Why Believe Anything Director of National Intelligence Clapper Says?


James Clapper
U.S. Goverment

Yesterday, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee about the foreign threats that menace the peace of the United States. I have no doubt that such threats exist, but why anyone would trust the way that Clapper would interpret (and strategically withhold) intelligence about those threats is beyond me. As all the world knows, Clapper lied last March in sworn testimony to Congress about the extent of National Security Agency spying on American citizens.

During the hearing yesterday, NSA critic Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) began his questioning by stating that Clapper and the NSA had previously made "misleading and deceptive statements" in their testimony. Wyden then added: 

Let me start by saying that the men and women of America's intelligence agencies are overwhelmingly dedicated professionals, and they deserve to have leadership that is trusted by the American people. Unfortunately, that trust has been seriously undermined by senior officials' reckless reliance on secret interpretations of the law and battered by years of misleading and deceptive statements that senior officials made to the American people. These statements did not protect sources and methods that were useful in fighting terror. Instead, they hid bad policy choices and violation of the liberties of the American people.

For example, the director of the NSA said publicly that the NSA doesn't hold data on U.S. citizens. That was obviously untrue.

Justice Department officials testified that Section 215 of the Patriot Act is analogous to grand jury subpoena authority, and that deceptive statement was made on multiple occasions.

Officials also suggested that the NSA doesn't have the authority to read Americans' e-mails without a warrant. But the FISA Court opinions declassified last August showed that wasn't true, either.

Earlier in the week, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) sent a letter signed by five other congressmen—both Republican and Democratic—to President Obama asking him to fire Clapper. The letter read:

The continued role of James Clapper as Director of National Intelligence is incompatible with the goal of restoring trust in our security programs and ensuring the highest level of transparency. Director Clapper continues to hold his position despite lying to Congress, under oath, about the existence of bulk data collection programs in March 2013. Asking Director Clapper, and other federal intelligence officials who misrepresented programs to Congress and the courts, to report to you on needed reforms and the future role of government surveillance is not a credible solution."

Unfortunately, in a reply to the letter a spokesperson for President Obama stated:

The president has full faith in Director Clapper's leadership of the intelligence community. The director has provided an explanation for his answers to Sen. Wyden and made clear that he did not intend to mislead the Congress.

Not intend to mislead the Congress? That is what happens when you start lying, you have to keep lying. 

NEXT: Senate Judiciary Committee Approves Major Sentencing Reforms

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. He’s quite. . .Fudd-like in that photo, isn’t he?

    1. He looks like he should wear robes and shout “SILENCE!” at every opportunity.

      1. I think he looks rather imp or troll like.

      2. Be wery, wery quiet. I’m hunting bunny wabbit.

        1. “Be wery, wery quiet. I’m hunting bunny wabbittewwowists.


  2. “I’m not doing it!”

    “OK, sure I’m doing it, but it’s for your own good and you should be grateful!”

    1. I didn’t want to like to you, but if I told the truth the people would revolt.


  4. This is a serious question…….has Obama actually fired anyone?

    At all?

    Not “people who handed in their resignation”, I mean has he actually fired anyone yet?

    I don’t know the answer.

    1. I don’t know, but it seems like the best route to job security with this President is to do something truly awful.

    2. He once fired a 17 year old American citizen from existing.

    3. Didn’t one of those Obamacare “navigators” get fired for saying on camera that it was all a clusterfuck?

      But that was one of his flunkies.

    4. If he fires anyone he has to 1. make a decision. Which is very difficult. 2. admit someone screwed up under his direction. Which will not happen, because he never screws up.

      Also, sooner or later the dirt will start to come out, and there will be a lot of it. He wants a lid kept on that as long as possible.

    5. At that level does anybody fire anybody? It seems like, no matter how obvious it is that someone is getting fired, they pretend they resigned.

  5. Be careful what we wish for. Obama would probably replace Clapper with…

    Well, shit, anyone that Obama knows is a pathological liar. Congress should instead be stripping the NSA of all its funding.

    To be on the safe side, I would reduce the federal budget by 100%. You can’t be too careful.

    1. He will never fire Clapper. First, God only knows what kind of abuses Clapper actually knows about. Second, firing Clapper means sending a replacement to the Senate for confirmation. That means a whole week or more of answering questions about this issue and keeping it in the news. Worse still and most importantly, it would force a whole host of vulnerable Democratic Senators to go on record on this issue with a vote. Obama and Reid do not want that.

      1. But why would Obama give a crap about this as an “Obama scandal” since it’s been going on for decades?

        Sure, like any POTUS he doesn’t want any bad news on his watch, but it’s not like this is partisan in any way. You’d think every moment spent on NSA is a moment not spent on ACA which IS Obama’s scandal.

