Tucker Carlson. We now have a bit of info reported by TheRecord, a cyberspace online pub, that, if true, actually sheds some light on the unmasking issue. NSA has done a review for Congress & evidently agrees another agency asked for the unmasking. 👇/1 therecord.media/nsa-review-fin…
https://twitter.com/McAdooGordon/status/1413734352773689346
Unmasking is done by the IC collector agencies at the request of their customer agencies who are the consumers of the polished intelligence products the collectors create. It only makes sense in a situation where a customer agency is involved, not just the collector agency. /2
This tidbit, again - if true, raises a question of which agency the "whistleblower" is from. How would someone outside NSA know BOTH that TC's info was being collected AND that NSA was planning to out his info? Was that whistleblowing? Could it have been a defensive briefing? /3
In TheRecord's article, the proposition is also asserted that the collection of TC's info is not "incidental," but rather is from third parties who are discussing TC's info. I wonder here if the use of "incidental" is very technical, as in "it's not directly with the target." /4
It may still be true that the actual emails/texts are being captured because they are being forwarded, cut&pasted, etc., by the target &/or a 3rd party. It always made more sense that the recipients of TC's emails/texts were sharing them & that was likely part of the equation./5
Whenever you are dealing with the IC, you have to parse the language VERY carefully & precisely, & allow for all the possibilities (stated & unstated) that the language allows, & then also allow for the possibility of deception, minimization, omission, etc. Assumptions cloud. /6
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
