Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

babylonsister

(171,066 posts)
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 09:33 AM Apr 2017

Josh Marshall: De-Derping the 'Un-Masking' Story

De-Derping the 'Un-Masking' Story

ByJosh Marshall
PublishedApril 3, 2017, 7:21 PM EDT



My read on Eli Lake's story about Susan Rice 'unmasking' Trump transition officials is that it's a rather elaborate attempt to make a scandal out of something that isn't scandalous at all. Given what we know just about Mike Flynn's activities in November and December of 2016 alone, Rice's alleged actions don't seem that surprising at all. National security experts seem to agree.

But here's something in the story that got my attention.

Read this paragraph, the third graf down in the story.

The National Security Council's senior director for intelligence, Ezra Cohen-Watnick, was conducting the review, according to two U.S. officials who spoke with Bloomberg View on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly. In February Cohen-Watnick discovered Rice's multiple requests to unmask U.S. persons in intelligence reports that related to Trump transition activities. He brought this to the attention of the White House General Counsel's office, who reviewed more of Rice's requests and instructed him to end his own research into the unmasking policy.


What jumps out to me here is the last sentence. Cohen-Watnick, whose new boss, National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster, was trying to fire him while all this was happening, took his 'research' to the White House Counsel's Office. They reviewed what he had come up with, did some additional research on Rice's requests and then "instructed him to end his own research."

This is all very cryptic and it's sort of a throwaway line in Lake's story. It's so spare you could read a number of possibilities into the sentence. Maybe the Counsel's office said, 'Wow, this is so big we need to take over this critical investigation you've started. Thank you so much for your work.' But that does not seem like the most likely read.

I would suggest that a much more plausible read is that Cohen-Watnick brought his 'research' to the Counsel's office, they looked at and basically said, 'Knock it off.'

That would make sense on a few fronts.

As even Lake concedes, Rice's alleged actions - if the report is accurate - were almost certainly legal. Most national security experts say they were not only legal but entirely proper. Moreover, the kind of snooping around that Cohen-Watnick was apparently doing could very plausibly be interpreted as an attempt to monitor or interfere with the on-going counter-intelligence probe of Trump associates' ties to Russia. The White House Counsel's job is to protect and look after the legal interests of the President. A good lawyer would likely want to shut that kind of freelancing down right away, especially if what Cohen-Watnick had found didn't amount to anything that helped the President or the White House.

more...

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/de-derping-the-un-masking-story
20 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Josh Marshall: De-Derping the 'Un-Masking' Story (Original Post) babylonsister Apr 2017 OP
That's about it! kentuck Apr 2017 #1
I'm confident that Rice will face charges before Trump does. (nt) Orrex Apr 2017 #2
Yeah, how horribly sad you're probably correct. Hugin Apr 2017 #5
and, don't forget NewJeffCT Apr 2017 #9
The American People Have A Right To Know Orrex Apr 2017 #10
Commin right up! Zoonart Apr 2017 #13
Isn't Cohen-Watnick the person that Michael Flynn brought with him to the NSC? kentuck Apr 2017 #3
Yep. That's the one. calimary Apr 2017 #14
It was totally aboveboard... Hugin Apr 2017 #4
This is making me insane Dem2 Apr 2017 #6
The Founding Fathers restricted voting to only all knowing stable men underpants Apr 2017 #7
Eli Lake NewRedDawn Apr 2017 #8
What's up with you body shaming, hunh? Bernardo de La Paz Apr 2017 #11
What is your problem? NewRedDawn Apr 2017 #15
As a relatively new member of DU you may not be aware that body-shaming is not approved here Bernardo de La Paz Apr 2017 #16
Well I am a 59 NewRedDawn Apr 2017 #17
You can call yourself what you want, but "fat, bald" has no place in condemning public officials Bernardo de La Paz Apr 2017 #18
Ok Fascist NewRedDawn Apr 2017 #19
Yes. . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Apr 2017 #20
What has been derped for the GOP voter Loubee Apr 2017 #12

Hugin

(33,148 posts)
5. Yeah, how horribly sad you're probably correct.
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 10:07 AM
Apr 2017

What a pathetic situation we find ourselves in... This is exactly why I gave up Karma.

kentuck

(111,098 posts)
3. Isn't Cohen-Watnick the person that Michael Flynn brought with him to the NSC?
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 10:01 AM
Apr 2017

When he was Trump's National Security Adviser?

