PCLOB Told Mike Rogers They Would Discuss Legality of Dragnet

Mike Rogers is outraged! outraged! that PCLOB overstepped what he sees as their mandate to talk about the illegality of the phone dragnet.

Defenders of the program reacted sharply to the report’s findings on Thursday. Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said he agreed with the two dissenters “that the board should … not partake in unwarranted legal analysis.”

I find this hysterical not just because Rogers has spent the last 7 months weighing in the program’s legality. I’ll take Retired Appeals Court Judge Patricia Wald’s opinion on legality over Rogers’ any day.

But it’s also funny because PCLOB told Rogers (as well as the President and the rest of Congress) they were going to report on the program’s legality back in their November report to the President and Congress.

Met with officials of the Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the National Security Agency (NSA) on several occasions to discuss the operation and oversight of programs under Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act (telephone metadata) and Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. These discussions covered collection, use and dissemination practices, compliance measures, including internal and external oversight, and the implementation guidelines governing collection and use of intelligence pursuant to Sections 215 and 702. These discussions commenced prior to June 2013 as part of the Board’s basic oversight responsibilities, and then evolved, after the Snowden leaks, into a more in-depth review of the programs operated pursuant to Sections 215 and 702. The review, which is intended to culminate in a public report as requested by the President and Members of Congress, is addressing the history, legality, necessity, and effectiveness of these programs. [my emphasis]

He didn’t object at the time.

He’s only objecting now that the Board has found the program illegal.

Rogers might complain that he didn’t notice this warning back then and therefore shouldn’t be held accountable for not objecting back when he was told they were going to review the legality of the program. But to make that argument, Rogers would have to admit he’s inattentive to matters concerning the programs he has primary oversight responsibility over.

While there’s abundant evidence that’s true, I doubt Rogers is prepared to admit it.

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

One Response to PCLOB Told Mike Rogers They Would Discuss Legality of Dragnet

  • 1
Emptywheel Twitterverse
bmaz @emptywheel @ryanjreilly I wonder if federal employee rights came into play in determining the disposition and punishment.
1hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @emptywheel @ryanjreilly Yep. That is where intent comes in. Not suggesting shouldnt have been more punishment honestly just asking question
1hreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV All of Huckabee's denying he ever wanted to kill anybody sounds really suspicious. Do we know for SURE where he was when Vince Foster died?
1hreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV Prediction: Pac's shoulder will take 3+ years to heal. May-Pac rematch in 2020 to be sponsored by AARP.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @ShawnMusgrave Yes. I'm apparently not on THAT blacklist. Yet. Now stop tweeting me before they catch on, wouldya?
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @ShawnMusgrave Which doesn't solve the underlying issue.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @ShawnMusgrave God forbid you be able to check FOIA bills bc you're a nuisance.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @bmaz According to your theory of "DEA always does WOT crimes 1st," should be looking for "forgotten" non-US ghost detainees. @ryanjreilly
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz .@ryanjreilly What occurred here is outrageous; yet, if was truly a mistake with no intent, what should the punishment be? Honest question.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @ggreenwald: NEW: How the NSA converts spoken words into searchable texts - that can be stored & searched forever https://t.co/rYvmpEEe
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @selfagency Spouse is Irish, where that is also used, with a fairly light accent. It has taken some training.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @selfagency Maybe pretend you're English where that slur has a different connotation?
2hreplyretweetfavorite