World of difference between wrong and illegal, especially in politics. Obviously this information was gathered for a political hit piece. Was her request illegal? Only if you can prove she did it with full intention of leaking the information. That can't be proved. Did she know, wink, wink, that it would be eventually leaked? Of course she did. Did she know that speculation would be spun as fact by a bought and paid for media? Only a political neophyte would think otherwise.
I am reading very conflicting info on Rice. Right sources yell ILLEGAL, left ones a typical procedure with nothing done wrong. I am no expert on these matters, and have no idea where truth lies. I assume most here are in the same boat as me with no real knowledge of government proceedings.
I hope they get to asking about whether any of the conversations that were unmasked came from foreign intel services. "wink" britain "wink"
The media/left have their marching orders to defend Rice at all costs, which tells you how serious this is. So we have the spectacle of liberals, normally so devout in defending privacy rights, sneering at republicans who object to having legal conversations monitored and unmasked for obviously political reasons.
So what you really mean is far left, since you probably would say CNN, NYTimes and WashPost are also center. Seriously, Bloomberg is part of the liberal/left media, little question about that. The reporter who did the story after Cernovich spilled the beans, Eli Lake, was a fanatical NeverTrumper.
from lawnewz.com "The key question now is simple: what legal basis did Susan Rice have to order the unmasking of Trump team members? If the information was inadequate to justify a FISA warrant (or the Obama White House wanted to keep some members of the intelligence community out of the loop?), what permissible purpose justified the unmasking? How significant is this?" The article also says Susan Rice had better start thinking about what's next for her.