Slashdot Mirror


Trump Is Looking at Plans For a Global Network of Private Spies (vice.com)

David Gilbert, writing for Vice: The White House is reportedly looking at a proposal to create a ghost network of private spies in hostile countries -- a way of bypassing the intelligence community's "deep state," which Donald Trump believes is a threat to his administration. The network would report directly to the president and CIA Director Mike Pompeo, and would be developed by Blackwater founder Erik Prince, according to multiple current and former officials speaking to The Intercept. "Pompeo can't trust the CIA bureaucracy, so we need to create this thing that reports just directly to him," a former senior U.S. intelligence official with firsthand knowledge of the proposals told the website. Described as "totally off the books," the network would be run by intelligence contractor Amyntor Group and would not share any data with the traditional intelligence community.

38 of 481 comments (clear)

  1. People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The U.S. government is becoming more and more corrupt.

    1. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, the stink of corruption rises form the attempt to disassemble the US government, parcel the things of value out to private enterprises and shove the cost of paying for this theft off on to the middle-class

    2. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by tbannist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly. And once you realize that both parties do it relentlessly, in coordinated lockstep, and that partisan idiots give their own party a complete pass when they do it, you will see how impossible it is to stop.

      This is obviously and poignantly wrong. We have a huge counter-example right here. The Democratic party supports net neutrality, the Republican party does not. How is that co-ordinated lock step?

      You are right that your elected officials don't (usually) hate one another but they aren't in this together, either. The Republicans and the Democrats are competing for the same positions, they may have gentlemen's agreements on what is acceptable behaviour, but they are still die-hard competitors for the same positions. I think, in general, their relationship could be summarised as frenemies, though I think with the introduction of Tea Party and Alt-Right candidates the legislature is moving away from friendships and towards partisan enemies.

      This means that government can get away with anything. You don't think the parties start with what they want to achieve and work backwards from there? You don't think that they divide up the unpopular positions to push down the throats of their own supporters?

      Yes, I don't think that and I don't think any sane person would. Politicians are political, they have views and beliefs and while they may compromise those beliefs for the sake of winning an election, they are not working together towards a single unified goal. Beyond that, keeping a conspiracy of that sort secret would require levels discretion that clearly the average elected official is not capable of maintaining. You can imagine that everyone running for office in America is secretly a super-villain, but I don't think that delusion is going to help you understand anything.

      Yeah, keep telling yourself that elected republicans hate democrats, and vice versa. You silly child. Hate is only good for manipulating stupid people. "Our" elected officials are all in it together.

      There's a middle ground between those extremes, and that's where sanity lies. Republican and Democratic officials, generally speaking, don't hate each other, but they aren't working towards the same goals either. There are consistent differences between the positions of the two parties over multiple election cycles. It is true, that there is a lot of similarity between the two parties, but that's because they operate in the same country, solicit money from the same donors and fight for the votes from the same people.

      Basically you are arguing that competing tool manufacturers are secretly working together because they produce tools that look very similar. No, the tools look the same to the untrained eye because they have been produced to do the same job with similar technology and similar materials. An expert, however, will be able to tell you if one company produces a better quality tool than the other for the job you want to get done. And just like in construction, in every election you should be trying to pick the best tool for the job.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
  2. CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Destined+Soul · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Then he's not really doing a good job of directing it, is he?

    1. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Osgeld · · Score: 5, Insightful

      don't worry, he will do much better this time with no accountability

    2. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by MooseTick · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "which is why we also don't have the truth about things like Benghazi"

      How do you know "we" don't know the truth?

    3. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Kyudosha · · Score: 5, Insightful

      New FSB directive: co-opt liberal and social justice terminology in an attempt to sow dissent. When called out for your shit, make sure to call it "racism" and say you are "deeply offended". If possible, say "so much for the tolerant left".

      --
      ç
    4. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It seems to be a requirement in order to run a department for Trump. The head of the EPA didn't think it should exist because it hurt business too much. The head of the housing department came out with a bunch of statements against social housing. So not trusting your department would make you qualified to run it.

