>> schieffer: welcome back to "face the nation." we turn to the chairman of the house in tell begins committee, mike rogers. he is leading congress i must say congressman we're sorry to see you go you have the respect of people on both sides of the aisle. we wish you well. i want to ask you about this report. you said, you didn't want this report released. you said in the beginning that you were worried it would lead to violence and death. what exactly do you mean by that? >> well, the reason i came to that conclusion because that's what foreign leaders told us who were engaged in trying to get their country's stabilized they believed it would incite violence in their particular countries. we had foreign intelligence services say they believe it would incite violence in their countries including attacks against u.s. embassies or u.s. personnel. our own intelligence services

issued an analytical report that believed it would cause and lead to violence. and likely death i based my conclusion on all of that. what i argued was the information. >> schieffer: so far so good. obviously you and i both hope that that doesn't happen. sure. >> schieffer: the question that i have, these tactics have already been banned by the president. why did the senate decide it was necessary to put this report out, do you think? >> you know, that's a great question. i don't know. when you look at what the risks were, remember we had the department of justice found no criminal wrongdoing, fact that we had already debated this publicly in congress and talked about what we weren't going to do what our values were when it came to interrogation, passed law that we use army field manual. why now, for what purpose. we can't do it it's against the law to do these things. i don't know. i wish i knew the answer to the

question. what i do know is that the risk is ongoing and very real and it will take time, i think see consequence of the release of this report. >> schieffer: john mccain says it should be out, many other republicans including you say no. some democrats say it should have been released, how is it that so many good people, there are good people on both sides of this, people on the senate intelligence committee i've known nearly all of them for years. i wouldn't question any of them's character. yet they come to absolutely opposite conclusions about the facts in this report. >> good people in this town can disagree. i believe when you look at somebody who released bipartisan report, they are difficult to do in this town. this was not a bipartisan report. it was only done by democrats and democrats staff, methodology is being questioned, no interviews, not one person was interviewed for the report in

their release of the report. i think that that does i think cloud people's judgment as this might not be the definitive report. think about this, now you have eu is talking about prosecutions of the people involved. united nations is talking about investigations and prosecutions. this i think was a very, very difficult time when we are a nation at war, we have increasing threat from isil to release report -- allows world to take a different conclusion about who we are and where we are when it comes to torture. >> schieffer: do you agree with the report's conclusion? >> this was not new information. we newsom places, especially in very beginning of the program didn't have good management structure to it, individuals were under the pressure to find information to stop terrorists attacks. we have to put it in context, that all happened, those were issues that were known and reviewed and debated internally and i think classified settings trying to get those things

fixed. some of the conclusions that this was absolutely no help whatsoever, i think is incorrect. again i'm an fbi agent i'm trained in rapport building not more enhanced interrogation technique. i thiara port building works and it's effective. we should not judge those people who were engaged in activities that the united states said, engage in so we can stop another terrorist attack. we didn't even know if there was another one planned. ten years in to this to go back i think ruin their lives over what we have already fixed, already recognized, had some flaws to try to fix those i think was just -- again was not a good decision. >> schieffer: you're leaving the congress now. let's look ahead, what has to happen here? obviously we need intelligence service. is it time for a big overhaul of the cia? how do you heal this riff between intelligence committee and cia obviously this is not a

good thing really when you come down to it. >> i'm very, very concerned about this. we need our intelligence services at the top of their game. again, i think this report unfortunately will allow the world who already doesn't like the america for prone aob to say, see, i told you we shouldn't like america for this reason. we're going to have to continue to try to fix it here. by the way we talk about what work they do. for this particular report about something that happened seven, eight, nine, ten years ago we forget talk about all the fantastic work that these very dedicated men and women have been doing day in and day out without the ability darn dash with the ability to follow the law do it appropriately. we should talk about that. tell those stories about what they're doing to keep america safe. it will make america feel better about who they are. we still need to provide oversight, sometimes we have disagreement in the oversight committees, people should understand that in those

classified sessions we do have debate. it's not cia love fest or republican democrat love fest there is real debate. real philosophical differences that we work our way through so that these folks and men and women can gain the support of the united states, collect intelligence and save lives here at home. we just need to get back to talking about that. >> schieffer: we want to wish you the very best. >> thanks, bob. >> schieffer: we'll be right back.

>> schieffer: we're back with our panel before i introduce them i want to say that earlier in the broadcast i misspoke i said senator john mccain was the only republican who wanted to make the intelligence committee report public. that will come as a surprise to senator collins, senator chambliss and senator bird, three republicans who did vote to declassify the report.

but like other republicans on the committee they did not agree with its conclusions. in fact they disagreed strongly. beg knee noonan is cbs contributor and she writes for the "wall street journal" is columnist of course, "washington post" columnist, michael gerson is here. want to welcome charles ellison the contributor to the root and "new york times" correspondent mark mazzetti who is out front on this intelligence committee report from the very start. peggy, let me just start with you. because i read what you wrote about this. one thing i kept wondering about as this thing was coming out is i've said about six times now, how is it that serious people can come to such opposite conclusions, what was going on here, was there more in play here than just the facts? >> i think there were various

angles playing out, some long simmering tensions between some members of the committee and the cia. i as i look at this, most extraordinary report think that it is very flawed and imperfect. i wish it had been a bipartisan support, had conducted in way that could have gotten republicans and democrats together taking part. i wish that things involved in the incidents alleged of torture had been allowed to come and speak and had been interviewed, it is strange that they were not. i wish it had not been made public. i wish it had been more deeply, historically grounded and serious and mandatory reading for all pertinent people in the u.s. government. that having been said, there is a public purpose in putting before the american people what

was done in terms of torture in the early months and years after 9/11 when america was in a bad place and those who were trying to get information were operating in a way they thought was legal. but it's a pretty appalling list of incidents. it is knot bad at the end of the day that we're all thinking about this and coming to terms with what we think is appropriate for a great nation. >> schieffer: mark, you were in the front on this story for a long time. you've been reporting on this. republicans expressed concerns that it really could put people's lives in danger. are you seeing any evidence of that so far? >> right. predictions of mass protests immediately after the report was released, hasn't materialized. we'll see what happens, we'll see what impact it has. on the question of why making it public, senator feinstein, said in her speech tuesday we have

this inability to learn from our mistakes. we keep doing the same things over again, her point was, only by making it public by lifting all these incredibly details do we see that it didn't work in her mind. and also that if we were to think about doing it again, to prevent the next attack this wouldn't be a good path to go down. that was the argument she made. we'll see ultimately down the road about if there is some kind of international impact. >> schieffer: what do you think, charles? >> this is sort of, tell me something i don't know moment. this is something we've been sort of inoculated about as far as the whole issue of torture as far as pop culture. we've been inoculated by endless episodes of "homeland" "24" and "zero dark 30" stript in the post 9/11 age. this sort of fell flat on a lot

of folks, we already knew this was occurring for some time. we've known it based on the pop culture, on the stream much news reports that have been coming out of both middle east and also just a lot of talk that's been coming off of capitol hill. it's not so much debate over the -- whether or not we should have released the report it's a debate over details within the report feeling rather embarrassed. i think what sort of surrey's is the political timing of this report and release of the report. if frankly, of course, democrats have to release it now because republicans are going to take over in the senate come 2015. >> schieffer: mr. gerson you thought the release of this report if i remember your words, a dangerous precedent here for those in the field who are out conducting investigations. >> there is in fact historical and security context that this street revealed in. president obama has adopted a

manner of war that is heavily dependent on intelligence. intelligence we get from syrian rebels. that we employ in drone strikes. and people at the cia that i talked to feel under siege, people at the nsa field under siege. this is a period where we're putting a huge amount of pressure on our intelligence community to produce. at the same time they feel -- people involved with the broken program wonder, are we next? one told me, these people are viewed as torturers are we going to be viewed as murderers in ten years, in the drone program when someone else politically doesn't approve. and i think people at the cia believe this is going to undermine our daily interactions with other intelligence services. which is how can we conduct sensitive operations with you when you can't as a nation. i think there are real world results. >> why not rip the band-aid off now.

we've had that damaged relationship with-allies right now, for example, this information is already out there just feels a little bit more official and lot more details coming out. >> not in this form w. this result. >> you can see the concern inside obama administering about who is losing the cia most public forceful response by administration was by the cia director in this unprecedented live press conference from cia headquarters. president obama let john brennan do that is telling. we really should also acknowledge that there is a lot of dissent in the cia about this program that comes out in the report from a lot of people i spoke to. one of the most striking things about the report in my mind in 2002 during first waterboarding session the first cia prisoner saw these harrowing things

saying, they're appalled by what they're watching saying it's not working. response from headquarters is keep doing it. don't question whether it's legal or not. >> schieffer: you know, peggy, everything about this is kind of different when you stop and think about it. the report comes out, head of the committee, diane feinstein, a woman widely respected on both sides of the aisle does one very testy interview with wolf blitzer on cnth then we don't hear another word from her. but when the head of the cia holds this unprecedented news conference, she starts tweeting. what was it, 20-some odd tweets. i've never scenery action quite like that. >> it was strange and looked defensive. on the other hand you had another senator, john mccain,

making really moving and striking speech on the floor of the u.s. senate and showing up today. sort of pulling the argument back to who are we as a people. we have to think about this. are we the people who do this? i think we are not. not in our history, not in our tradition. stop now. rethink this thing. that's what i think is interesting that nobody would ever side you're on on this thing pretty much nobody is coming forward saying, you know the guys whose actions are outlined in this report, i think they ought to be prosecuted, held up to shame. nobody is say can that. everybody is saying, we know what happened on 9/11. we know what the time was like. we understand. they were doing their best according to the legal rights as they understood it but let's not ever do that again. >> schieffer: you know, i'm sitting here thinking about diane feinstein tweeting. do you think that was really diane feinstein or was that her

