Some lies to congress are more important than others
by digby
Emptywheel has been documenting the story of James Clapper and his blatant lying to congress.
As I noted yesterday, when Andrea Mitchell asked James Clapper about his lie to Ron Wyden earlier this year, Clapper offered a baloney answer, admitting both that he gave the “least untruthful” answer and that he had been “too cute by half.”
First– as I said, I have great respect for Senator Wyden. I thought, though in retrospect, I was asked– “When are you going to start– stop beating your wife” kind of question, which is meaning 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.
[snip]
And this has to do with of course somewhat of a semantic, perhaps some would say too– too cute by half. But it is– there are honest differences on the semantics of what– when someone says “collection” to me, that has a specific meaning, which may have a different meaning to him. [my emphasis]It was such a terrible response to Mitchell’s question, for ten whole minutes I wished Rahm Emanuel were back in the White House to rip Clapper to shreds for such a media fail.
But what makes Clapper’s answer — and his retroactive explanations for it — far, far worse is that Ron Wyden gave him a day to figure out how to answer.
One of the most important responsibilities a Senator has is oversight of the intelligence community. This job cannot be done responsibly if Senators aren’t getting straight answers to direct questions. When NSA Director Alexander failed to clarify previous public statements about domestic surveillance, it was necessary to put the question to the Director of National Intelligence. So that he would be prepared to answer, I sent the question to Director Clapper’s office a day in advance. [my emphasis]
And after Clapper lied to Wyden’s face, Wyden gave him a chance to amend it, which he did not take.
After the hearing was over my staff and I gave his office a chance to amend his answer. Now public hearings are needed to address the recent disclosures and the American people have the right to expect straight answers from the intelligence leadership to the questions asked by their representatives. [my emphasis]
Wyden is making it clear: this was a deliberate, knowing lie to Congress. And no one wants to talk about it.
Well, who cares about lying to congress anyway, right? Except for the oversight and all, it’s no big deal.
Most of them may not care about being blatantly lied to about millions of Americans’ having their 4th Amendment rights trampled on by the government, but they must be pleased to see the DOJ draw a big red line on other important matters:
A jury acquitted baseball great Roger Clemens on Monday of all charges that he lied to Congress about using steroids—the second time in a month the Justice Department has suffered a high-profile defeat.
Mr. Clemens, 49 years old, fought back tears as he thanked supporters after a legal saga that dates to 2007, when a congressionally ordered inquiry into steroids in pro baseball had concluded the pitcher was among those who had used steroids.
Hey, lying to congress about your own steroid use in professional sports is beyond the pale. Anyone can see that.
Meanwhile, I’m having a really hard time understand why James Clapper is such a respected and popular figure in this administration (according to Chuck Todd on twitter yesterday, anyway.)
I mentioned this over the week-end but I’m still so gobsmacked by it that I have to bring it up again:
THE STRUGGLE FOR IRAQ: WEAPONS SEARCH; Iraqis Removed Arms Material, U.S. Aide Says
By DOUGLAS JEHL
Published: October 29, 2003The director of a top American spy agency said Tuesday that he believed that material from Iraq’s illicit weapons program had been transported into Syria and perhaps other countries as part of an effort by the Iraqis to disperse and destroy evidence immediately before the recent war.
The official, James R. Clapper Jr., a retired lieutenant general, said satellite imagery showing a heavy flow of traffic from Iraq into Syria, just before the American invasion in March, led him to believe that illicit weapons material ”unquestionably” had been moved out of Iraq.
”I think people below the Saddam Hussein-and-his-sons level saw what was coming and decided the best thing to do was to destroy and disperse,” General Clapper, who leads the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, said at a breakfast with reporters.
He said he was providing a personal assessment. But he said ”the obvious conclusion one draws” was that there ”may have been people leaving the scene, fleeing Iraq, and unquestionably, I am sure, material.” A spokesman for General Clapper’s agency, David Burpee, said he could not provide further evidence to support the general’s statement.
This is the guy in charge of all this secrecy. Seriously.
.