Last I looked we are not signatory to the Geneva Conventions. Other treaties may apply perhaps.
I think what Hayden is saying is “The CIA/FBI are used to Obamas restrictions and will resist change for fear of being charged with crimes later on.”
I think what Trump is saying here is “there are a lot of options that push the boundaries but are legal”
Yes, and as someone else (maybe you?) said, Congress can change what is or isn’t legal. And if Obama’s invaders start chaos here a POTUS can use martial law also, if the need is there. With a POTUS who would back up the CIA rather than stab the whole system in the back, things could be a lot different than they are now. But I think a lot would depend on whether Trump would be willing to clean the CIA and military house, as others have also mentioned. There is one whole side of the CIA that engages in treason against the USA. Will Trump get rid of them? Same thing with NSA. Will Trump excise the stuff that wages war against the American people and only keep the stuff that is necessary to protect us?
It’s an important question. I remember thinking under GW the Patriot Act was necessary - mostly because I thought that GW would not use these powers against the US public. And as far as I know, he didn’t. But having the PERMISSION to use them against even law-abiding US citizens was a bad, bad, bad thing to have in place for a lawless foreign enemy combatant like Obama. So now what would Trump do? Would he seek to gather even more power for the POTUS, thinking he would use it benevolently? Or would he try to get things back to a lawful balance?