04-12-2017, 05:46 PM
(04-12-2017, 03:07 PM)hollodero Wrote: Jeez, I don't know, I don't want to get pulled too deep into one possibility I just described without fully committing to it. (Because what do I know.)
But a very obvious answer seems to be: Which associate exactly. Another obvious answer seems to be: Acting on suspicion. Another obvious answer seems to be: She might know, but others might not.
That has not much to do with whether she told a lie or not. She did the unmasking of Trump aides, that one I believe, although I see that there are "anonymous sources" so there's a chance it isn't true. If it is, however, her answer just seems misleading. (and breaks down to what "disclosed" means :) ) - Why not saying, there's the unmasking process, it's something common, and whether Trump associates were unmasked or not, I'm not at liberty to say. What everyone else says. This quick "I know nothing about this" has something Sessionesque to it.
So she wanted to know the name. She asked for the name. They told her the name.
At that point the name is unmasked.
It hasn't been disclosed, leaked, disseminated, mishandled, etc. What is improper about the NSA asking to know the identity of someone talking to the target of surveillance by a US intelligence agency? And who is as it used for political gain after Trump was elected? What am I missing?