A slew of national security experts on Monday went after George W. Bush’s former press secretary, Ari Fleischer, over comments he made criticizing Obama administration officials who made requests to “unmask” American citizens.
Law&Crime previously explained at length how anonymous American individuals who show up in intelligence reports can be “unmasked” to provide better context for official analysis. It is an increasingly routine government intelligence practice which has become even more prevalent under the Trump administration. The controversy surrounding the unmasking of Michael Flynn has of late become the foundation for arguments that Flynn was wrongfully targeted by Obama administration officials, including then-Vice President Joe Biden.
“Thread worth reading,” Fleischer wrote, referring to a Fox News op-ed written by former National Security Council (NSC) chief of staff Fred Fleitz. “However, I suspect the MSM won’t care unless they find a journalist was unmasked. I suspect Congress won’t care unless they find a Congressman was unmasked. I care because civil liberties matter. There’s a good reason names are masked to begin with.”
Thread worth reading. However, I suspect the MSM won’t care unless they find a journalist was unmasked. I suspect Congress won’t care unless they find a Congressman was unmasked. I care because civil liberties matter. There’s a good reason names are masked to begin with. https://t.co/5yP7DM5KD7
— Ari Fleischer (@AriFleischer) May 18, 2020
Fleitz’s op-ed focused largely on the rarity of National Security Agency (NSA) authorized unmasking during his time in the White House. However, several former officials last week told the Washington Post that the intelligence about the Flynn-Sergey Kislyak calls were held by the FBI, not the NSA, and “a summary describing them was circulated among senior Obama administration officials without Flynn’s identity being masked.” What’s more, experts said, “masking” became a thing after the Bush years. In other words, the data reviewed by the Bush Administration was wide open.
National security experts were quick to point out the faulty premise espoused in Fleitz’s op-ed. Still others said Fleischer was in no position to criticize other administrations given his role in the post-9/11 Bush White House and stance on the Iraq War.
“Did you not read what NSADIR wrote? All unmaskings were to authorized individuals & followed proper NSA procedure, incl[uding] justification. Given what your Administration argued was lawful to do, you have gall to criticize,” National security attorney Mark Zaid said.
Did you not read what NSADIR wrote? All unmaskings were to authorized individuals & followed proper NSA procedure, incl justification.
Given what your Administration argued was lawful to do, you have gall to criticize.
— Mark S. Zaid (@MarkSZaidEsq) May 18, 2020
National security lawyer Bradley P. Moss, Zaid’s colleague, similarly took aim at Fleischer’s purported defense of “civil liberties.”
“’I care because civil liberties matter.’ Ari, you guys oversaw vast warrantless surveillance during your WH tenure. Warrantless. Without a warrant. So please, take a step back, Sir,” he tweeted.
“I care because civil liberties matter”.
Ari, you guys oversaw vast warrantless surveillance during your WH tenure.
Warrantless. Without a warrant.
So please, take a step back, Sir. https://t.co/MNuBf7iM2Y
— Bradley P. Moss (@BradMossEsq) May 18, 2020
Referring to Fleitz’s underlying op-ed, George Croner, the former principal litigation counsel at the NSA, said Fleitz’s past experience pre-dates current procedures and “brings nothing to the debate.”
As others have noted, the vast bulk of unmasking requests to NSA relate to NSA's reporting derived from Section 702 collection. Section 702 was first added to FISA in 2008, years after Fleitz's time in the State Department and at CIA. 2/
— George Croner (@GeorgeCroner) May 18, 2020
So, there is no reason Fleitz would necessarily have been exposed to any "unmasking" issues during his time at CIA or the State Dept. Indeed, it's hard to say whether Fleitz ever occupied any position at CIA where "unmasking" decisions would have been within his purview. 4/
— George Croner (@GeorgeCroner) May 18, 2020
Former FBI special agent and current CNN national security analyst Asha Rangappa made similar observations.
“The reason there is any ‘masking’ at all is because that’s the minimization required to disseminate info acquired by the 702 program — the setup Congress had to put in place after the [George W. Bush] admin[istration] was caught illegally surveilling Americans,” she wrote.
“That was while you worked for him, FYI.”
The reason there is any “masking” at all is because that’s the minimization required to disseminate info acquired by the 702 program — the setup Congress had to put in place after the GWB admin was caught illegally surveilling Americans.
That was while you worked for him, FYI. https://t.co/KXawzDYFCI
— Asha Rangappa (@AshaRangappa_) May 18, 2020
“Pot calling the kettle black,” Zaid said in response to Rangappa’s tweet.
Pot calling kettle black
— Mark S. Zaid (@MarkSZaidEsq) May 18, 2020
[image via YouTube screengrab]
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
Follow Law&Crime:
