Judge Napolitano is a Fox News contributor. As a judge he understands the law and interprets the law. He often puts things in perspective for viewers to understand the law in plain and simple terms.
Judge Napolitano clearly knows that Susan Rice, as the former President Obama’s National Security Advisor, had the highest level of national security clearance. However, he will also tell you that she can’t reveal the identity of an American for a purpose OTHER THAN national security. If she asked for more people to be unmasked for political purposes, even those as far up as on the Supreme Court, that would be called espionage.
H/T Western Journalism:
Surveillance during the Obama administration might have even reached the Supreme Court, Fox News legal analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano said Monday.
Napolitano focused much of his interview with Maria Bartiromo of Fox Business Network on recent concerns voiced by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., that he was a subject of surveillance. Napolitano also added something he was told by the late Justice Antonin Scalia.
“Justice Scalia told me that he often thought the court was being surveilled. And he told me that probably four or five years ago,” Napolitano said.
The extent to which the Obama administration conducted surveillance on domestic, political targets has been an ongoing Washington narrative since March, when President Donald Trump accused former President Barack Obama of having him under surveillance. Since that time, media accounts have identified former national security adviser Susan Rice as the official who unmasked the identities of Americans caught up in surveillance.
Napolitano said the ramifications of the Obama administration’s domestic surveillance dwarf those of the alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
“It’s about your own government spying on the opposition party. That would be enormous if it’s true,” he said.
On May 5, Paul formally requested information on whether or not he was under surveillance. No public response has been made to that request.
Napolitano suggested that claims of surveillance are “most likely true.”
“Think of this as a three-step process: Surveillance, which is acquisition in a digital version of every keystroke on every computer, and every communication on every cell phone phone and landline phone; storage, which is the maintenance of the digital versions of these communications; and then unmasking, which is accessing this data and finding out the names of the people who are actually surveilled,” he said.
“It is beyond dispute that the NSA has access to, if it wants, it would be unlawful for them to do this, but they have it, every phone call of every person in the United States of America since 2005,” he added.
Wake up people!
“It is the use to which the raw intelligence data can be put that makes it criminal. If they had to unmask Sen. Paul’s name in order to understand a conversation he was having with a foreign agent and the foreign agent was harmful to the United States, they can do that,” he said.
“That’s not what he talking about. They’re talking about them unmasking him while he’s having a conversation with his campaign manager when he’s running in the Republican primary in 2016,” Napolitano said.
“The use of intelligence data for political purposes is a felony … Unmasking is illegal if done for any reason other than national security,” he added.
Why would Obama need to tap into the Supreme Court or Justice Scalia? Well, let’s see there was the ruling on gay marriage and then a little thing called Obamacare.
Holy Cow! Would Obama really go that far? Well, I’m sure if Justice Scalia knew something 4-5 years ago, he had pretty good instinct. Of course, too bad he’s still not alive to tell us anything? Coincidence or not?
Liberals dont’ want you to hear any more about the ‘unmasking’! No, certainly not! They just want you to know that ‘The Russians did it.” and that “Trump and the Russians colluded” and that’s why Hillary Clinton lost the presidential election. Ok? Right! (Wink. Wink.)
Liberals dont’ want anything said about the private email server that Hillary Clinton used or that highly classified emails were sent. Nope. That’s not the narrative. Let’s get back to… ‘The Russians did it’!
They also don’t want you to know WHO requested the ‘unmasking’ of names like Michael Flynn. That’s one of the reasons Comey was let go wasn’t it? He wouldn’t share the truth with President Trump, he was incompetent, and a Clinton/Obama holdover. Did he know who requested the unmasking? Certainly. Was it most likely Susan Rice? Most likely! Were others involved? Most likely. Do liberals really think we are THAT stupid?
Should these criminals have to testify before Congress? Absolutely! Should they be brought to justice? Absolutely!
Oh, but wait….let’s get back to the narrative….’The Russians did it’! Now, move along little sheeple!