When it comes to the separation of powers, the Constitution makes it look pretty simple: Congress makes the laws, the president enforces them and the judiciary adjudicates them. In reality, though, the lines between the branches are a little blurrier than they seem on paper.
Asha Rangappa
And, you know, in my opinion, when the FBI uses these sources, there are a lot of internal guidelines on how they can be used and particularly if they touch in any way on First Amendment activity. So you know, journalists, political activity, clergy people - all of those get extra special protection when it comes to FBI investigation.
There's no law preventing a journalist from publishing whatever they want.
After all, clemency is by nature outside the rule of law. When conferred upon those already convicted of crimes, it unravels the decision of citizen-jurors who found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
But I have to say, in my 12 years as the dean of admissions at Yale Law School, there was a lot of legal behaviour that I saw that worried me and that clearly was allowing wealthier and privileged students to tilt the balance in their favour.
We are a nation founded on distrust of government power, and questioning that power is essential to promoting transparency and accountability.
It's no surprise that whether by blocking visas or building walls, there are parts of the country desperate to hang on to a vision of the United States that is rapidly disappearing from their TV screens as well as their neighborhoods.
I was a pretty unsavvy applicant, and I am grateful that the dean of admissions at Princeton chose to take a chance on a girl from an average public high school in southern Virginia.
Reflexive control is a 'uniquely Russian' technique of psychological manipulation through disinformation. The idea is to feed your adversary a set of assumptions that will produce a predictable response: That response, in turn, furthers a goal that advances your interests.
Counterintelligence is, in effect, chasing ghosts, which is why the tools used to investigate foreign intelligence activity are secret, like human sources or electronic surveillance.
Having conducted counterintelligence investigations, I can attest that not everything a foreign intelligence service does is necessarily illegal.
When presidents decide to litigate an issue to protect their policy decisions, they are more likely to act judiciously, and with an eye toward compromise, because they can see the larger implications for the legacy of their office.
The aim of a foreign intelligence service is to find and convince individuals to help them achieve intelligence objectives.
In response to Russia's election hacking, the U.S. expelled not just one, but 35 spies posing as diplomats - the strongest response ever to a cyberattack against the U.S.
As a former F.B.I. special agent who conducted counterintelligence investigations, I can attest that foreign intelligence services do not operate on the basis of explicit agreements or even actions that, standing alone, constitute criminal activity.
The assumption that everyone in government is a bad actor imperils our democracy.
The FBI is not in the habit of leaving loose ends. That's not what they do.
If there's one thing that lawyers know about reading documents, it's to pay attention to the footnotes. In fact, oftentimes the most important information is buried there.
Like any country with sophisticated intelligence services, Russia has long been a careful student of U.S. freedoms, laws and the constraints of its main nemesis in the U.S., the FBI.
Russian President Vladimir Putin's traditionalist-nationalist rhetoric, which blames secularism, diversity and internationalism for the weakening of Western democracies, gives voice to the grievances that American hate groups have felt for so long.
Under the dual sovereignty principle, the Fifth Amendment's prohibition on double jeopardy - which prevents the government from trying someone twice for the same crime - doesn't apply if the second trial is by a different 'sovereign' - in this case, the state.
The F.B.I. pursues cases against individuals and organizations, not topics - this allows each case to have the flexibility to go in the direction the evidence leads, regardless of what happens with other, related cases.
FYI, there are basically only three things besides a vest that will stop a bullet: a tree trunk, the engine block of a car, and a U.S. mailbox: if you are ever caught in gunfire, find one of those.
In 1978, Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act after hearings exposed the F.B.I.'s egregious practice of illegally spying on civil rights leaders, black nationalists, Communists and Vietnam War protesters.
In the case of someone sharing classified information with foreign intelligence, for example, the FBI could surreptitiously ensure that they are no longer able to obtain sensitive information.
Field offices are evaluated in part based on their success in following through on leads and making cases that result in arrests and convictions. No case agent worth their salt would remain quiet if their cases were closed in the face of a continuing threat.
My parents came under a provision where the government was specially looking for doctors, because the Vietnam war was happening and many doctors were overseas.
I'm a process person. Process is a manifestation of values.
The Espionage Act is very broadly written. It doesn't make distinguish - or it doesn't make distinctions between categories of people that can receive and publish information and under what circumstances.
Facebook's greatest strength - its ability to identify and connect like-minded people - is also a major vulnerability.
Facebook is primarily a mechanism for bonding, not bridging. Studies show that in the vast majority of cases, people live in self-made echo chambers on Facebook that reinforce their existing views of the world.
Consistent positive interactions increase levels of trust in the relationship, so that when conflict arises, there are enough 'reserves' in place to make a withdrawal, but still leave the relationship in a net-positive place.
Without a way to make regular, positive deposits in social relationships that bridge political lines, every civic debate is a withdrawal without social reserves, leaving people perpetually overdrawn.
The idea of interviewing someone is that you are getting their first off-the-cuff impression or response. You don't want them to have the chance to really prepare.
As an FBI agent, you don't want to go in there gangbusters and confrontational. You are going to get a lot more information if you put the subject at ease and allow them to talk.
When I did counterintelligence investigations, they rarely saw the inside of a courtroom. That wasn't the goal of them.
But history shows that when courts intervene because a president is trying to shield his own conduct, the deck is stacked against him.
In practice, presidents have typically tended to think of themselves not just as stewards for their party, but also of the presidency itself - preserving the full scope of its constitutional power for their successors is part of their job.
White Southerners created an entire cosmetics industry equating beauty with whiteness and trained a string of winning Miss Americas who embodied their racial ideal in a national representative.
For wealthy or privileged students, applying to Ivy League schools or elite schools is sort of expected of them. If you go to a prep school, for example, that's just what your guidance counsellor tells you.
Presidents have, of course, acted inappropriately in the past, and our constitutional system has a framework in place for addressing misconduct by the chief executive. But it's designed to deal with straightforward criminal activity, not national security threats.
In a typical whistleblower scenario where the inspector general determines a complaint to be credible and urgent, there would be no colorable legal basis for the complaint to not reach Congress.
The president, by virtue of his office, can easily 'go dark' when it comes to conversations with foreign leaders, even if he makes promises or assurances that run contrary to the interests of the United States or even place the country in danger.
Unfortunately, once a person who is willing to act against the interests of the United States assumes the awesome powers of the presidency, the laws and investigative techniques we use in ordinary national security situations are woefully inadequate.
Foreign intelligence services rely on manipulating vulnerabilities over time - like greed, or fear of exposure of a secret - to puppeteer those under their influence into acting in their interests without saying a word.
Though my parents were professionals and expected me to go to college, they were immigrants from India with no idea about how the admissions process worked in the United States or the importance of standardized tests.
College acceptances, particularly of high-profile teens and celebrities, make the news cycle each year.
Students come away with a clear message about how admissions works: If you have money, connections or 'insider' knowledge, you have a leg up. It's hardly surprising that many students of modest or lower means decide it's not even worth playing.
Rather than trying to find evidence of a crime, the FBI's counterintelligence goal is to identify, monitor and neutralize foreign intelligence activity in the United States.
The Trump administration's assault against the FBI's efforts to assess a national security threat posed by suspected foreign agents only raises more questions about what went on in 2016.
