iceberg
Diamond Member
- May 15, 2017
- 36,788
- 14,920
Whatever happened to the 'unmaskings' probe?
"Then, they argued that they needed to store the information on U.S. citizens a little longer, and might occasionally need to “unmask” or reveal their names. Still, “unmasking” was supposed to be extraordinarily rare, requiring a high-ranking official’s approval accompanied by a strong legal argument that the citizen’s name is crucial to addressing some national-security threat.
But several years ago, intel insiders tell me, the process was corrupted. Here’s how:
An official who is a bad actor may want to monitor a U.S. citizen — say, a political enemy or a journalist — but knows he could never get wiretap approval from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). So he develops a pretext to wiretap a foreigner or a target in contact with that citizen. He then “incidentally” captures the citizen’s information, too. Later, he builds a case for “unmasking” the U.S. citizen’s name, supposedly for national security or other crucial reasons."
all this under obama. started by bush.
for those who defend this action, or these actions, understand that simply means trump can do it also. if *they* can, he can. that is the danger of doing what your emo-feelz says to do is that in so doing, you open a door best left shut. only a fool would think bad actions won't be repeated by the other side.
"Then, they argued that they needed to store the information on U.S. citizens a little longer, and might occasionally need to “unmask” or reveal their names. Still, “unmasking” was supposed to be extraordinarily rare, requiring a high-ranking official’s approval accompanied by a strong legal argument that the citizen’s name is crucial to addressing some national-security threat.
But several years ago, intel insiders tell me, the process was corrupted. Here’s how:
An official who is a bad actor may want to monitor a U.S. citizen — say, a political enemy or a journalist — but knows he could never get wiretap approval from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). So he develops a pretext to wiretap a foreigner or a target in contact with that citizen. He then “incidentally” captures the citizen’s information, too. Later, he builds a case for “unmasking” the U.S. citizen’s name, supposedly for national security or other crucial reasons."
all this under obama. started by bush.
for those who defend this action, or these actions, understand that simply means trump can do it also. if *they* can, he can. that is the danger of doing what your emo-feelz says to do is that in so doing, you open a door best left shut. only a fool would think bad actions won't be repeated by the other side.
