I'm sure that with some pretzeling and strong self control to avoid grinning, someone can come up with something here.
Was the information necessary for his upcoming tea luncheon with the Princess of iceland?
If you did, you’d also understand that this is a strange question.
(no message)
I mean, I suppose its possible, but seems unlikely.
Maybe you could answer Baron's question. Or, are you avoiding it because there is no good answer yet?
And requesting an unmasking does not make it happen.
The president of course does not have to request anything of the kind. He gets to see whatever he wants, and can share it with whomever he wants.
need to do it. I also said that you could probably pretzel your way to an answer that you'd have to hold back a grin as you said it because you know full well that there really isn't a reason other than political.
On the same day the Post ran an article on the info?
But in realty it is not unusual at all.
(no message)
And that is what Chris is having a hard time doing: coming up with a reason. He is just saying unmasking in general is common. But the facts of this case are not common.
.......as I’m sure that longtime political activist turned Obama campaign advisor Samantha Powers who was then named as ambassador to the UN had statutory reason - all seven times that she had no recollection of doing.....otherwise they wouldn’t have granted it, right?
Then leaking to press? Normal? Targeting next administration without cause? Normal?
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Unmasking itself is not illegal. But, ask yourself, why do they mask? It's to protect the rights of American citizens. There has to be a compelling national interest to unmask. Here, the compelling interest in at least one case appears to be to leak to the press, and that is illegal.
Also, given who requested unmasking and when they did it, and what happened afterwards, it certainly seems like they were doing it to take down the following administration, which is banana republic type of behavior on the part of the Dems. But, I'm sure there is more information to come.
Like I say, though, be careful what behavior your defend, because Trump gets to do everything you defend.
(no message)
(no message)
You are like the person who lost their keys in the front yard, but is looking for them inside the house because the lighting is better.
But, I have a suggestion: Let's both just let it play out.
(no message)
(no message)
You are mindlessly defending them. I've made no attempt to defend Trump. The fact that you can say that is pretty funny. It tells me that you have TDS, and cannot actually address the topic at hand...it all has to go back to Trump, as if everything the D's do is justified because of Trump.
(no message)
(no message)