Obama Still Standing By His Man
If Clapper goes, what will the repercussion be ... or will he be Obama's fall guy? Fall on his sword for the good of the cause ...
The precise bizarre quote from Clapper:
“I thought, though in retrospect, I was asked [a] ‘when are you going to … stop beating your wife’ kind of question, which is … not answerable necessarily by a simple yes or no. So I responded in what I thought was the most truthful, or least untruthful, manner by saying, ‘No.’ ”
Note he was given advance knowledge of the question, and also given had the opportunity to revise the answer.
No = least untruthful ... as opposed to Yes being the most truthful?
Further evidence of the sheer arrogance and impunity with which these people act. They don't even try and hesitate about lying under oath. They just don't believe anyone can touch them.
... sadly, they may be right. More chance of them bunkering down, waiting for the furore to pass, then brushing it all under the carpet.
If Clapper goes, what will the repercussion be ... or will he be Obama's fall guy? Fall on his sword for the good of the cause ...
As the Obama administration insists that Congress was fully informed about the National Security Agency's widespread surveillance on Americans' phone records, its intelligence chief is becoming a complication.
James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, has now admitted he gave the "least untruthful" answer to a direct question in March about the extent of surveillance on US citizens. The admission sets up a critical test of Clapper's relationship with the congressional committees that oversee him – committees the Obama administration is relying on for its defense of the surveillance efforts.
The Obama team is expressing support for Clapper as criticism of him mounts. "The president has full faith in director Clapper and his leadership of the intelligence community," National Security Council spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden told the Guardian on Wednesday.
At least one member of Congress is calling for Clapper's head. On his Facebook page, Justin Amash, a Michigan Republican, wrote that Clapper "lied under oath" to Congress.
"It now appears clear that the director of national intelligence, James Clapper, lied under oath to Congress and the American people," Amash posted on Wednesday morning. "Members of Congress can't make informed decisions on intelligence issues when the head of the intelligence community wilfully makes false statements. Perjury is a serious crime. Mr Clapper should resign immediately."
James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, has now admitted he gave the "least untruthful" answer to a direct question in March about the extent of surveillance on US citizens. The admission sets up a critical test of Clapper's relationship with the congressional committees that oversee him – committees the Obama administration is relying on for its defense of the surveillance efforts.
The Obama team is expressing support for Clapper as criticism of him mounts. "The president has full faith in director Clapper and his leadership of the intelligence community," National Security Council spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden told the Guardian on Wednesday.
At least one member of Congress is calling for Clapper's head. On his Facebook page, Justin Amash, a Michigan Republican, wrote that Clapper "lied under oath" to Congress.
"It now appears clear that the director of national intelligence, James Clapper, lied under oath to Congress and the American people," Amash posted on Wednesday morning. "Members of Congress can't make informed decisions on intelligence issues when the head of the intelligence community wilfully makes false statements. Perjury is a serious crime. Mr Clapper should resign immediately."
“I thought, though in retrospect, I was asked [a] ‘when are you going to … stop beating your wife’ kind of question, which is … not answerable necessarily by a simple yes or no. So I responded in what I thought was the most truthful, or least untruthful, manner by saying, ‘No.’ ”
Note he was given advance knowledge of the question, and also given had the opportunity to revise the answer.
No = least untruthful ... as opposed to Yes being the most truthful?
Further evidence of the sheer arrogance and impunity with which these people act. They don't even try and hesitate about lying under oath. They just don't believe anyone can touch them.
... sadly, they may be right. More chance of them bunkering down, waiting for the furore to pass, then brushing it all under the carpet.
Comment