    5. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem is the CIA is showing that most of these conspiracies are not real. So this doesn't fit Trump narrative. I honestly think that Trump just wanted to get into office, just to see all the real dirt that is going on, only to realize there was no grand conspiracy, just normal paper pushing, and a few good ideas and a few bad ideas. Trump being a Conspiracy theorist, and not getting the information that he knows in his heart to be true, figures the CIA is against him, purposely hiding information.

      Trumps main chip on his shoulder is because he feels like the upper crust is always rejecting him. Hence his appeal to the middle class, who also have the same feeling that the upper class folks are trying to lock these people out. So no matter how rich he is, or powerful of a position he is in, the fact that he isn't accepted as one of them bugs him.

      This man really is unfit for the position, and is more or less controlled by others, just as long as they keep his tweeter running.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    6. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by lgw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Since I believe in democracy, I'm all for Trump being able to trash any and all federal departments - that's the power the Constitution gives him.

      What I object to is the Byzantine palace intrigue bullshit. Don't trust the CIA? Fine - fire everyone, bar them from future government work, and start over. That's very transparent, very open, and sends a clear message to both voters and other departments. This double-secret probation stuff is just the worst.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    7. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by kqs · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Islamic terrorists were behind 9/11. Liberals are fine going after Islamic terrorists, but not all Muslims. Conservatives seem to want to go after all Muslims, or at least treat all Muslims poorly. Or, to put it another way: "White gun owners were behind the attack in Las Vegas. Conservatives defend white gun owners at all costs."

      The Russian government meddled in the 2016 elections with trolling that didn't kill anyone but which may have changed a presidential election. Liberals are horrified, conservatives defend Russians at all costs.

      Bigotry is a better word than racism. Bigotry is hating all Muslims for the acts of a few, or all Russians for the acts of their government, or all white gun owners for the acts of a few. Bigotry is not really a conservative or liberal trait, though recently conservatives have chosen bigots as their leaders for some reason. There are certainly liberal bigots, but liberals try to not elect them.

  3. That sounds familiar... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Uh, isn't this the same reasoning that led to the creation of the SS in the 20s?

  4. Re:trump dat bitch by swimboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What could possibly go wrong?

    --
    Ask me how the Heisenberg Principle may or may not have saved my life.
  5. Holy shit by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Trump continues to go down the hole to hell further and faster.
    America NEEDS mueller to really get on this probe. There is little doubt that Trump committed treason, but now, he is going off the deep end.
    THis is exactly how dictators operate and need to be stopped.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  6. There's no good that can come of this by Baron_Yam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You cannot tolerate your president trying to build a power structure outside the one constrained by your Constitution unless you WANT a dictatorship.

    He's already tried to bring the FBI and court system to heel (including at least twice now declaring himself above the law), he's expressed an interest in controlling the media to ensure it aligns with his wishes (and taken a few practical steps in that direction), and now he's going to create a new intelligence service that is under his direct control?

    Just how far does this guy have to go before he lacks the support to continue?

    1. Re:There's no good that can come of this by sl3xd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just how far does this guy have to go before he lacks the support to continue?

      I've heard Trump voters saying things along the lines of "If Jesus Christ gets down off the cross and told me Trump is with Russia, I would tell him, hold on a second, I need to check with the president if it is true. That is how confident I feel in the president."

      We have a pretty long way to go if ostensibly Christian voters will choose to believe Trump rather than their God.

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
    2. Re:There's no good that can come of this by vux984 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just ask them if they want this system in place the next time a democrat president sits in the whitehouse?

      Even if they trust trump to the end of the world (which is batshit crazy all on its own), their rabid distrust of everyone else should slap them back down to earth.

      Give the whitehouse a private army / spy network / whatever else controlled exclusively by the president, and it will still be there for the next president.

      No matter what happens, whether it's 3 or 7 years, the next president will *not* be Trump.

