So here's a wildarsed speculative explanation for Nunes: 1) His source leaks to him over a month ago of "spying on Trump transition"*
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel
2) Trump's meltdown gives him reason to ask NSA, FBI, CIA to turn over unmasked reports on March 15. NSA starts to comply, FBI doesn't.
1 reply 12 retweets 15 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
3) NSA detailee to NSC familiar w/hunt for unmasked reports knows that ones he leaked abt aren't being included in those for HPSCI repsonse
2 replies 12 retweets 13 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
4) So he sets off last week's theater, forcing NSA to count reports that AREN'T unmasked as unmasked. Anyway: that's my current WAG.
3 replies 10 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
.
@emptywheel Who unmasked the names, or authorized it. Doesn't that seem vital? Aside from possibly being illegal.2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @gr8tale @emptywheel
No, I mean the ones that are unmasked, which media seems to be ignoring. Nunes escapade is a sideshow in all of this.
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @gr8tale
Perhaps bc Nunes said, "Dozens of unmasked" and then changed and said "mostly masked"?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel @gr8tale
I mean, he's self-discrediting at this point.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
.
@emptywheel Put aside the Nunes sideshow, fact remains there were names unmasked. Who authorized? Why?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Some yes. Not dozens, like Nunes claimed. And probably like the Flynn ones they were appropriately unmasked.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.