Judge Jeanine Pirro compliments Sean Hannity on the way he laid out the case against Susan Rice, but notes that he left out one consideration that she would have included. She says, “Whenever any witness takes the stand, and that witness has a history of being a liar, as Susan Rice has been with respect to Benghazi, with respect to Bowe Bergdahl serving with honor and distinction, then a jury is entitled to take anything she says with less than a grain of salt.”
She says the questions that we have to ask are, “Who put her up to it, why did she do it, did Obama know about it, who did she share it with, is she the one who gave it to the Washington Post? And this woman has to be put under oath. We’ve got to get to the bottom of this, because if they can do it to the President or a president-elect, they’re doing it to us all the time.”
Jeh Sekulow calls Susan Rice the liar-in-chief, saying she’s told so many stories she could pass a lie detector test simply because she can’t tell one from another. He points out that what she said to Andrea Mitchell was not a denial of the unmasking.” Hannity points out that “she actually acknowledged it.”
He notes there are multiple felony counts possible here, saying, “But let me give you one simple one. If she put this in motion and this is what everybody needs to understand, but for Susan Rice unmasking this, if she didn’t do this, none of this would have happened. She did it, she put this whole issue in play. If she was working with others, knowing that they were going to distribute it, wink and a nod or however she did it, that’s a conspiracy under the espionage statute. So it’s very, very serious.”
Sekulow warns, “She needs to hire a really good criminal defense lawyer, really quick, because I think she’s in serious trouble.” Hannity points out her admission that the pace of surveilling Trump picked up after the election and then admits that the unmasking of General Flynn took place but that it wasn’t political. How could it not be political?”
Sekulow directs attention to the timeline, noting as the intelligence increased against the President and his associates, it becomes more frequent. He says, “So this wasn’t an incidental accident, oh my goodness, I want to know who USA 1 is, US person 1 and it’s President Trump, or President-elect Trump at that point, or one of his associates, but then she wants more, and as it gets closer it’s more.”
He says, “Here’s the political question. Why are we saying it’s okay to be spying on, I don’t even want to call it surveillance anymore, spying on the President-elect of the United States. Why is that okay?” Judge Jeanine agrees that “It’s certainly not okay,” naming off the list of violations, “the making of a false statement, espionage, violations of the FISA Act, but I think what is significant here is the fact that if Obama knew about all of this, nobody seemed to care, and this goes right to the timeline, until it looked like, ‘Oh my God they’re taking him seriously, and now what we need to do is we gotta stop, we gotta get the dirt, we’ve got to pass it around.”
Sekulow notes that Dr. Evelyn Farkas was doing exactly what Judge Jeanine just outlined with them wondering who is the “we” in the conspiracy that she admitted to.
Thank you for reading and sharing my work – Please look for me, Rick Wells, at http://www.facebook.com/RickRWells/ , http://www.gab.ai/RickRWells , https://mewe.com/profile/rick.wells.1 , https://seen.life/21990861rick-wells/profile, https://plus.google.com/u/0/+RickwellsUs and on my website http://RickWells.US – Please SUBSCRIBE in the right sidebar at RickWells.US – not dot com. I’m also at Stop The Takeover, https://www.facebook.com/StopTheTakeover/ and please follow me on Twitter @RickRWells.