Samantha Power Claimed She Never Tried
To Unmask Michael Flynn, But Records
Show She Unmasked Him 7 Times
The Federalist,
by
Sean Davis
Original Article
Posted By: Pluperfect,
5/14/2020 5:02:30 AM
Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power testified to Congress in 2017 that she never sought to unmask records containing information about former White House National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. Newly declassified documents from the National Security Agency (NSA), however, show that her name appeared on at least seven separate requests to unmask Flynn’s name between Nov. 30, 2016, and Jan. 11, 2017.
Power was asked explicitly during sworn 2017 testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) whether she had ever attempted to unmask information related to Michael Flynn, a retired general and former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency
Reply 1 - Posted by:
Petronius 5/14/2020 5:07:59 AM (No. 410496)
What a bunch of lying weasels old jug ears employed. So when are we going to see the indictments?
64 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
judy 5/14/2020 5:58:54 AM (No. 410514)
Most of the unmaskings were made before Flynn made the phone call ..the call they used as an excuse to torture Flynn for 4 years. My guess is Flynn is one on many they spied on.
48 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
LadyVet 5/14/2020 6:01:33 AM (No. 410516)
There seems to be plenty of evidence for a perjury charge.
43 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
jeffkinnh 5/14/2020 6:14:01 AM (No. 410522)
Incompetent or lying or both? I believe at one point, Power has stated that someone else in her office may have used her password and seemed unconcerned about it. If so, she is accountable for illegal access of her accounts.
41 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
privateer 5/14/2020 6:39:27 AM (No. 410538)
FTA: “Yes, I have no recollection of making a request related to General Flynn,” Power again claimed. All my life I've heard: ignorance of the law is no excuse. Well, in a similar way 'no recollection' of your criminal actions should count for nothing in your defense. Legally, it should be known as the Hillary Dodge. Why is it that lying to the fbi, even in an 'informal' interview is like perjury, but lying in a Congressional hearing is no big deal?
34 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
watashiyo 5/14/2020 6:53:13 AM (No. 410553)
Yup, she's GUILTY alright!
19 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
LaVallette 5/14/2020 6:59:15 AM (No. 410559)
Note carefully: She did not flatly deny to the Committee of of the House that she was not involved all. She merely said "“I don’t recall, making such a request” The first refers to the time it took place, the second refers to the time that the question was put to her later and in a different context. Note the very carefully and "nicely" worked out legal "strategy" which is becoming very common when senior members of government or ex governments are brought before legal committees, tribunal or investigating organizations, under oath. It is the perfect way of to avoid a perjury charge, if later evidence emerges that in fact one was involved up to the gills at the time the matter. The plea to the perjury charge will be that at the time the question was put some time after the incident, the respondent genuinely could not recall, but when the probative evidence came out it caused a rapid memory recovery and now the respondent is able to admit the matter. It is outright "shyster dissimulation. However whether the "I cannot recall" or "I have no memory" can be legally interpreted as proving "deliberate lie" for the charge of perjury beyond reasonable doubt is another matter,
16 people like this.
This is just one big reason never to vote for a democrat/communist. They have terrible memories. It is probably because of all that pot. You know the stuff they are always pushing on our kids. Now that early altzheimers is appearing among 30 and 40 yr olds I wonder if anyone will make that connection. Joe Kennedy wants to blame it on global warming, yeah that's it your head is getting too hot. Hillary couldn't remember a darn thing either in all those hearings she had to go to to try and unearth all of her corrupt shenanigans.
17 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
F15 Gork 5/14/2020 7:33:09 AM (No. 410589)
Why do they lie? Because they can and know they will get away with it.
28 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
BeatleJeff 5/14/2020 7:45:41 AM (No. 410602)
Liars tell lies. It's what they do. And the entire 0 Administration was just one big snake pit full of liars.
