The thing is, I don't trust the CIA. I don't trust the people who work for the CIA. I don't trust the motives of the CIA nor the motives of the people who work for them.
Let me remind everyone, this is the same agency that thought their mandate would be best fulfilled by dosing unsuspecting US populations with LSD. Because, yes, THAT's in the best interests of americans.
They are buying up local providers. They can easily do this without problems because they ARE the incumbent provider.
Now, the reality is we'll see what happens. I've seen these kind of promises come and go, with nothing to show. That said, if they are competent and really going to do this, can a suggest Altice acquire Mediacom or Frontier?
Considering the how often I hear reports of boxes of votes getting found during a recount (seems like this comes up every year), and the people working at the polling stations are just run-of-the-mill public (at my polling station, I recognised one of the staff, because she's also a waitress at a restaurant I frequent, such is life in a small-town), I don't find following up on someone saying they were tampering with votes to be that bad. This agent got a report of a crime, followed up, and checked it out.
"having a 10/22 rifle in his car could result in his summary execution by an officer that felt concerned for his safety by a firearm being in the vehicle and that a jury would acquit the officer of his homicide due to officer safety concerns"
The cop's not wrong. They seem to be able to get away with murder pretty easy.
That conflict of interest is actually codified in the NSA charter. The NSA has two mandates, the first is to capture and analyze signals intelligence, but the second is to ensure the security of US transmissions. This has always created a conflict where the NSA would make recommendations about encryption algorithms, and noone would really know which mandate they were working from.