Rep. Mike Rogers Goes On National TV To Lie About NSA Programs And Snowden
from the aren't-journalists-supposed-to-call-out-these-things? dept
Number 1 NSA fan (and, laughingly, the guy supposedly in charge of oversight), Rep. Mike Rogers went on George Stephanopoulos' show this weekend to talk about the latest NSA goings-on and as far as I can tell, he appeared to be allergic to the truth, because there's an awful lot of things he said that are simply, factually, bullshit. Let's take a few examples, starting with the big one about Ed Snowden:Rogers: Here's where I think he's crossed the line now, George, he has contacted a foreign country and said, 'I will sell you classified information for something of value.' That's what we call a traitor in this country.What he's referring to is the open letter Snowden sent to the people of Brazil, which we posted recently. Nowhere in there does Snowden do anything that Rogers says above. He does not offer to sell anything. He does not request anything. He does not offer them classified information. In fact, he does the opposite. He offers an unconditional promise to help politicians there with their investigation, if they want, but clearly stated he would only do so "wherever appropriate and lawful." And at no point did he request anything in return, let alone something of value.
Stephanopoulos: You're talking about his open letter to Brazil?
Rogers: Absolutely! He has traded something of value for his own personal gain that jeopardizes the national security of the United States. We call that treason. And I think that letter, very clearly, lays out who this gentlemen is and what his intentions were. Clearly.
Why would Rep. Mike Rogers go on TV and directly lie about Ed Snowden to claim he was a traitor? Does Mike Rogers think so little of the American public that he believes they won't actually read what Snowden wrote and realize that Rogers is flat out lying? He claims that the letter shows what Snowden's intentions are, and I agree. They're the exact opposite of what Rogers claims on TV.
Elsewhere, when asked about last week's task force report that proposes some pretty big changes, while calling out the NSA's programs for going too far, Rogers lies again.
Perspective is important here. If you think about where we are and what the panel did -- which was dominated by law professors -- they basically said that the information is important, but where we keep it may be up for debate. So that's a very important milestone for those who said 'oh, this is devastating to the NSA.' I disagree. What they said was 'this information is a vital part of our counterterrorism effort, to keep Americans safe.'"This is also a lie. The report repeatedly notes that the Section 215 program did not appear to be useful or effective. And, the members of the panel have been speaking out about how shocked they were that the NSA couldn't even come up with a remotely defensible excuse for the program. Richard Clarke -- who is not a "law professor" as Rogers implies, but rather the former anti-terrorism czar for multiple presidents -- went on On the Media last week to point out that what stunned him was that the NSA couldn't show the panel a single example where the program was necessary. Clarke notes that they were able to go through all of the data related to this program and "we came to the conclusion it was not necessary in any case where it was used."
Again, Rogers is flat out lying to the public over very factual information.
Next up, he's asked about the ruling by Judge Leon that the program is unconstitutional, Rogers went on the attack.
16 federal judges, 36 different opinions have all had a different opinion.... And these are business records, not your personal records. That's very, very different. There have been hundreds of appellate decisions reaffirming the government's right to get business records in the course of a terror investigation or determining if a terrorist overseas is calling into the United States. So this is one case, when you have a huge volume.... Yes, this one district judge that doesn't handle national security cases had a difference of opinion. That's our good system. But he set aside his own decision, as he said 'likely to be overturned' because of the sheer volume of federal judges who have already reviewed this... and reaffirmed that this program is legal. It does meet the constitutional test...Also, almost entirely untrue. Yes, courts have said that business records can be collected without a warrant, but the courts meant it within the context of Maryland v. Smith, involving a single bit of information about a specific person. Not the bulk collection of data on everyone. Judge Leon clearly made the distinction, which Rogers ignores and misrepresents. And, yes, while the FISA Court has approved the program repeatedly, it's in a non-adversarial process in which no one has presented the other side. Now that that's finally happening, the judge has rejected it.
