reauthorized but that s not this. in practice, if a national security adviser at the white house wants to demask someone s name and find out who is that person, these foreign officials were discussing, there s a process you have to go through. it s not simple, is it? oh, no. what you do is you ve gotten the report. you say i really need to know who person number one is. you fill out a request, in her case a staff member would fill out the request. it would go to nsa and literally be adjudicated by the analyst, a lawyer and someone who is an expert in unmasking and minimization. if the argument made by the requester, and by the way it doesn t have to be the national security adviser. it could be a gs-9 analyst at khai who needs it to perform his or her job. they make an adjudication and make a decision and then, wolf, if it s yes that identity is revealed only to the requester, not to everyone else on the original distribution, so this is very careful and very well
officials at the top of that agency. the director and a few others. which agencies do mask? was it just those two and are we also talking cia and dia? it could be any of those in the u.s. community. you get this information. what is the the legal you get it? thlega requirement now for the official that has gotten this information. she makes a request to see what the person named in this report. she gets the name. what is her legal requirement to protect that name going forward? there was more than one person involved. the requester and the granter. they are only granted to the
melissa: especially your first point. when she said i leaked nothing to nobody. she used the word leaked again. sort of like okay maybe you didn t leak it but did you discuss it? how do you think all of this information became basically common knowledge? exactly. the reason that is so important. the authority to receive unmasked information is a precious authority. it s our civil liberties. it is appropriate for a national security adviser to receive that information in certain instances. but when you get it, it is given only to the requester, only to the national security adviser in this instance. and if she disseminates it, she needs to explain why she disseminated it. that is a precious document she is given with the names of americans on there and it should not be disseminated. melissa: still, it seems like based on what she said, it would be almost impossible to say she did anything illegal. she said she thought maybe even if she discussed it with other
how many people unmaskin unmasking. here again, stepping back from the specifics and this is something that intelligence officials who have served the administration, it is a very specific process, there s only about 20 people in the national security agency that has the ability to approve the unmasking and then the process is to have that information go back solely to the requester. so very few people. and the story s literally moving as we re talking. jim sciuto is reporting that both susan rice and a colleague of hers were responsible for that unmasking. what do you think s going on. i ll let others do the
and schumer. that s amy schumer. not shying from politics there, doing elizabeth warren. they had fun at spicer and donald trump, but we are going to have the grammy awards in l.a., and things get get political. people watching for this. talking music and politics is our writer and editor requester teen vogue, how are you doing? good. i m excited. did you catch the snl impressions? it was getting in on the idea she s maybe a little too much ho homework. it s interesting, like, they only make fun of the left in terms of personas. what is there to work from other than the goody too shoes. they were making fun of her trying to hold, like, the actors corruption to account, so her brand or her, you know, values have till coming through in the impression. yeah. it was strange. it was sort of that it was poking a little fun, but it was