to violate the rights to privacy of U.S. citizens? And if it was done with such frequency, why wasn't Powers directly questioned by the judicial authority that grants such requests?


Tweet

Samantha Power uses her power to unmask hundreds of Trumpers

Okay, here's what we know so far: Samantha Power is not a man nor does she "identify" as a man; she's a woman and is a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. 

She also is known to have 'unmasked' over 260 Americans last year--about one a working day--and even sought information in the days leading to President Trump's inauguration.

Two anonymous sources and my source who goes by the moniker Vinny Boombots, revealed this startling number and it leaves people scratching their heads as to what a UN ambassador needs with such information--unless she's also an undercover CIA operative [not of the "honey pot" kind] in addition to being an ambassador.

Power is to appear next month on Capitol Hill as she and other questionable leftists are to be scrutinized for their role in seeking the identities of Trump associates in intelligence reports. However, the interest in Power's actions is very high due to an apparent absence of a "need to know" status and the fact that she's probably a Commie sympathizer like her husband.

In a letter written July 27th to the Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) said the committee discovered "that one official, whose position had no apparent intelligence-related function, made hundreds of unmasking requests during the final year of the Obama Administration."

The "official" in question is widely believed to be 'Sam' Power. 

At a public congressional hearing this year, Trey Gowdy (R-SC) asked former CIA director and Hajj visitor John Brennan about unmasking, without mentioning Power by name or reputation.

Gowdy: Do you recall any U.S. ambassadors asking that names be unmasked?

Brennan: I don't know. Maybe it's ringing a vague bell but I'm not--I could not answer with any confidence.

Gowdy: On either January 19 or up till noon on January 20, did you make any unmasking requests?

Brennan: I do not believe I did.

Gowdy: So you did not make any requests on the last day that you were employed?

Brennan: No, I was not in the agency on the last day I was employed.

But realizing there might be a 'sign-in log' or video evidence of his having been there, he corrected the record, confirming he was at CIA headquarters on January 20.

Brennan: I went there to collect some final personal materials as well as to pay my last respects to a memorial wall. But I was there for a brief period of time and just to take care of some final--final things that were important to me.

Power's spokesperson had no comment on the number or timing of her requests. Her lawyer David Pressman stated previously that "While serving as our Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Power was also a member of the National Security Council responsible for advising the President on the full-range of threats confronting the United States. Any insinuation that Ambassador Power was involved in leaking classified information is absolutely false."

Yeah, sure. That's what they all say and he even gets paid to say it.

And what the hell is Power doing on the National Security Council concurrent to her ambassador position.

The sad truth is, however, nobody at the top is going to prison. Nobody. Not Hillary; not Power; not Rice; not Clapper. It's the way the system works for the elite, for those who make the laws they break, or the policies that don't actually effect them, like Obamacare.

What you see in the media is fluff.


Tweet

McMaster has more problems than just his anti-Israel stance

Current National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster has miffed some Trump administration people after it was revealed he sent a letter to Susan "It Was A Video" Rice giving her ongoing access to classified information.

McMaster is already a noted anti-Zionist (aka anti-Semite) and Arab supporter in every facet of support that Trump opposes, but for some unfathomable reason, he still has a job. 

He fired several people (seven in total thus far) who are pro-Israel, and most recently dumped the Trump loyalist, Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the senior director for intelligence at the National Security Council.

Circa reported Thursday that McMaster sent a letter to Rice giving her access to classified material, just weeks after her alleged role was disclosed in 'unmasking' identities of Trump associates in intelligence reports.

But for some unfathomable reason, he still has a job.

However, Fox News learned by National Security Council sources, that the letter is a pro forma document similar to those every living former national security adviser and former president is sent, and he was required to send it. 

Perhaps that's a requirement that needs  further analysis.

Fox News was also told that just because her security clearance was extended, that doesn't mean she gets to look at classified information or 'unmask' Trump staffers. All it means is that she can be called back (if need be) to discuss classified information and provide more bull crap to the media.

However, the fact that McMaster sent the lying Rice lizard the letter doesn't sit well with members of the Trump administration, who aren't big fans of the anti-Israel jerk. 


Tweet

Obama official made 'hundreds of unmasking requests'

In the final year of Obama's failed presidency, one of his officials made "hundreds of unmasking requests" according to a letter from a top Republican who raised concerns that the requests were made for "improper purposes."

"Unmasking" refers to a formal request to identify Americans in an intelligence document.

Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), the House Intelligence Committee Chairman, has questioned whether the unmasking was improperly sought by Obama officials in unmasking the names of the Trump transition team.