Honestly, it's difficult to find anything that Rep. Rogers spoke accurately about in this appearance. Oh, and in case you're wondering, not once did Stephanopoulos push back on anything Rogers said. Because that's DC "journalism" where the "press" just let the politicians lie to the American public, because that's what they do.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: ed snowden, george stephanopoulos, intelligence community, mike rogers, nsa, section 215, task force report
Reader Comments
The First Word
“And yet the only protection has been for the criminal bankers, politicians, and gov. agents for crimes against us.
Wall street's crimes were more harmful than any terrorist act and they were protected and paid. The banks got away with crimes because no gov. agency or office would do their job.
And now finally someone actually did his job which is supposed to be, protecting us, and now he is in trouble for it. WTF!?
It exposes the reality of all of this bullshit.
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
This is pretty simple, actually
Mike Rogers is a coward.
Mike Rogers is a liar.
Mike Rogers hates America.
Once you absorb those few basic facts, his behavior becomes far easier to analyze. In fact, it's quite consistent and pretty much exactly what you'd expect. The problem is that we'd like to believe otherwise: we'd LIKE to believe that he's a representative of the public and that he really does want to uphold and defend the Constitution, as he swore to do. But what we'd like to believe is diametrically opposed to reality.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This is pretty simple, actually
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This is pretty simple, actually
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rogers: Absolutely! He has traded something of value for his own personal gain that jeopardizes the national security of the United States. We call that treason.
No....YOU call it treason. I was unaware that the United States was in any way in any kind of conflict with Brazil. Treason is defined in part anyways, as aiding an enemy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rhetorical Question, but "Yes"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Regarding that letter
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Regarding that letter
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Regarding that letter
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NSA lies to him, he lies to us = oversight.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I thought he said because it was likely to be stayed because of an appeal?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sadly...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Didn't I say...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Emperor's New Clothes
Enter a small child that doesn't know to follow the narrative in the form of bloggers that tear the narrative to hell and tell the true story.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Judge Leon did not "set aside" his judgement, he "stayed" it. Setting aside a decision nullifies it, staying a decision postpones its execution until a later time.
Nor did the Judge say it was "likely to be overturned"; he presumed the government would appeal his decision -- so "likely to be appealed" would be an accurate paraphrasing -- but he also warned the government it should prepare for the eventuality of "when, and if, this ruling is upheld".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Snowden should sue Rogers for libel
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The public has come to understand they will never own up to the truth, will never admit they have exceeded their mandate, and need to be held accountable for those actions. The shame of it is, unless the whole country rises up in disagreement it will never happen.
I am not too sure that rising up is out of the question. This whole spying business is wrapped up with corporations helping them out. The same corporations that are responsible for the steady increases in prices for the cost of living, food, energy, and employment that is below a living wage. At some point people put 2 and 2 together and find out there is not enough to buy food. When it reaches that level, you will see unrest and it is right below that level now. We more closely resemble the Great Depression than any other era at this time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In other "news": Dog Bites Man.
Masnicking: daily spurts of short and trivial traffic-generating items.
What is this? A political blog? Where's the tech?
08:08:46[j-65-1]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: In other "news": Dog Bites Man.
As you're routinely compelled to show up and post here, I wouldn't necessarily call the it trivial - I'd call it "effective"
______________________________________________________________
Everything's more believable when you include some lines
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: In other "news": ankle-biter #1 can't help it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And yet the only protection has been for the criminal bankers, politicians, and gov. agents for crimes against us.
Wall street's crimes were more harmful than any terrorist act and they were protected and paid. The banks got away with crimes because no gov. agency or office would do their job.
And now finally someone actually did his job which is supposed to be, protecting us, and now he is in trouble for it. WTF!?
It exposes the reality of all of this bullshit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Edward Snowden - US Business' best friend?
At this stage, the value might actually be to US companies! Right now, any non-US company loosing a bidding competition to a US company for oil rights, mining rights or selling things is in a good position to challenge the outcome suggesting the US competitor might have had an unfair advantage due to support by the NSA - the current assumption is the NSA listens to everything and anybody (except for terrorists, maybe, given the NSA's track record in not catching them ...).
