[mirimir]

Although the DoD (or War Department, as it was originally called) is part of the Executive Branch, it (for the most part) operates only outside the country. And military intelligence (for the most part) operates outside normal government constraints.

That's how it's always been, throughout recorded history. If you constrain military intelligence too much, as happened in the US between WWI and WWII, and during the 90s, you get fuckups like Pearl Harbor and 9/11.

But on the other hand, if military intelligence (and the military generally) operates too much domestically, then you have (doh) a military government. So it's a delicate balance.

As far as I can tell, the US does not have a military government. However, as we saw from documents released from Snowden's cache, the military does operate too much domestically. It's arguably mainly about terrorism and the drug war. But although there are certainly impacts on civil liberties, especially on some ethnic groups, at least there's apparently not much outright suppression of political and social dissidents. So that's reassuring.

[espeed]

The DoD hires tech talent, partners with tech orgs on R&D, and contracts with tech companies for expertise. When trust is broken, those relationships are strained.

[mirimir]

The DoD obviously contracts with tech companies. Historically, I gather, there was lots of ~blind patriotism. For maybe 20 years, the NSA was officially "No Such Agency". That's far less so now, clearly.

Regarding talent, the CIA and NSA clearly recruit in academia. However, I've read that the NSA also draws heavily on enlisted personnel, and trains them in house. Also, I've read that it recruits from the non-white-hat hacker community. But maybe that's dated information.