Is this Susan Rice email proof that she’s turning on Obama?

Rice email

I saw an interesting thread from Thomas Wictor about this Susan Rice email.

I won’t post the entire thing here. But if you want to read it, here’s the LINK.

Instead, I will post the salient tweets from the thread — starting with this one:

Now, I’m not certain this is true.

And let me explain why.

Association with Barack Obama has served as a Golden Ticket into elite society – both here in the US and globally — for everyone who worked for him.

In his defense of his position, Wictor cites a Vogue puff piece about Susan Rice from September 2013 which I dutifully read. And I think it supports this point of mine.

Rice holds a party in honor of LGBT Pride Month at her “penthouse of the Waldorf Astoria.”

Read Vogue’s description of what became Rice’s final party before she left the UN post to became Obama’s National Security Advisor.

She makes her entrance wearing a scoop-neck blouse, black trousers, and a striking green Ultrasuede jacket accented with circles cut above the hem that she bought at a Smithsonian Craft Show. Her hair is combed back to her shoulders, and a gold watch and bracelet flash on her wrists. She introduces Abramson to Gérard Araud, the French ambassador to the U.N., embraces Farrow, then spots David Dinkins, the venerable former mayor of New York. She hands him her own champagne flute, says, “Cheers,” and fist-bumps the glass.
The party tilts into full swing, with the seventies disco anthem “Ain’t No Stoppin’ Us Now” blasting from speakers. Rice dives at people’s cheeks for kisses, glances up at her tall, dark-haired husband of 21 years, Ian Cameron, and jests mischievously to a dignitary and his boyfriend, “If you don’t touch mine, I won’t touch yours.” The boyfriend in question, who is famously reluctant to attend stuffy U.N. parties, exclaims, “If I knew you were so fun, I would have come years ago.”

This is what her association with Barack Obama brought her.

A penthouse at the Waldorf, rubbing shoulders with Mia Farrow and Jill Abramson, hosting cocktail parties with gushing and sycophantic guests.

Do you think Susan Rice, left to her own devices, would have ever been in the position to rub elbows with the powerful, wealthy and well-connected?

Hell, do you think any of these Obama people would have had that opportunity?

But because of their association with him, they are invited to the poshest cocktail parties and the toniest vacation spots. They are given positions on prestigious boards. And they are called upon to write “expert” columns in the New York Times and the Washington Post.

Obama did that for them.

He is their Golden Ticket.

And I just don’t see Susan Rice stabbing him the back when he remains as wildly popular to these elites today as he did when he was President.

Now, I don’t think that Susan Rice is blindly loyal to Barack Obama. Nor is Samantha Power, Ben Rhodes or any of the other people from his orbit.

Well, let me clarify; there is one exception. Valerie Jarrett is blindly loyal. But everybody else is loyal because Obama has been their Golden Ticket.

In other words, their loyalty is based on self-interest – they absolutely get something from it.

So why would Susan Rice betray Obama when he is still her Golden Ticket?

As long as the media, the elites and the globalists see Obama as their superstar, what benefit would there be for Susan Rice to turn on him?

I just don’t see it. Not now.

Wictor also asserts this:

But that isn’t accurate.

Rice doesn’t say that Comey lied to Congress. And the link to the Law & Crime article doesn’t say that either.

A newly-discovered email suggests former FBI Director James Comey may have been less than honest about his meetings with former president Barack Obama on the subject of Russian interference with and during the 2016 general election.

“Suggests,” “may have been less than honest” – this is not the same as “Rice ALSO says that Comey lied to Congress.”

In his opening statement to the Senate Intel Committee, Comey said [hat tip The Daily Caller]:

“I spoke alone with President Obama twice in person (and never on the phone) – once in 2015 to discuss law enforcement policy issues and a second time, briefly, for him to say goodbye in late 2016.”

Note the use of the word “alone.”

The Rice Email lists the people attending the meeting: Obama, Biden, Comey, Yates, and Rice.

Comey was not alone with Obama on January 5, 2017.

In his Law & Crime article, Colin Kalmbacher points out that Comey also said in his statement, “I have tried to include information that may be relevant to the committee.”

And in that, Kalmbacher is right. This January 5, 2017 meeting would most definitely be relevant. So why didn’t Comey mention it?

That’s a valid point. But that is not the same as saying “Rice ALSO says that Comey lied to Congress.”

How could she — when the Rice email was written on January 20, 2017 and Comey’s testimony didn’t happen until June 8? Rice would have no way of knowing that Comey intended to keep this meeting secret from Congress – unless of course all attending the meeting agreed to do so. But we have no way of knowing if that’s the case.

Now, don’t get me wrong, the revelations in the Rice email definitely show that Comey was less than forthcoming with Congress. But I don’t believe that was her intent.