  6. Pictured: The banality of evil

    1. Actually, I was thinking he looked like Egghead from Batman. Which is pretty much the exemplification of the banality of evil.

      1. You mean the egg-xemplification Bat-Brain and Boy Blunder!

        MWAH HA HA!

        1. Personally, I was more of a fan of King Tut.

    2. As I mentioned yesterday, he bears a strong resemblance to Supreme Being:


  7. Fire him? Arrest him.

  8. You can tell Clapper is lying since he rubs his head when he does it.

    This also explains why he is bald.

  9. “This is just a bunch of crazy right-wing ringers milking a phony scandal, just like how they claimed that Obama ‘cancelled’ people’s health policies. The law didn’t cancel anything! The insurance companies did! Also = clapper TOLD YOU that they didn’t *intentionally* collect people’s data. And they don’t! This is just about criticizing Obama because racists.”
    /[Someone, somewhere, commenting @ Salon]

  10. Why…why is his face in the wrong part of his head?

    1. Because of his Lizard Person hybrid physiology.

      1. Why did we let the mole people and the lizard people team up to destroy us?

      2. Oh, right, I forgot that he was a Reptilian.

  11. I can’t think of any clearer sign that rule of law is dead in this country than the fact that none of our “leaders” seem even slightly interested in holding Clapper accountable for lying to Congress, which is tantamount to lying to the entire American people, and is, or so I thought, a serious crime.

    Fuck him. I’m not a violent person, but he deserves to end up with his back to the wall, staring down a firing squad.

    1. (along with all of his bosses and those that have shielded him, but I thought that went without saying)

    2. But they are throwing the book at Desousa and the guy who dared bring an empty magazine into DC.

    3. No one high up in the political class has paid any price for pretty much anything in a long time, other than buying cocaine. This comes as no surprise.

      1. Not since Reagan. Ann Burford went to jail for lying to Congress. That was like 1984.

      2. I’m not sure I want to decriminalize drugs.

        Without the War on Drugs, how will politicians ever go to jail?

        just in case its not clear, obvious sarcasm is obvious

    4. But he didn’t lie! He misled. Unintentionally. So that makes it OK.

      1. The problem is his defense doesn’t make it any better.

        True, if he did not know the details of the programs his agency was running then he was no lying. Problem is if he did not make it his business to know the intimate details of said programs prior to testifying about them in front of Congress is guilty of gross dereliction of duty and still guilty of a crime.

        Either way you look at it he should be facing serious jail time

  12. “Why Believe Anything Director of National Intelligence Clapper Says?”
    Hey, he’s not as dishonest as Obo! I think.

  13. The president has full faith in Director Clapper’s leadership of the intelligence community. The director has provided an explanation for his answers to Sen. Wyden and made clear that he did not intend to mislead the Congress.

    Would someone inform the Mexican horny toad Clapper “least untruthful answer” is still perjury.

    1. “He did not intend to mislead Congress” = He intended for Congress to never find out about the programs and ask him questions about them.

  14. “Officials also suggested that the NSA doesn’t have the authority to read Americans’ e-mails without a warrant. But the FISA Court opinions declassified last August showed that wasn’t true, either.”

    Uhhhh…Senator Wyden, the NSA does not have the authority to do that no matter the opinion of the FISA court. That they sanctioned such Is no different than me giving permission to some random thug the OK for breaking into my neighbor’s house.

    1. This is true even when the Supreme Court rubber-stamps a flagrantly unconstitutional act. Ultimately, it’s up to the rest of us to decide whether the government is acting legally or not, not the government.

    1. I was afraid that was a link to a Cathy cartoon.

      I’m sorry I doubted you.

      1. Not having looked at it, I will assume Bill the Cat. Now.off to.check my hypothesis.

        1. Oh, too bad for.me.

          There was a set of Bloom County strips with Bill testifying before Congress…

  15. Devout Christian mother-of-three, 31, becomes first woman in Britain to DIE from cannabis poisoning after smoking a joint in bed

    Gemma Moss had moderate to high levels of the drug in her system
    It is believed mother-of-three suffered a heart attack triggered by the drug
    Usually, deaths associated with drug are a result of mixing it with alcohol

    The gist of it is the coroner couldn’t explain what the cause of death was, and she had THC in her system, therefore the marijuana killed her.

    1. Tests of her vital organs found nothing wrong with them although it was suggested she might have suffered a cardiac arrest triggered by cannabis toxicity.

      That is some top flight scientific certainty there.

    2. PM has a rock-hard banboner over this “news.”

  16. If Congress is so concerned about being lied to, it sure is a shame they don’t have a legal mechanism to accuse formally a member of the Administration, pres3nt evidence against him, and render a verdict. Sure wish the authors of our founding documents would have thought of that.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.