Sharyl Atkisson On Intel’s Rules

Interesting read:

I’ve spoken to a small group of reliable, formerly high-placed intelligence officials who have dropped a few interesting tidbits on me of late. Here’s my understanding, based on the discussions:

It’s not true that wiretaps and/or electronic surveillance of U.S. citizens can “only” be done with a FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) court order…

Additionally, U.S. Presidents have the power to issue secret presidential directives that can authorize otherwise illegal acts (theoretically in the country’s best interests). These directives may come with pre-planned cover stories to be used in the event the operation is exposed, and they come with indemnity for those involved, giving them permission to lie about the operation or their involvement without fear of prosecution…

There are “back-door” ways to collect and report on a target without Title III or FISA court authority. If it’s for political purposes or blackmail, this may consist of “inventing” an excuse to surveil the target…

If the work of targeting an individual cannot be accomplished by government intel officers, it can be contracted out to third parties or to foreign parties who aren’t bound by U.S. law…

I believe those third parties can be shielded when needed under government/LE authority, by sworn agents, giving them the power of law enforcement with the deniability of civilians. My impression is somewhere in the last seventeen years, some law or order was passed that forces local, state, and federal LEs to be completely subservient to any of the many national intel outfits. The power is so broad it can go wherever it is needed.

I had no idea they officially codified the “There-are-no-rules” rule with an official rule allowing the President to say, “There-are-no-rules” officially. The truth is, from a practical standpoint that option is probably more like a quick reach-around from the intelligence operatives to the political class, to make the political pogues feel involved, and like they still have some sort of power and relevancy in matters of national security. In reality, in the intel realm I doubt the political class has any idea what is going on, or any power to do anything about it if they did.

But clearly all this talk about rules and protections is just to mollify the rubes and keep the sheep docile. There are no rules, and where this goes, I have no idea.

If I were President Trump, I would make sure I had some independent way to verify exactly what I had signed, and what I had not, lest someone later claim I had signed something I didn’t. I wouldn’t think he would ever have a problem with this now that he is seen by the populace as a victim of illegal surveillance himself, but given how the establishment is looking to take him out, maybe by impeachment, there is no harm in being certain.

Tell others about r/K Theory, because we still need a lot more ITZ

This entry was posted in Conspiracy, Intel, Surveillance, Trump. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Sharyl Atkisson On Intel’s Rules

  1. Pingback: Sharyl Atkisson On Intel’s Rules | @the_arv

Leave a Reply