The Central Intelligence Agency has in many ways achieved the opposite of the purpose for which it was founded. Instead of increasing the security of the U.S., it has weakened it. The CIA is a main element of what is known as the Deep State, a permanent government that operates apart from the democratic machinery of the U.S. and conducts a policy characterized by ruthless actions intended to sustain U.S. global hegemony. Along the way, the CIA has poisoned public confidence in the integrity of government institutions by persistently using the tool of plausible deniability to mask its dirty work. Bribery, torture, assassinations, coups, and regional wars have all been carried out under an increasingly flimsy veil of deniability. I will describe how this malignant practice developed.
1947 – The CIA is Born
The CIA was created in the founding document of the U.S. national security state, the National Security Act of 1947. Although originally intended to be an intelligence gathering and coordinating entity, tucked away in its mission definition the CIA was assigned the task of performing “such other functions and duties related to intelligence affecting the national security as the National Security Council may from time to time direct.” On this small foundation, an enormous structure of deceit would be built. These “other functions and duties” were described in 1955 in the NSC 10/2 – Covert Operations Directive. Covert operations were defined as follows:
As used in this directive, “covert operations” are understood to be all activities (except as noted herein) which are conducted or sponsored by this Government against hostile foreign states or groups or in support of friendly foreign states or groups but which are so planned and executed that any US Government responsibility for them is not evident to unauthorized persons and that if uncovered the US Government can plausibly disclaim any responsibility for them.
What “plausibly disclaim” means is that the CIA was to leave no evidence leading back to U.S. accountability. While NSC 10/2 avoids explicitly including assassination in the list of covert actions,” the phrase “all activities” and the reference to plausible deniability created a legal gray zone that was subsequently interpreted to include kidnapping, lethal sabotage, support for violent coups, and assassinations. Congress never approved this mandate for covert actions because it had granted the President full authority over the actions of the CIA in the 1947 National Security Act. In subsequent decades, the CIA used this authority to conduct extensive secret campaigns in support of U.S. “national security.” These included overthrowing the governments of many nations.
Many of these clandestine operations produced terrible results, often resulting in the bloody installation of oppressive regimes and creating enduring hostility to the U.S. While CIA participation was usually plausibly deniable in the short term, leaks and subsequent declassified documents showed a consistent pattern of deceptive U.S. actions.
In 1975 Congress investigated the CIA in an effort to curb its covert activities, which had spilled over into spying on U.S. citizens. The Church Committee held hearings that led President Ford to issue an order banning assassinations. Congressional committees were established to oversee the operations of the CIA, although they lacked practical means of curbing CIA activities.
Congressional oversight of the CIA weakened significantly after the 9/11 attacks, particularly in the first decade following 2001. This shift was driven by a mix of national security panic, executive overreach, secrecy expansion, and political deference. The 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force permitted drone strikes and covert lethal operations against terrorist targets abroad, effectively overturning the assassination ban. The CIA soon had its own drone force and was regularly killing individuals designated as terrorists. The CIA also engaged in clandestine torture of captives during the “war on terror.”
Today, the CIA continues to rely on plausible deniability to conceal its activities. The classified Presidential action directives that authorize covert operations are inaccessible to the public, and unpersuasive denials continue to be issued. Most recently, President Trump denied any knowledge U.S. support for a Ukrainian drone strike on Russia that destroyed a number of military aircraft. Yet many informed observers have asserted that this strike could not have been conducted without the knowledge of the CIA.
Nord Stream Sabotage
Perhaps the most spectacular recent example of implausible deniability was the destruction of the Nord Stream gas pipelines.
Here is a Bayesian analysis assessing the likelihood that the United States was responsible for the destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines. The analysis is based on prior probabilities and three sets of evidentiary factors: 1) means/motive/opportunity, 2) lack of investigation disclosures, and 3) a whistleblower revelation. Posterior probability is calculated using Bayes’ theorem.
H₁: The U.S. was responsible for the destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines.
H₀: The U.S. was not responsible.