The person he seemed to be referring to regarding the hundreds of unmasking requests is Samantha Power. 

"[T]his Committee has learned that one official, whose position has no apparent intelligence-related function, made hundreds of unmasking requests during the final year of the Obama Administration," Nunes wrote to Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats.

Nunes wrote that only one request "offered a justification that was not boilerplate and articulated why" the identity was needed for official duties.

Three top Obama administration officials were specifically named: Former CIA director John Brennan; former national security adviser Susan "It Was The Video" Rice; and former U.N. ambassador Samantha Power.

David Pressman, Power's lawyer, stressed that her responsibilities in her capacity as a member of the National Security Council but said she will cooperate with Congress.

"Ambassador Power strongly supports any bipartisan effort to address the serious threat to our national security posed by Russia's interference in our electoral process, and is eager to engage with the Senate and House committees on the timeline they have requested," he wrote. "While serving as our Permanent Representative to the United Nations and as a member of the National Security Council responsible for advising the President on the full-range of threats confronting the United States, and long before receiving an invitation to engage the Congressional committees, Ambassador Power was unambiguous about her support of bipartisan efforts to determine the full extent of this threat to our national security."

Which is why she unmasked as many Donald Trump campaign team personnel that she could get away with and not raise eyebrows.

Nunes' letter said he plans to introduce a bill requiring "individual, fact-based justifications" for unmasking requests.

"Cabinet members and other senior political leaders cannot be permitted to continue to seek access to U.S. person information within disseminated intelligence reports without documenting a specific, fact-based requirement for the information," he wrote.

Nunes said that "Obama-era officials sought the identities of Trump transition officials within intelligence reports" without offering any "meaningful explanation" as to why they needed or how they would use the information.

Nunes is concerned the information could be used for nefarious purposes, including leaking. He even noted that some of the requests were "followed by anonymous leaks of those name to the media."

So it walks and quacks like a duck.


Tweet

Intel official who 'unmasked' Trump associates is 'very high up'

The U.S. intelligence official who exposed the names of private citizens affiliated with the President's team is someone "very well known, very high up, very senior in the intelligence world," a source told Fox News.

Intelligence and House sources knowing about the disclosure of classified names told Fox that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) knows who illegally revealed the names. According to their sources, the person responsible is not in the FBI, but Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer have not yet been mentioned. (See how you can spin a story?)

To unmask a private citizen, or for that person's name to be revealed in an intelligence report is as rare as an intelligent thought by Whoopi Goldberg. When it normally happens the American in question is a suspect in a crime, is in danger or must be named in order to explain the context of the report.

A congressional source told Fox News that "The main issue in this case, is not only the unmasking of these names of private citizens, but the spreading of these names for political purposes that have nothing to do with national security or an investigation into Russia'a interference in the U.S. election."

But rather than being upset with the unmasking of the names of private citizens, the Democrats are attacking Nunes for focusing on the felony (i.e., the freaking crime) rather than the possibility, not the actuality, that someone in the Trump camp may have had something to do with the Russians tampering with our election, in spite of the fact that there isn't "even a smidgeon" of evidence, as Obama claimed about Hillary's email server.

Which there was enough smidgeons to fill a tome.

The mistake that Nunes made, in my opinion, was to go to Trump first about the alleged 'wiretapping' of President Trump's devices by the Obama administration during the 2016 campaign.

Nunes tried to get intelligence agencies to release the reports to him but he was stonewalled. Eventually, however, he got to see them at the only safe place available to protect the identities of the sources: the old executive office building on White House grounds in its Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF), a required location to view classified or top secret material.

The White House did not tell Nunes about the existence of the intelligence reports, but assisted in helping him gain access to the documents at his request.

Naturally, the White House is pushing Nunes et al, to pursue what improper surveillance and leaks may have taken place before Trump took office. This now comes after an Obama administration official, Dr. Evelyn Farkas, told MSNBC that her former colleagues tried to gather information on Trump team contacts with Russia, which she is now walking back saying she used a 'shorthand' way of explaining that she enjoys opera and long walks along the beach and other non sequiturs.

House Intelligence Ranking Member Adam Schiff (Duh-Calif.) criticized Nunes' handling of the investigation, and as much as I think of Schiff as a leftist dork, he makes a point--he should not have briefed Trump first. Nunes apologized the following day but said the briefing he had with Mr. Trump had nothing to do with Russia, or as Democrats like to say, "Mother Russia."

As it turned out, the citizens affiliated with Trump's team who were illegally unmasked, were not tied to any intel about Russia or other foreign intelligence. 

At least the Democrats have been able to take the focus off our real problem: radical Islam.


Tweet