Is it appropriate to say they've "gone rogue" if the agency is actually doing exactly what it was truly intended to since it's inception? I like idea of using the descriptor "rogue" but it feels a bit disingenuous when unconstitutional spying and dodging oversight was always on the agenda. "Rogue" implies they're doing something they're not supposed to, but the crimes they commit was always their raison d'etre.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from: