Whether they like it or not intelligence agencies must obtain their information legally and ethically. Because there must be something that differentiates those who would go about breaking the law, and those who enforce it. We cannot get slack on our laws just because someone under federal investigation will do shady things. And whereas a criminal will always break more laws to continue their enterprise, we must take the higher road, even if it means a longer but ethical investigation. I am concerned about a slippery slope however, because government agencies can define “threat” any way they want to. Consider, for example, how Nixon was able to discredit anti-Vietnam protestors by saying that they were all a bunch of hippies smoking a very dangerous drug. To this day Marijuana has not caused a single death, but we will question the validity of anyone who smokes it. What’s to stop this current government from investigating anyone who doesn’t like the president as much as he likes himself? The republican led legislative branch continues to prove that executive accountability doesn’t matter to them, when that branch shares their political leanings. Going so far as to sling mud on Mueller, who up until he was asked to head the investigation into the Trump campaign’s collusion with Russia, was considered a legal gem by all sides of the aisle. But now that he’s closing in on the president, he all of a sudden can’t be trusted to be unbiased? And if something as important as threats against the transparency of democracy are not worth investigating for those republicans, what exactly do they consider a worthy threat? Likewise, as much as I want intelligence agencies to obtain their information legally and ethically, what’s to stop them from making up a threat?