Unless the NSA or the US government decide to turn on transparency, Edward Snowden might be the only person with the information and credibility to narrow down the scope ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wanna show that you're the beacon of truth while Rogers is a lying devil, then actually discuss any of his perceived lies in the comments. I mean, you aren't lying, right? Surely, you're willing to honestly discuss your view that he is, right?
Oh, wait. I forgot. Mike doesn't discuss substance. He just spreads FUD. Prove me wrong?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You need to present proof for people to disprove. Otherwise you're making baseless accusations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If you'd have read the article, the stance that Rogers is lying would be obvious to you.
It's only FUD if it isn't true - can you specifically outline exactly what Snowden did that made the United States vulnerable?
Outlining a spy program that "we all must've known" existed surely wouldn't be any surprise...after all, it's "just" metadata. Unimportant stuff. Nothing to see here...right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-23/data-are-money-for-google-to-yahoo-asking-nsa-to-back-of f.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-23/data-are-money-for-google-to-yahoo-asking-nsa-to-bac k-off.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stephanopoulos can play 'bad cop' as well as 'good cop'.
When Stephanopoulos "interviewed" Dennis Rodman about his North Korea visit, he ripped Rodman to shreds. Stephanopoulos has also been tough on a few 'maverick' politicians, such as Ron Paul.
But like most any mainstream journalist who values his career, Stephanopoulos routinely bows down and kisses the feet of those in power.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Then again maybe Rogers thinks he's telling the truth...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
People don't care if they're being lied to, just that the person lying to them is confident in their lies. Snowden being a traitor and trying to sell nuclear secrets to Brazil or whatever bullshit he was trying to push is an absolute truth now. Why? because he said it on TV without a laugh track being played in the background.
So now, to three-hundred million people, Snowden is worse than Hitler. Expect opinion polls to reflect that in the coming months.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And what is rogers trading?
I think all this lip service clearly demonstrates just what kind of fellow he is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
New blood on intelfintelll committee
http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Himes-cites-need-for-intelligence-changes-5087164.php
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Speaking of definitions...
1580s, "person skilled in politics," from politics + -ian. Johnson defines it as "A man of artifice; one of deep contrivance."
contrive (v.)early 14c., from Old French controver (Modern French controuver) "to find out, contrive, imagine," from Late Latin contropare "to compare"
Sense evolution (in French) was from "invent with ingenuity" to "invent falsely."
Mike Rodgers is definitely "A man of artifice; one of deep contrivance."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
One of the great paradoxes that continues to fascinate me...
They have one foot (spying) in the future, and one foot (public relations) in the past. So much so, that the present continues to hound them at every step, instilling little confidence and trust in them as effectively ambulatory in the least.
Given that they are fond of the bridge of the Star Trek Enterprise, perhaps they think they're playing some game of Vulcan three-dimensional chess. Problem is, their opponents are playing checkers and the citizens backgammon.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
As multiple people pointed out here Mike substantiated all of his claims in the post. Not sure what you're arguing here. Was there a specific claim you think he needs to defend further?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And if you think Mike is wrong, feel free to explain why. So far you've been less than convincing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More Crony Journalism
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Democrazy...
1. "Lying to the public while holding public office will render the liar unfit for public office anywhere in the USA, ever again. It could indeed be viewed as treason, since corruption in government weakens the nation and makes it easier for enemies to wreak havoc, in effect, aiding and abetting all enemies of the USA."
and...
2. "Once a year, the public gets together on the internet, to vote on which politicans should be ousted from office for dereliction of duty, criminal activity, dishonesty and impersonating a statesman, and then vote again to choose a replacement."
Yep, those two would go a long way towards creating and maintaining an honest government. Its certain that no such creature has existed at any time during human history.
Methinks it be way past time for such.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is an opportunity that shouldn't be missed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]