Dobbs, Jarrett – Rice Bailing On Testifying Because She’s In Real Legal Jeopardy

dobbs jarrett

Lou Dobbs has noticed that in addition to Susan Rice, there are others who are trying to hide from the prying eyes of Congressional committees, among them is Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson, who last week refused an invitation to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Gregg  Jarrett joins Dobbs to discuss what Jarrett described as an epidemic of unmasking being engaged in by the Obama regime and that crimes may have been committed. The bigger the criminal the more demanding they are, as we learned with Hillary Clinton and her criminal entourage.

The level of cooperation of those conducting the investigation is a good indicator of whether or not they are taking things seriously or merely going through the motions. So far, nothing serious threatens Susan Rice.  She’s asked for a weekend testimony date. 

Since she doesn’t have a real job it’s hard to see why she would find attending during the week to be a problem, aside from it being more public and committees don’t generally conduct their affairs on a weekend. We’ll see if she’s running things or if the committee is in that regard. A Saturday schedule worked out well for Clinton when the FBI came to put on their performance.

The rescheduling tells Jarrett that lawyers have gotten involved and “told her to clam up, wait for a subpoena and when you get a subpoena it’s time to play let’s make a deal without Monty Hall, because she’s in legal jeopardy [Guilty]. If it’s true, all of the evidence that has been uncovered about her unmasking, there’s three potential crimes here.”

Jarrett explains, “It’s a crime to lie in your request to unmask. There’s only one reason you can site, it’s national security. If a document on its face shows no national security concerns then you’ve lied. It’s also a crime to use your public office, her office, for a corrupt purpose, and that would be to lie. And a third crime is, as we all know, it’s a crime to unmask and leak a name to the media, like Michael Flynn. So at least one crime was committed here and likely many more.”

Dobbs notes that the “one crime” certainly involves Michael Flynn, invoking Sherlock Holmes in pointing out there is “no other possibility other than the fact that his name was leaked.” Jarrett says he has “a feeling that they will eventually be able to determine the number of people who had access to Flynn’s name and then whittle that list down to the individual who leaked it.”

Jarrett says it’s not just others such as Samantha Power and John Brennan who have been rumored to be on the list of deep state subversives worthy of being looked into. He points out that the number of people caught up in what is supposedly incidental collection does make one wonder, “is it true that the Obama administration, in the last year in office, was undertaking a concerted effort to hurt the Donald Trump campaign and then the Presidency of Donald Trump.”

Jarrett expects that once offenders are identified they will be indicted, noting that top administration officials were the ones with the access to some of the leaked data. Dobbs asks if executive privilege could be claimed as a defense. Jarrett notes that the Obama administration no longer has the ability to make those claims and the new President is unlikely to do so, given his desire to uncover the information.

He points out it was the White House counsel’s office that exposed the unmasking in the first place.

Thank you for reading and sharing my work –  Please look for me, Rick Wells at,, and on my website http://RickWells.US  – Please SUBSCRIBE in the right sidebar at RickWells.US – not dot com, and also follow me on Twitter @RickRWells.

%d bloggers like this: