Under normal situations NSA and CIA involvement would require a bunch of people to debate and know about it. Under Obama, though, all it would take is a secret directive - secret because it is for “national security”, of course. Or the CIA and NSA could do stuff without asking anybody, as they did with Dennis Montgomery and “The Hammer”.
But DWS started up with these crooks from the very outset of her House career; at that point she didn’t necessarily have the clout to go to the POTUS and ask for a presidential directive (again, secret because it is for “national security”) allowing Pakistani crooks to give US intel to the Muslim Brotherhood. (And yes, I truly do believe that those are the kinds of things Obama would do under the name of “national security”; whatever name is given to dem operations is ALWAYS the exact opposite of what is truly being done) - and while they are at it, to spy on Congressional communications (which “The Hammer” was actually already doing, IIRC).
I think what DWS did is for the reasons you said. If she had been higher up - say, at the John Brennan level - she would have just done the criminal activity at huge taxpayer expense without asking or telling anybody except the one tasked with the job, who would be chosen because their reputation could be impeached so they would be called “non-credible” if they decided to whistleblow (same reason David Petraeus was chosen for CIA during the Benghazi time period BECAUSE Obama knew about his indiscretions; that info made him blackmail-able).
These vermin are sick, sick, sick, and their Modus Operandi need to be exposed so people can see them for the sick puppies they are. AND so we can put checks and balances in place so this will never happen again. No more signed blank checks and total secrecy for anything the crooks want to CALL “national security”. And the presidential directives that have been kept secret under that excuse need to be made front page news. TODAY.
To explain what I’m talking about, Sharyl Attkisson had a n eyewitness source tell her that presidential directives can order crimes to be committed, with the promise that the perpetrators of those crimes will have “cover story indemnity”. It is all secret so nobody will ever know what really happened, and anybody asking for FOIA responses, for instances, will get lies instead, which of course will make them seem like “moonbats” if they question those responses.
The fact that Obama does NOT have a HI birth certificate - as exposed by Alvin Onaka’s refusal to certify 3 letters of verification so that Loretta Fuddy had to unlawfully use her own seal instead in order to obstruct justice and commit election fraud on Obama’s behalf - tells us that not only was Obama not qualified to be POTUS but that he used the entire government apparatus to keep an unconstitutional usurper in power, which is an act of treason. This is PROOF that he is an enemy of the US Constitution, and the presidential directives that he cited as “national security” directives MUST be publicly exposed if the US Constitution is to be protected.
I just want to add that Obama claimed for himself - and was lawfullly authorized under the NDAA, again based on “national security” - the power to kill or imprison any US person deemed to be a “national security” risk. No legal recourse for the person or their family; all secret and no questions allowed to be asked.
Was Andrew Breitbart a national security risk, in the eyes of Obama? Was Michael Hastings? Was my husband a “national security risk” and that’s why it was OK for him and my daughter to be poisoned right after I was (supposedly, I didn’t get the message because my blog email notifications had been hacked and turned off) told my husband would have to “lose his job” if I didn’t stop investigating Fuddy’s “death”?
If, in the eyes of Obama the Usurper, we threatened “national security” then he could do whatever he wanted to us, with Congressional approval.
How in the HELL is this still America?