The process by which unmasking must be done was explained by Admiral Rogers in an interview after he retired. For each unmasking asked of Flynn, needless if that was all they were asking for— this group of a@@clowns got around the strict rules with the “hop and skip” method for surveilling ANYONE Flynn was talking to, and then who those people were talking to-— waaaaaay beyond the Kislyak call, and not the 33 other foreign ambassadors he called. Call it “multilevel” unmasking bypassing the strict rules of Federal laws (which, btw liberal dems insisted on for civil rights— what irony)
The “hop and skip” to other individuals from the multiple requests for the same unmasking-— is completely illegal— major security breach of NSA intercepts— and is spelled out in the enabling legislation created to protect individual privacy.
That is the crux of the importance of the exposure of multiple unmasking requesters— the Queen of them in sheer numbers was Samantha Power (who tried say someone had “used her name by hacking it”— never happened, she gladly helped build the entire surveillance operation of thousands of Americans). This is the “obama” apparatus which that idiot Maxine Waters bragged about repeatedly. It is obamaumao’s STASI like surveil, which in Flynn’s case was decided to remove him— because Flynn was set to expose all of this abuse,political surveillance, and because he was advocating AUDITing several 3 letter intel agencies. He had to be taken down, fired— whatever.
The requests must be in writing. And the request is documented with reasons for the request. The written requests will be declassified, and all hell will break loose for the ones who are not to be indicted, and exposing them to the public. Durham has all the other request letters— they are evidence no one ever thought would be revealed in their “operation”.
I think you are making it too complicated. They read the call with Flynn's name redacted, and they asked for the unmasking. When they do further searches they are working with Flynn's name to find more calls between Flynn and other foreigners. But, in my opinion, that's not the same as proactive surveillance in the FISA court. Two different things. The first is conversations with foreign suspects that have already (and always) been recorded. The second is wiretapping.
The problem is using the search tool for political purposes.
Again, she's not creating future surveillance. These are past conversations that have been recorded because the foreigner is of some higher rank or importance. The US names are redacted. By unmasking hundreds of names she is building the social network database. But she is doing it for political targeting because there's no way those searches could have been anything else.