Hugin

(33,148 posts)
4. It was totally aboveboard...
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 10:05 AM
Apr 2017

Just like having an email server.

But, the Trumpanzees are desperate to turn this whole Trumplin treachery into a he-said-she-said case. Classic FUD operation.

Dem2

(8,168 posts)
6. This is making me insane
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 10:08 AM
Apr 2017

Why aren't the people inside our government who are attempting a coup being held to task?

I guess the founding fathers couldn't envision the electorate being so desperate and hateful that they'd elect a mafia-like crime family?

underpants

(182,818 posts)
7. The Founding Fathers restricted voting to only all knowing stable men
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 10:44 AM
Apr 2017

Let's not forget that. I'm not proposing that that was a good thing.

You had to be an adult male who either owned land or were a merchant who was considered to be a pillar of the community. They specifically weeded out the riff raff.

 

NewRedDawn

(790 posts)
8. Eli Lake
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 11:03 AM
Apr 2017

This dead eyed fat bald blob was gutted live last week by David Corn on Lawrence O'Donnell. Another Bloomberg Trump toady like pinched faced Mark heartburn Halperin.

Bernardo de La Paz

(49,002 posts)
11. What's up with you body shaming, hunh?
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 11:30 AM
Apr 2017

"fat bald blob"
"pinched faced"

What do their appearances have to do with any facts or issues in this story?
 

NewRedDawn

(790 posts)
15. What is your problem?
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 12:22 PM
Apr 2017

I hate these motherfuckers that are destroying this country. I say it like it is. if you dont like it tough shit! My family is under attack by these mother fuckers & it is personal with me. They are trying to take insurance from my sick wife for one. So guess what Bernarado it goes way beyond politics to me!

Trouble is we been way civil with these fucking traitors way too long & what has it gotten us? I love Michelle Obama, but going high when they go low? Got us teabaggers & Trump. They deserve more than what little insults I can throw at them.So lay the fuck off!

Bernardo de La Paz

(49,002 posts)
16. As a relatively new member of DU you may not be aware that body-shaming is not approved here
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 12:28 PM
Apr 2017

From the DU Terms of Service (emphasis added):

No bigotry/insensitivity

Members are expected to respect diversity and demonstrate an appropriate level of sensitivity when discussing related topics. Racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, or other forms of bigoted intolerance are not permitted.

Why we have this rule: Democratic Underground is a diverse community which includes people of every race, sex, religious belief (or lack thereof), sexual orientation, gender identity, body type, disability, age, etc. We want to promote a welcoming atmosphere for all of our members, and do not want to provide a platform for bigotry.
 

NewRedDawn

(790 posts)
17. Well I am a 59
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 12:36 PM
Apr 2017

year old thinning hair fat blob who hates with a passion these Fascist motherfuckers. Again, do you have someone you love that these vermin are trying to literally kill with their policies?

I will demean them & resist them with all my being. Political correctness be damned! Thank you for your concern.

Bernardo de La Paz

(49,002 posts)
18. You can call yourself what you want, but "fat, bald" has no place in condemning public officials
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 12:51 PM
Apr 2017

... unless it plays directly to an issue or policy or statement of theirs. I think you misunderstand the meaning and purpose of what sometimes gets derisively called "political correctness".

It's the same reason we here don't call people or actions we don't like "gay" the way rednecks do. The reason is contained in the excerpt from the terms of service I quoted. Please read it again not for the surface but for the deeper meaning. The reason is that when you body-shame somebody for their appearance you give many readers the uncomfortable impression that their own appearance is a negative.

The prohibition against body-shaming is not just against calling women "fat" or "wearing a James Brown wig".

"What's good for the goose is good for the gander."

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Josh Marshall: De-Derping...