Dutch intelligence services now share less information with US
dutchnews.nl
dutchnews.nl
We have had, in no particular order: the boxes in the bathroom at mar-a-lago, the Chinese lady wandering around the property unescorted, the casual tweeting of classified satellite imagery, the adding of journalists to group chats, the use of unsecured phone messaging picked up by photographers. Then we have people in the presidential orbit demonstrably funded by adversaries (Tim Pope, Maria Butina). Oh and the obvious conflict of interest around the leaderships investments. Amd we havent even got to the blackmail risk posed by materials alleged in the Epsteim files.
If you were a regular civilian whose employer was looking to get you a clearance, any of these kinds of things would put your application in the shredder.
Given these facts, I would not expect any of the EU or FiveEyes partners to share everything they learn.
I've been scraping hard to find something positive from this administration. Anything about intelligence services "sharing less information" is likely to be one.
This is tied to US IC's long history of (near exclusively) surveilling people not suspected of a crime and rarely (if ever) telling a public truth about it.
It is true that IC and LEO are distinct groups and ought to be considered that way.
Regarding surveillance and specifically the points I raised, I belive the similarities (of LEO and IC) matter more than their differences. Here we can consider them in the same light.
By way of example: While the FBI utilizes IC collected data, they also run their own surveillance units - which present the same issues raised by IC collections. The vast majority of individuals who appear in FBI data are not suspected of a crime and the FBI rarely (if ever) tells meaningful public truths about their collections.
Also, Trump adopts the tactical position of arbitrary power: He asserts the power to do whatever he wants, and to disregard your interests. That tactic has some advantages but also means even his allies can't rely on him not turning on them.
Nothing really changed.
> “but we are more critical”