I still think, as I said yesterday, that Susan Rice’s intent in composing this email was to provide Obama a bit of air cover.

Now, admittedly, I could very well be wrong in my assessment. And Wictor could be right.

But I just keep coming back to Obama being the Golden Ticket for these people.

And so long as an association with him offers Susan Rice the good life, I just can’t see her tossing him under the bus.

Susan Rice isn’t omniscient.

And there is no way in hell she would have known that this RussiaGate house of cards would come tumbling down the way it has.

The reason the Rice email does more damage than good for Obama and Comey is because of what happened after Susan Rice composed it. How could she possibly know that it would careen out of control the way it has?

On January 20, 2017, Susan Rice had no reason to believe James Comey or Sally Yates would have been fired. As far as she knew — at that time — they were safe in their positions and fully able to continue the work.

No. This Rice email was not written as a way to destroy Obama and Comey.

It’s just her dumb luck that it turned out that way.

Hit the Tip Jar!

Your contributions help keep an ad-free site. Hit the DONATE button in the side bar. Or, set up a recurring monthly contribution by choosing SUBSCRIBE. Even a few bucks can make a world of difference!

Share, share, share

8 thoughts on “Is this Susan Rice email proof that she’s turning on Obama?

  • February 14, 2018 at 12:11 pm

    I know her not! But I bet she knows Seth Rich. She is not as dumb as Yeb!.

  • February 14, 2018 at 1:29 pm

    Susan Rice was wealthy before Obama. Part of the reason Obama chose her to be in his administration. She had the chops to open doors and cement his ‘genius’. She has a long history.

    What her email is is an insurance policy to cover for herself. She can easily sing like a bird or go under the bus or stay quiet. Remember this is the woman who did a lot of illegal unmasking at the request of Obama.

    However I don’t see why she is worrying. I don’t think the GOP has the guts to perp walk any of the truly guilty. They will find a fall guy/s and they appear to be within the FBI itself. More than likely Strzok, Page, and Comey.

    • February 14, 2018 at 1:56 pm

      And how quickly do you think before the elites jettisoned her if she stabs Obama in the back? He is still wildly popular with them. If she turned on him right now, they would eat her alive.

      • February 15, 2018 at 2:14 am

        Her time in the limelight is already over.

  • February 14, 2018 at 3:56 pm

    If Bill Priestap, Asst Dir. FBI Counterintelligence Div, has truly flipped and is singing to congressional investigators and the IG, perhaps Susan Rice is afraid of what he may know and tell about her. When staring at the possibility of years in a federal penitentiary, Rice may not want a portrait of her in an orange jumpsuit to be her signature for all of posterity. I have no doubt she would drop a dime on anyone she could in order to avoid the Gray Bar Hotel.

    • February 14, 2018 at 4:06 pm

      So what are you suggesting? She hopped into a time machine back to January 20, 2017 and planted that email?

  • February 15, 2018 at 10:43 am

    She hasn’t turned, she will lawyer up and plead the 5th and nothing will ever happen with Rip Van Sessions as AG. Trump can not even fire him, without repercussions, and the Dems would hold up any new AG appointment.

  • February 15, 2018 at 10:57 am

    “And there is no way in hell she would have known that this RussiaGate house of cards would come tumbling down the way it has.”

    Given that Obama politicized agencies by placement of political agents in management positions, her going on the TV news circuit to repeat Obama’s/Clinton’s lie that Benghazi was caused by a video (when they knew it wasn’t), she knew she was expendable as far as Obama was concerned. And she knew that actions these agents engaged were certainly violations of the Hatch act and illegal under the Constitution. What her letter does, is just document Obama’s actions.

    The question to ask, is what reason would Obama have to even question sharing information his administration obtained, with the incoming president (in this case about Russia)? Remember Evelyn Farkas’s statements on MSNBC about her urging the people with information collected about alleged Trump/Russia collusion, to be saved before Obama’s administration ended, and the sources and methods they used to obtain it.

    The obvious answer, is Obama was illegally spying on Trump (and probably other potential GOP candidates as well). And it was so much business as usual, that most of them didn’t even consider it might be illegal because the setup via the dossier, fooled even them. They likely started intercepting communications of anyone Carter Page communicated with, until they monitored all of the Trump campaign people. And note Dem. Rep. Jerrold Nadlers 2/3/18 letter to his colleagues, in response to the Nunes memo, which has this gem:

    “There is no reason to dispute the Nunes memo’s assertion that the FBI was actively investigating the Trump campaign months before they approached the court about Carter Page.”

    We’ve only heard a small amount about who was monitored by the FBI and when. And we haven’t heard anything about who the NSA and CIA were monitoring, but both Brennan and Clapper have been sniping quite a bit about the Nunes memo and exposure of Obama’s surveillance. It’s worth asking why.

Comments are closed.