What role should intellegence agencies have in US politics?


#21

They didn’t initiate any removal process. They only conducted an investigation. There is a difference.


#22

None whatsoever.


#23

When you begin a thread with such a factually inaccurate statement as this…

Then it seems like you’re not actually here for a discussion of anything.


#24

This is factually untrue. Page was not in communication with the Trump Campaign when the FISA warrant was first issued according to both Page and the Trump camp.


#25

This is also demonstrably untrue and factually inaccurate. No one in the Campaign was “subject to government surveillance.” The so-called “step rule” allows officials to access the phone numbers being called by the subject of the investigation. They are not allowed to then listen in on those people’s conversations with others outside of the actual target. In this case Page, who was not communicating with the Trump Campaign anyway. Please kindly stop spreading inaccurate information.


#26

This is completely inaccurate. There was no such admission made anywhere. There was no abuse of power. That is false.


#27

More factually inaccurate posting here. Perhaps the problem is your lack of knowledge and understanding of these events including what conspiracy against the US actually means. Perhaps try to expand your sources of information in the future so you don’t run around posting complete untruths sprinkled in across a handful of half-truths.

Incorrect. The role of the Law Enforcement Institutions of this nation is to protect us from all threats to our national security, both foreign and domestic. Just because you win an election, or you are in close proximity to someone who wins an election, it doesn’t place you above the law and above scrutiny. What kind of third world dictatorship are you advocating for here?


#28

In the latter case it is true.


#29

No it’s not.


#30

I kind of like that some republicans have come out against law enforcement, US intelligence, oversight, investigators and probably prosecutors and judges. It paints a clearer picture for us all.


#31

Yes it is.


#32

Indeed. It’s just amazing that it’s all for Donald Trump of all people though. That’s kind of hilarious.


#33

No, it is not. They exist to:

  1. Protect property
  2. Maintain order for the state

They do nothing for We… except trample rights in the name of “public safety.”

It is not a noble endeavor, but a necessary evil.


#34

And, at the same time, he was pushing for NFL players like Colin Kaepernick to be fired for taking a knee to protest law enforcement.

Trump talks out of both sides of his mouth.


#35

Information from 2013 describes the length and breadth of surveillance even with a FISA warrant:
John C Inglis, the deputy director of the surveillance agency, told a member of the House judiciary committee that NSA analysts can perform “a second or third hop query” through its collections of telephone data and internet records in order to find connections to terrorist organizations.

"Hops" refers to a technical term indicating connections between people. A three-hop query means that the NSA can look at data not only from a suspected terrorist, but from everyone that suspect communicated with, and then from everyone those people communicated with, and then from everyone all of those people communicated with.

Snowden confirmed that the surveillance was not limited to collection of contact information:
The technology filter designed to protect U.S. communications is “constantly out of date, is set at what is euphemistically referred to as the ‘widest allowable aperture,’ and can be stripped out at any time,” Snowden wrote in the chat. “Even with the filter, US comms get ingested, and even more so as soon as they leave the border.”

As Democratic Senator Frank Church warned back in the 1970s:

"‘That capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything: telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn’t matter. There would be no place to hide.’ “He added that if a dictator ever took over, the NSA ‘could enable it to impose total tyranny, and there would be no way to fight back.’”

The capability of the intelligence agencies to collect and process communications is millions of times greater today than it was back when Church issued this warning, and there is growing evidence that is being abused for political purposes. Is that a good thing?

Or is this just the first step or two toward an Orwellian tyranny?


#36

Salt of the earth people and evangelicals are trashing entire groups filled with people just like themselves and those with integrity to protect…

wait for it…

Donald Trump. One of the biggest con men in our country.


#37

Yes it is. The FBI and CIA are both defending us from national security attacks, both foreign and domestic. Your disdain for them notwithstanding.


#38

Exactly. There is no consistency here. There is only one man who must be defended at all costs.


#39

This isn’t a spy movie. Reality is a lot less bland than the imaginings of some who envision this deep conspiracy. There was no surveillance of the Trump Campaign. If there had been, the defenders of Trump who have actually seen the data provided to them by the DOJ would be screaming from the rooftops. But curiously, even supporters of the President who have seen the information completely unredacted drop the issue after doing so. See Trey Gowdy as a prime example.


#40

I think there are a tons of Americans who aren’t savvy enough to know what Trump is doing. It’s a bit like a New York businessman coming down to some one horse town in Georgia and conning the locals.