17 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
Clinger 5/14/2020 7:53:01 AM (No. 410610)
Hey Sam, why don't you simply say "what difference at this point does it make?" I hear that's a can't miss line that gets you off the hook every time.
Glad I could help.
20 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
VietVet68 5/14/2020 8:21:55 AM (No. 410649)
After the Obama regime and all their illegal activities how can any voter pull the lever for a democrat ever again. They're all corrupt, they all lie and apparently will do anything to stay in power. So much for the "Scandal Free" Obama administration.
16 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
jacksin5 5/14/2020 8:29:12 AM (No. 410658)
The Ambassador to the U.N is in on this too? How about the cleaning lady, or the pool guy? Judt indict everyone, and let the discovery phase begin.
10 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
h24015 5/14/2020 8:40:16 AM (No. 410677)
I always wonder about what other treasonist activities we don't know about.
10 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
Dodge Boy 5/14/2020 8:43:04 AM (No. 410681)
Ruh roh, Smantha. Lying to congress?
5 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
gone2pot 5/14/2020 9:07:42 AM (No. 410714)
So what? What good is it to know all the information about the deep state coup and the Marxists and media parts in the crimes when the only thing that will happen is we'll know and they will get away with it and be rewarded for being felons? Truth is useless unless it is efficacious and kids, it ain't and in the case of the coup members and deep state, looks like it never will be. All truth does right now is sell pillows. That's pretty sad if that's the only result and it has been for almost four years and counting.
6 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
The Remnants 5/14/2020 9:18:17 AM (No. 410727)
Just an afterthought: we have knowledge of the unmaskers, but will there be a corresponding list of the unmasked? In addition to General Flynn's name, that is. Probably not. Might be a lawsuit in there someplace. Just something else for the rabbit hole, which is overflowing as is.
5 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
Ida Lou Pino 5/14/2020 9:45:29 AM (No. 410779)
It all depends on the meaning of "try" and "attempt."
Samantha just sort of eased her way into the unmaskings. No perjury here.
NEXT!
3 people like this.
Reply 19 - Posted by:
Krause 5/14/2020 10:03:38 AM (No. 410818)
Democrats could be bigger liars than the Chinese government is.
4 people like this.
Reply 20 - Posted by:
snowoutlaw 5/14/2020 10:23:45 AM (No. 410859)
She should have had a lawyer with her when she testified, they would have told her to plead the 5th.
1 person likes this.
Reply 21 - Posted by:
little guy 5/14/2020 10:50:33 AM (No. 410899)
Well ... not to get all techy here and then lost in the weeds, everyone needs to understand how Washington works when they want to cover something up.
Re-read the transcripts ... not just in this article but elsewhere as well ... and you'll see that Ms. Powers clearly says on record that "I don't recall". Then McCabe often responds with "I think what YOU just stated Congressman is correct...." blah, blah, blah. This is classic b.s. and dates back to Nixon but was really moved up to an art form by Hillary trying to recall the FBI papers literally found on her lawn (even then there were rats at the FBI) or trying to recollect Whitewater and those cattle futures. Certainly not the truth ... but not exactly a perjury lie either.
Also, hiding behind behavior that everyone did and got away with doesn't make your action excusable but it does provide an explanation. It is never an exoneration or justification in a fair court. Only in Washington.
If you or I robbed a bank and said: "I was just doing what everyone else does!" or you were caught speeding by a cop and said "Officer, I was just keeping up with traffic!" you'd see how far that "excuse" or "explanation" would get you.
6 people like this.
Reply 22 - Posted by:
Kafka2 5/14/2020 11:08:35 AM (No. 410921)
Before Obama, the list of officials that could request the names of U.S. citizens that could be unmasked (aka, revealed) was very small and restricted to intelligence officials. In the eleventh hour of the Obama administration, he expanded this list greatly to include many of his senior officials who had nothing to do with intelligence. This enabled the next three and a half years of the phony Russia collusion hoax designed to overthrow President Trump. This goes far beyond anything Nixon tried to do.
