Freedom of the Press writes about how a Justice Department report directly contradicts the Attorney General’s claims about the Patriot Act:
As ACLU’s Jameel Jaffer pointed out, one of the IG report’s main conclusions is that FBI “did not identify any major case developments that resulted from use of the records obtained in response to Section 215 orders.”
Meanwhile, today Attorney General Loretta Lynch weighed in on the debate in Congress, claiming the exact opposite. She was quoted by CBS News as saying that if Patriot Act Section 215 expires: “[W]e lose important tools. I think that we lose the ability to intercept these communications, which have proven very important in cases that we have built in the past.” (emphasis mine)
Color my unsurprised there is a contradiction in reporting between the Inspector General and the Attorney General. Politics drives what the AG states whereas facts back up what the IG states.
Personally, I find it hard to believe the Patriot Act has ever had any direct correlation to a major conviction of any form of terrorism. It seems the FBI is using the Patriot Act for standard criminal cases rather than terrorism prevention, as it was originally designed by Congress.