AS A GENERAL MATTER -- and a wild over exaggeration to make a point -- OGC attorneys have responsibility for things like workplace harassment claims, Time & Attendance compliance, DIOG compliance (are the right forms filed timely in every case), etc. https://twitter.com/ken_caudle/status/1298417350946050053

They have limited operational responsibilities. In Cyber, where Clinesmith was, it is the AGENTS who investigate cyber-intrusions, not the OGC lawyers assigned. There are specific enforcement tools used to investigate cyber crimes.

The OGC lawyer is versed in the technical side requirements -- are all the technical requirements of the law met such that we can use this particular method under the DIOG. But they are not co-extensive with investigators the same way agents and DOJ prosecutors work together.

So, if I got a call from an Agent on a case and he said "We want to use XZY technique to evaluate this possible intrusion, can we do that?" My response would have been "How the fook should I know, ask your Cyber lawyer what are the required steps under the DIOG that justify use."

But the cyber guy is not going to be versed on the case law about what is "relevant" and what can be omitted from a FISA application. The OI lawyers that work every day with the FISC are the people who give those answers. If Clinesmith did, he was guessing.