4 people like this.
Reply 23 - Posted by:
bighambone 5/14/2020 11:12:52 AM (No. 410928)
Like with just about everything that the Federal Government does, there should be a paper trail showing every time a request was made to “unmask” General Flynn.
So there should be a written application to “unmask” Flynn that was filed each time that anyone requested that Flynn be “unmasked” listing the reasons for the “unmasking” and the identity and signature of the requester.
If it turns out that those applications are now “missing” you would have to be extremely naive to believe that those requests were in the up and up and in accordance with applicable laws.
2 people like this.
Reply 24 - Posted by:
DVC 5/14/2020 11:12:58 AM (No. 410929)
#3, only Republicans can be charged with perjury.
5 people like this.
Seven times in the two months that we can see.
1 person likes this.
Reply 26 - Posted by:
john56 5/14/2020 11:37:58 AM (No. 410969)
The question I'd like to know is that the record shows that Gen Flynn and the Russian Ambassador spoke on Dec, 23 and 29. Okay, I can see how late Dec. and Jan requests fit their coup plotting needs.
What were they "unmasking" in November and early December?
And I can't think that the ONLY guy they wanted to unmask was Lt Gen Michael Flynn and why did all those folks from the Ambassador to Italy to the Syria CIA Station Chief get in on the game. Heck, the only guy who didn't unmask Gen Flynn was the Janitor to the Third Assistant Undersecretary to the Secretary of Agriculture for Bovine Excrement.
5 people like this.
Reply 27 - Posted by:
Kafka2 5/14/2020 12:04:40 PM (No. 411020)
Suddenly, all these people have developed "amnesia." Who knew that this was so contagious to Democrats? I guess this is the result of the hot steaming pile of conspiracy that they dump on this country over the last three and a half years being revealed for what it is.
0 people like this.
Reply 28 - Posted by:
Penney 5/14/2020 12:17:40 PM (No. 411033)
Dem pols! ...If their lips are moving they are lying. It's what they do.
0 people like this.
Reply 29 - Posted by:
JackBurton 5/14/2020 12:46:54 PM (No. 411067)
Is that lacking candor?
Or is it garden variety lying?
0 people like this.
Reply 30 - Posted by:
BigTimeTrumper 5/14/2020 3:30:37 PM (No. 411208)
Boot Hill is full of liars and cheats meaning that many less on the streets...THIS...when all systems are broken...the Feral Govt is turned against We The People...is WHY we have the Second and most important Amendment....AND why the offenders don't want us to have it!
1 person likes this.
#12, I'm going to have almost as much trouble voting GOP if they don't figure out how to make hold these corrupt dirtbags accountable. Are you listening, LINDSAY GRAHAM??!
1 person likes this.
Reply 32 - Posted by:
HonestDon 5/14/2020 4:42:13 PM (No. 411293)
I sure hope we get to SEE the unmask request. Wouldn't it be grand if "somebody" forged her signature to get it?
0 people like this.
Reply 33 - Posted by:
HotRod 5/14/2020 5:17:38 PM (No. 411325)
It's the old ''I don't recall'' defense. Avoids perjury in a dishonest answer!
Indict. Prosecute!
1 person likes this.
Reply 34 - Posted by:
czechlist 5/14/2020 5:46:48 PM (No. 411344)
Have to play a little "devil's advocate".
As I understand - The "unmaskers" do not know who they are "unmasking" until the person is "unmasked". They read the transcript of a conversation with a foreign agent and want to know who the American in the conversation was. What I would like to know is why political hacks were privy to the transcript.
The real issue/crime is WHO LEAKED TO THE PRESS
2 people like this.
Reply 35 - Posted by:
doctorfixit 5/14/2020 5:52:39 PM (No. 411348)
Samantha Power. Enemy of the People. Deep State operator. Send her to Guantanamo.
1 person likes this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Pluperfect"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)