Prior Probability H₁ = 0.4 / 0.6 = 2/3 = 40% (based on no prior U.S. attack on EU infrastructure)
Posterior Odds = (Prior Odds) × Product of Likelihood Ratios
Posterior Odds ≈ (2/3) × 1.8 × 2.67 × 3.5 ≈ 11.23
Posterior Probability H₁ = 11.23 / (1 + 11.23) ≈ 91.8%
The prior probability of U.S. responsibility is low, about 40% based on the unprecedented nature of a U.S. attack on the infrastructure of a European ally. When the additional factors of U.S. means, motives, and opportunity are added to the calculation, the probability increases to 54%. Adding the factor of incomplete and inconclusive investigations of the sabotage raises the probability to 76%. Finally, adding the Seymour Hersh disclosures from an inside source results in a total probability of U.S. responsibility of 91.8%. Although any of these factors can be disputed, collectively they make an overwhelming case. Given the context of this evidence and the official policy of the United States that covert actions must be deniable, U.S. denials of responsibility for the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage are worthless.
While most people don’t formally apply Bayesian logic, the human mind intuitively determines probabilities based on cumulative information. This is why the decision criterion in civil law cases is preponderance of evidence, not the absence of reasonable doubt. The willingness of public officials, media outlets, and ordinary individuals to consider U.S. deniability of the Nord Stream pipeline attack “plausible” in the face of substantial opposing evidence indicates the normalization of acceptance of government lies, and this is an indicator of serious social decay.
When it comes to the clandestine actions of our government, the U.S. has become an empire of lies. Shielded by public acquiescence to false narratives and concealment of its dirty work, the CIA has grown from an intelligence gathering entity advising the President into a rogue agency, conducting bribery, torture, assassinations, and government overthrows with only notional supervision by Congress.
Truman’s Regret
In 1963 President Truman publicly acknowledged that the CIA he created had turned into a monster with a license to kill. He published an op-ed in the Washington Post in which he said:
For some time I have been disturbed by the way CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the Government. This has led to trouble and may have compounded our difficulties in several explosive areas.
I never had any thought that when I set up the CIA that it would be injected into peacetime cloak and dagger operations. Some of the complications and embarrassment I think we have experienced are in part attributable to the fact that this quiet intelligence arm of the President has been so removed from its intended role that it is being interpreted as a symbol of sinister and mysterious foreign intrigue—and a subject for cold war enemy propaganda.
. . .
there are now some searching questions that need to be answered. I, therefore, would like to see the CIA be restored to its original assignment as the intelligence arm of the President, and that whatever else it can properly perform in that special field—and that its operational duties be terminated or properly used elsewhere.We have grown up as a nation, respected for our free institutions and for our ability to maintain a free and open society. There is something about the way the CIA has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historic position and I feel that we need to correct it.
Conclusion
Since 1955, the use of plausible deniability in U.S. covert actions has significantly eroded public trust in government. By shielding decision-makers from accountability through secrecy, deception, and the absence of documented admissions, the United States has repeatedly engaged in operations that, once exposed, contradicted official narratives and violated ethical norms. From the CIA’s role in coups in Iran and Chile to clandestine support for foreign wars to engaging in torture and assassinations, each revelation has contributed to a growing perception that the U.S. government operates with impunity behind a veil of national security. This dynamic fosters cynicism, weakens democratic legitimacy, and deepens the divide between official rhetoric and actual conduct, making it increasingly difficult for citizens to discern truth from strategic manipulation.
Plausible deniability persists not because it is rational or just, but because the institutions that govern U.S. state secrecy were never designed to meet the evidentiary standards of civil justice or the norms of morality. The structure we call the Deep State was designed to concentrate power in the hands of ruthless individuals playing international power games with complete disregard to democracy and the rule of law. The result is a dual-track culture of accountability, where ordinary people face the law, and national security elites manage optics. The people of the Deep State are intoxicated by their power to disregard the norms of society, and this makes them a danger to us all. When this danger becomes intolerable, reform may ensue. Until then, the implausible deniability of ugly U.S. government actions will remain a national disgrace.
