Former national security adviser Susan Rice agreed to testify regarding allegations that she spied on various people for the Obama administration, but only if the meeting is classified and behind closed-doors.
Over the last few months, former President Barack Obama has been exposed for spying on the American people, including wiretapping Donald Trump and his campaign.
The Senate has been working hard to investigate these claims and has called on Rice to provide a sworn testimony to set the record straight.
Conservative Tribune reports:
Americans may not have the answers for a long time. According to the Independent Journal Review, Rice has refused to testify at an open Senate hearing regarding the allegations.
Instead, Rice has said that she would be willing to talk about the concerns with members of Congress — but only if it’s conducted in a classified, closed-door setting.
The core question is simple: Did the former national security advisor improperly “unmask” Trump campaign staff members during unrelated surveillance?
Sen. Lindsey Graham has been leading the charge to uncover the truth about Rice. “I’d like to ask questions of her,” the South Carolina Republican told CNN this week. “I have seen press reports — I don’t know how accurate they are — that she was involved in the unmasking of an American citizen who was incidentally surveilled.”
The scandal involves two overlapping themes: Alleged Russian interference during the election, and the arguably more troubling possibility that the Obama administration used that foreign factor as an excuse to spy on Americans for political gain.
Graham firmly believes the Russians interfered in the election and is working hard to confirm these claims.
As for Rice, Graham wants her to explain what took place so that he can properly investigate the entire incident.
“Ambassador Rice is prepared to assist Congressional inquiries into Russian election interference because of the important national interests at stake,” the letter stated, “provided they are conducted in a bipartisan manner, and as appropriate, in classified session.”
What do you think about Rice? Does her conditional testimony prove that she is guilty?