      We have a pretty long way to go if ostensibly Christian voters will choose to believe Trump rather than their God.

      key word being 'ostensibly Christian'; they're not Christian... at most they're just 'team Christian', and only when it suits. We're about to watch "ostensible Christians" in Alabama elect a pedophile because he's on the same team as the sexual predator in chief.

  7. Dangerous and terrifying... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is the making of a secret police agency that doesn't have any oversight from lawful civil authority (courts, Congress). This idea needs to be shut down. Hard.

  8. Dumbest Idea Ever by EndlessNameless · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So Trump wants us to run two completely independent intelligence networks? How is this not insanely wasteful? What happened to those small government principles?

    And here is the kicker:

    The group reportedly brought in former Marine Corps Lt. Col. Oliver North to sell the idea to Trump.

    Their salesman is going to be the poster boy for corruption in the military. The only reason he's not a felon is a technicality, and he admitted his wrongdoing in front of Congress.

    I want to believe this is total bullshit. It's coming from Vice, so maybe it's safe to ignore it for the time being.

    --

    ---
    According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
    1. Re:Dumbest Idea Ever by StormReaver · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What happened to those small government principles?

      The Republicans only want small government when some other party is in control. When Republicans are in control, they want an all-powerful government.

  9. Everyone but trump by WaffleMonster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Who would be stupid enough to do something like this?

    Trump can't even keep his mouth shut long enough to save himself from criminal liability or resist to the urge to give Russian government the location of U.S. nuclear submarines.

    Any spy who reports directly to trump is a dead man walking.

  10. Exactly. by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is basically a private secret police agency with no lawful oversight from the courts and Congress. Awful idea.

    1. Re:Exactly. by mbkennel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Doesn't it report into the same CIA director? So not private

      No, that's baloney. "not private" means "authorized by Congressional law and, usually funded by appropriation, and subject to Congressional & judicial oversight".

    2. Re:Exactly. by tbannist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Doesn't it report into the same CIA director? So not private. And we know about it? So not secret. And it's a spy agency? So not police. So, yeah, every word in "private secret police" is wrong.

      Here's a hint: Secret police aren't police, they're spies. Otherwise they'd just be "police". The "secret police" part just means they have the power to make you disappear, permanently.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
  11. Re:You guys break me up by PmanAce · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why are you bringing in the left when it has nothing to do with the article? Deflecting blame is not a valid counterpoint strategy.

    --
    Tired of my customary (Score:1)
  12. Re:You guys break me up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So your "solution" is a private spy network with even less accountability? YOU ARE A RETARDED CUNT.

  13. This just keeps getting weirder by orgelspieler · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How am I just now learning that Betsy DeVoss's brother is the Blackwater guy?! Erik Prince has a soul of pure, black, unadulterated evil. This whole thing is so fucking strange. If they think the CIA is that bad, why not fire everybody and hire new people? Is it even legal for the president to have a personal, private spying apparatus? No congressional oversight? No judicial review? Sure seems like a unconstitutional and unconscionable idea to me!

  14. Re:You guys break me up by Baron_Yam · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > Deflecting blame is not a valid counterpoint strategy

    It is not valid, but it's been pretty effective for about a year so far.

  15. Re:You guys break me up by orgelspieler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This isn't reform. This is privatization. This is taking an apparatus that is already basically beyond oversight, and putting it under the direct control of an unstable dictator who cannot tell fact from fiction. Just because we think the CIA is bad doesn't mean it can't get worse.

  16. Re:Vice reports from an anonymous source by orgelspieler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This has been reported in other, more reputable sources. I don't know why /. went with Vice. Basically, the official line from Trump's people is that there is no way in hell he would agree to this. Seeing as how the guy's sister in in the cabinet, I bet there will be more of this story coming out. My guess is that Trump will tweet about what a great guy Erik Prince is, and what a true patriot Ollie North is, and that the CIA cannot be trusted. I guess we can't really guess what the Angry Cheeto will tweet until Fox and Friends comes out with their version of the story, though.