staff? >> i think most likely her staff who were clearly trying -- they saw coordinated pushback but by the end of the day on thursday after all the tweets you saw fairly conciliatory statement towards what brennan said on thursday. i think she wanted to dial that back a little bit from the hours earlier with all the tweets. i think she kind of said that brennan agreed with her that she welcomed that. i think she was trying to dial back a little bit. >> they talk to each other in great democracy. a news conference, somebody on corner tweeting outlines rebutting him. there's something unseemly about that. >> for example, on the house

side you've got oversight committee, he is holding his hearing because he knows that he's about to go out. also feinstein doing that with senate intelligence committee, she's no longer going to be chair she has to go out with a big hurrah you have that social media element. once again you look at the other political element gearing up for 2016 highway is this going to change the political landscape headed for 2016. how is this going to make certain candidates look. this libertarian wave. >> schieffer: let me shift to the congress, that's what you're talking about. i know the people that work with me at "face the nation" are going to run for the door when i say this because they sauce say, i say it about every other word. this is the least productive congress in history probably and certainly in modern times. they're ending up this weekend just as they began going deep in to the night, threats about

shutting down the government and all of that. again you have texas senator ted cruz taking on the republican leadership. leadership in his own party. just want to you hear what he said last night. >> whole lot of citizens across this country feel a little bit like charlie brown with lucy and the football. where fight after fight, leadership in congress said, we'll fight next time. not this time, no, no. the wise thing to do is fight in a month. two months. three months. not now. there comes point where charlie brown has kicked the football and fallen on his rear end one too many times. >> schieffer: what about it michael gerson. you worked for president bush. >> how to lose friends and alienate neighbors. this is -- they got a vote eventually 22 people supporting it. really undermining their own

cause. you can question the reason whether that's fundraising or foolishness. they're undermining their own cause. the interesting thing in this wider part of the congress was emergence of the populous of both parties. emergence of the cruz wing but also the elizabeth warren wing. this is a warning, there is a market in the democratic for populous anti-market. if i was hillary clinton i would not be happy about that. >> schieffer: do we think that elizabeth warren is going to run? >> i don't think we should count her out. i think -- speaking to michael's point here about populism. there's just throughout american political landscape right now i think that right now people want authentic candidate. elizabeth warren comes on as very authentic person. that is what people are graph stating towards we saw that in

2008. b. >> schieffer: what do you think, peggy? >> she's looking like someone who is starting to see herself as a leader. she is i think trying to lead the progressive wing, maybe leading the progressive wing of the democratic party. progressive wing on republican party, too. i think there is potential there. if she goes forward if mrs. clinton does not run. i don't know if she would go forward if mrs. clinton does. but maybe she would and maybe it would rock the house. there might be -- >> some mistakes in 2008 i wouldn't be surprised see if warren gets -- >> schieffer: we ought to talk about demonstrations yesterday. this story is story that is not going away. do you think this is going to be a significant thing in the coming elections? >> i do. sort of seeing the start of civil rights microsoft part two. there was some unsettleddish ice

from the first issues 40 years ago, the relationship between law enforcement agencies and the communities they protect, communities of color. it's bringing up -- another thing, too, that you have just society in general is growing very sensitive to the issue because there's some growing sense of a police state, surveillance issues, issues about invasion of digital privacy. people are concerned about that. you have people of color were marching yesterday, say, where were you guys, we've been going through this about 400 years now. >> schieffer: mark, you'll get the last word. this business with the cia will that be an issue in 2016? >> i think it will be issue certainly -- you'll have candidate asked about what they think about these techniques. i think they should be asked. they should be on record about whether they support some of these techniques. and the issue of terrorism especially in environment of isis is not going away. really political issue, what is the proper response.

it's with us for awhile. >> schieffer: i think you're right. that's it. thank you all very much. we've run out of time. we'll be right back.

>> schieffer: that is it for us. be sure to tune in to "cbs this morning" tomorrow because oprah winfrey will be dropping by. thank you for watching "face the nation." see you next week.

captioning sponsored by cbs captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

the country because of poli killings. good evening, i'm ann notarangelo. and i'm brian hackney. church leaders use will pole pit to talk pulpit to speak about the shootings in ferguson and new york city. >> reporter: a ral segoing on at 3rd baptist church and we are awaiting michael brown senior to speak right now. brown senior arrived as the rally started at 4:00. it is like the civil rights gatherings of the '60s with references to martin luther king junior and songs like "we shall not be moved." brown is the featured speaker. they are urging th