Can Someone Answer Questions about NSC and Intelligence?

[ProudLib72]

I had this question last night, and did not get a response. I've tried researching it, but the information is a little vague.

How much influence can the NSC exert on our intelligence agencies? I know the CIA coordinates with the NSC, but does the FBI ever get involved? If so, can the NSC order the FBI to unmask names in certain documents?

Thanks in advance!

[ProudLib72]

1. Maybe it's a dumb question

I don't know.

I want to find out if someone like Bannon could have got his hands on FBI documents with names unmasked simply by asking. Otherwise, who is leaking these documents?

[Samantha]

2. I don't think so

but this is not my field of expertise. But names redacted in confidential documents are done sometimes to protect the identify of the person. A good example of this would be a covert agent acting in the field abroad. If the actual name of the agent were revealed, people familiar with the circumstances could come to understand the agent abroad going under the name of Agent XYZ is truly John Smith. All of the security entities go to great lengths to protect the identities of their agents. Other than that, a redacted name could also be protecting a person whose life might be endangered by the revelation of their involvement in activity X.

I am sure there are a number of reasons why this is done, but I also know that revealing the identity of a covert agent is an automatic federal crime.

Just some thoughts. I am thinking others here can think of more examples if the stop to consider the question.

Sam

[jmg257]

3. From House Intel Committee hearing...

In one tweet, the White House said, “FBI Director Comey admits Obama’s White House had ability to ‘unmask’ American citizens.” The tweet included a clip of Comey explaining that White House officials can ask an intelligence agency to “unmask,” or identify, the names of “U.S. persons” caught up in surveillance operations.

Intelligence agencies protect the identity of such people by referring to them in reports as “U.S. person number one” or “U.S. person number two,” Comey said. Only the agency that collected the intelligence can “unmask” a U.S person, but it can do so at the request of the White House, Comey said.

From CNN...

"The notion of "unmasking" Americans came up several times, prompted by Republican lawmakers' anger over the leaks that former national security adviser Mike Flynn was caught up in surveillance of foreigners would be masked, or their names kept confidential, so lawmakers asked Rogers and Comey who would have authority to reveal a person's identity.

Rogers said there were 20 people at NSA, including himself, who could do so.

"If it's criminal activity (caught during surveillance), we'll disseminate the information, and if the FBI or other criminal activities are on the reporting stream, in some cases I also will generate a signed letter under my signature in specific cases to Department of Justice highlighting that what we think we have is potential criminal activity," Rogers said. "But because we are not a law enforcement or justice organization we're not in a place to make that determination."

Rogers and Comey confirmed that other agency directors, such as those at Justice and the CIA, would also be able to request a person's name be unmasked. But Comey said the White House could only make such a request to the agency that collected the information."

[MrScorpio]

4. All the intelligence agencies specialize in particular areas

For example, the NSA focuses on electronic signals collection or SIGINT and interpretation, the FBI in domestic counterespionage, the CIA on foreign data collection, interpretation and HUMINT. The Pentagon is also an intel community with several agencies of its own.

Basically, the NSC and National Security Advisor are the clearing house for all of the incoming data. Raw data is interpreted and coordinated. Of course, The President, through the NSC, determines what the priorities are, but the agencies are charged with focusing on their own areas.

They're supposed to do their own jobs regardless.

Going back to the Gulf War, the agencies were directed by Bush and Cheney to find a reason to invade Iraq. There wasn't any and the agencies did their job and informed the White House as such. Basically resisting the pressure put upon them.

Since they didn't cooperate, Rumsfeld built an intel op in the DoD to fabricate the evidence to justify an invasion. That's how they got away with it.

Remember that the intel agencies are staffed with professionals, these aren't people who usually bend to partisan politics. For one, bending to a partisan agenda will corrupt the information that they're responsible for providing to the NSC and the President.

A good President would not impose a partisan agenda on the NSC and the agencies. There's too much at stake.

No such luck with the Russian stooge currently sitting in the Oval Office and the lack of oversight by the GOPrs.

Trump doesn't trust the intel establishment because he can't control him and they have discovered the fact that he's in the pocket of the Russians.

The establishment has its ways of getting around the fact that Trump has stuffed the NSC with his cronies instead of intel pros.

Basically, there's a silent war between the agencies pros and the White House. I'd place my bets on the pros in this one. They're going to make sure that the truth gets out.

[ProudLib72]

5. Thanks everyone!

I should not have been so cryptic in my first post. The gist of the original article under discussion from another thread was that the WH was conducting its own intelligence gathering on the FBI's investigation ostensibly to run better interference. This idea sprang from Nunes' strange behavior, of course. My immediate thought was that the FBI would never allow the WH to get hold of specifics of their investigation, but someone mentioned that the NSC might have the power to force the FBI to release information.