  17. Re:You guys break me up by EndlessNameless · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You don't have to be liberal to have a moral problem with assassination of foreign leaders.

    Any sane person who complains about American intelligence agencies is going to focus on the the lack of oversight and accountability. The transparency and accountability will be far, far worse for private intelligence service that reports only to the President.

    --

    ---
    According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
  18. Re:"Deep State"? by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 1, Insightful

    IMHO, the "deep state" is really the "normal government" of the USA. The reason Trump and friends are always droning on about it is because many of the ideas Trumps wants to do (or at least the way he thinks these ideas should be done) are mostly illegal, or at least highly unethical and so far outside the bounds of civilized discourse it's ridiculous. Trump is so used to being the "CEO", saying "get this done now" and it just happens; not needing to care who is financing what, or whom he is actually employing...he just can't adapt to the idea of "checks and balances" and "procedures".

    Erik Prince is treading on some very dangerous ground going up against the CIA like this. His overseas contractors will be open-season targets, outside of any Geneva Convention protections, and he himself might end up being a target for some type of "accident". "Edge of the knife" and all.

  19. No chance. by WolfgangVL · · Score: 1, Insightful

    No way in hell will something like this fly in the USA.

    I imagine trump sits in his bed at night, under the covers with his smartphone, and dreams up things just like this as ways to troll the media, so he can point fingers and cry fake news later.

    But then again, the more I think about it, the more it seems like this might have been the plan all along. Suddenly all the bananas bullshit of the past year and half starts to make sense when viewed through a "spin up the secret police" filter.

    Seriously, if this comes to pass, it's time to start looking at the 2nd amendment solution.... and I don't say this lightly. Once something like this is a thing, people start falling into unmarked vans and black bags.

    How far we have fallen.

    --
    You are being ripped off every second of every day, so that advertisers can help rip you off even more tomorrow.
  20. Re:Great idea by jbengt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's a false equivalency. It used to be true that both parties helped the rich donors while placating their voters, but they had core sets of values that they would more-or-less adhere to when push came to shove. There's a huge difference between Trump's "Republican" party and the old Republican and Democratic parties, and it's not and improvement to abandon all sense of truth and decency, eliminate as many checks and balances as possible, call reality "fake news", and lie so much and so blatantly that it almost becomes normalized..

  21. Re:trust the private spies by jbengt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes. You remember the Iraqi "asset" going by the code name "Curveball", and the information he provided about weapons of mass destruction, and how useful he was to our efforts at making the middle east more stable peaceful. This will work out just as well for our new paid informants.

  22. Re: Great idea by tbannist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not just the Gulag; there's no shortage of Americans calling Trump "racist" because he purposed a ban on Muslim immigration from certain countries, or because he wants to build a wall between the US and Mexico. This wanton abuse of the word "racist" is quite common.

    Or maybe they're not-subtly saying that he's racist and proposing a ban on Muslim immigration because Muslims are predominantly Arab, and proposing to build an ineffectual and costly wall between the US and Mexico to tap into anti-Latino racism?

    Seriously, it should be transparently obvious to everyone that Trump is racist because of the things he says and does, but it's not entirely his fault. He did grow up during the era of segregation. It's pretty likely that he was taught at an early age that blacks were inferior to white people. That type of mental damage can be hard to unlearn, and Trump doesn't like ever admitting that he was wrong, so fat chance of a sincere change of heart on his part, especially at his age.

    --
    Fanatically anti-fanatical
  23. Re:trust the private spies by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It wasn't the informant's fault, his masters had already decided they wanted a war and were just looking for someone to give them the intel they needed. They were not mislead, they mislead the UN and their citizens.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  24. Re:trump dat bitch by Locke2005 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Off the books"?!? In other words, they can spend as much as they want, and congress cannot cut off the funds, even if they are used explicitly for espionage on businesses competing with businesses owned by the Trump mob family?

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.