Thread: Clapper’s NSA Claptrap: ‘Simply Didn’t Think Of’ Patriot Act When I Lied To Congress

Clapper’s NSA Claptrap: ‘Simply Didn’t Think Of’ Patriot Act When I Lied To Congress

Clapper’s NSA Claptrap: ‘Simply Didn’t Think Of’ Patriot Act When I Lied To Congress

July 5, 2013 by Ben Bullard

James Clapper, director of the National Intelligence Program, apologized this week for lying to Congress in testimony he gave in March at a hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee.
That was before Edward Snowden, before the Internal Revenue Service scandal had reached its full burn, before the Justice Department’s Associated Press phone surveillance scandal, before PRISM. The public didn’t even have one eye open when Clapper testified three months ago.
But Clapper has found himself revising his testimony in the court of public opinion ever since the bottomless volcano of spy scandals started belching, terrorizing Americans who’d remained peacefully unaware they’d been living in the Federal government’s dangerous surveillance shadow.
He pulled a Bill Clinton in June, telling NBC’s Andrea Mitchell his earlier testimony represented “what I thought was the most truthful, or least untruthful, manner” of answering a direct question from Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) on whether the National Security Agency (NSA) engaged in a data collection dragnet that sweeps information on millions of Americans.
But this week, Clapper went from “least untruthful” to “I’m sorry.” He wrote Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and posted the letter’s contents on the National Intelligence website Tuesday, apologizing for making “clearly erroneous” statements in denying Congress any informed oversight of the NSA’s immensely broad citizen spying program. He justified the willed omission (i.e., lie) by saying he “simply didn’t think of Section 215 of the Patriot Act,” which enables expanded government spying through use of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

I have thought long and hard to re-create what went through my mind at the time. In light of Seantor Wyden’s reference to “dossiers” and faced with the challenge of trying to give an unclassified answer about our intelligence collection activities, many of which are classified, I simply didn’t think of Section 215 of the Patriot Act. Instead, my answer addressed collection of the content of communications. I focused in particular of Section 702 of FISA, because we had just been through a year-long campaign to seek reauthorization of this provision and had had many classified discussions about it, including with Senator Wyden. That is why I added a comment about “inadvertent” collection of U.S. person information, because that is what happens under Section 702 even though it is targeted at foreigners.
That said, I realized later that Senator Wyden was asking about Section 215 metadata collection, rather than content collection. Thus, my response was clearly erroneous — for which I apologize.

Take a look at the relevant portion of Clapper’s testimony below, which begins 22 seconds into the video:
Remember, Clapper had three months to figure out a way to backtrack, and this letter is what he came up with. Feinstein’s only response to the letter was to say Clapper’s statement “speaks for itself.”
And, since Clapper brought it up, metadata collection is ostensibly too benign, too impersonal, too incapable of revealing to the government any inkling of the intimate aspects of an individual’s life. If you believe his explanation, it was simply too inconsequential a component of the NSA’s surveillance power (both technical and legal) for Clapper to call to mind under direct questioning. In short, metadata can’t tell you much, he’s arguing.
Oh yeah? See this. And this.
http://personalliberty.com/2013/07/0...d-to-congress/

This is called "PURGERY" Sluggo LIED to Congress; Which is Pretty Damn Serious Offense ... Lock'm Up Danno

Get the Judges from the FISC and make them explain the justification for rubber stamping mass Surveillance programs like Prism.

Article:
Secret Courts: A History of Intrigue and Abuse

http://www.livescience.com/37389-nsa...r-chamber.html

Marc Lallanilla, Assistant Editor
Date: 12 June 2013 Time: 03:38 PM ET

inShare

Secret courts like today's Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) operate without public scrutiny. CREDIT: Andrey_Popov | Shutterstock.com View full size image

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which approved the National Security Agency's collection of U.S. citizens' telephone records, is just one of history's many secret courts.
The fundamental premise behind secret courts like the FISC is that some decisions cannot be made in public without jeopardizing a critical national interest, such as security, defense or government administration.
Therefore, the proceedings of a secret court are closed to the public. Court records are kept sealed; they can only be seen under specific conditions by certain people, and much of the information in secret court records may be redacted before viewing by anyone outside the court. [Top Ten Conspiracy Theories]


In many secret courts, only one side of an issue is presented to the several judges sitting on the court bench. Secret court decisions are usually final and are not subject to appeal.
The names of judges who preside over secret courts may or may not be known. In most cases, even the fact that a secret court exists, or has arrived at a decision on a particular issue, is not known to the public.
The advantages of a secret court are its ability to make a decision quickly and without public knowledge of its proceedings. Many critics claim, however, that those same qualities undermine the legitimacy of secret courts.
The Star Chamber
In medieval England, the Star Chamber was a secret court named for the decorative stars emblazoned on the ceiling of the wood-paneled room in which its judges deliberated.
The Star Chamber oversaw the proceedings of the local courts; it was also able to decide matters involving wealthy and powerful people whose influence made them immune to the decisions of lower judicial bodies.
Over the centuries, the Star Chamber was often used to break up the power of England's land-owning elites. Punishment was swift and could be severe, though the court never condemned anyone to death.
As a flexible organization with wide-ranging powers, the Star Chamber was a valuable ally to kings needing a quick and fair decision on an important matter, sometimes involving a political rival, but often involving crimes like riots, corruption and sedition.
Under some rulers, however, the secretive Star Chamber abused its considerable power to oppress and punish people — often religious dissidents like the Puritans — who had no hope of appeal.
Due to its excesses, the Star Chamber was abolished by Parliament in 1641. The chamber itself was dismantled some years later, though its legendary star-studded ceiling was preserved and can now be seen in Leasowe Castle in Cheshire, England.
'Unnatural acts' at Harvard
In 1920, a secret court was convened at Harvard University to investigate allegations of homosexual activity involving students, alumni and faculty.
The now-infamous Secret Court of 1920 was composed of five administrators who reported to Harvard President Abbott Lawrence Lowell. In their proceedings, the administrators interrogated dozens of people accused or suspected of "unnatural acts" over the course of two weeks.
Many of those questioned by the court were expelled or fired; two accused homosexuals committed suicide. A few expelled students, however, were later readmitted and went on to have successful careers.
The existence of the court was largely unknown until 2002, when a reporter from the campus newspaper discovered a box of files labeled "Secret Court" in the Harvard University Archives.
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC)
From the 1950s to the 1970s, the CIA, the U.S. Army and other intelligence-gathering government entities often spied with impunity on civil-rights activists, anti-war protestors, political candidates and thousands of other citizens.
To stem these abuses, the seven-member FISC was authorized by Congress in 1978. The secret court — all hearings are closed to the public and proceedings are considered classified — is responsible for reviewing search-warrant applications drafted by the National Security Agency (NSA).
According to the Federal Judicial Center, "each application must contain the Attorney General’s certification that the target of the proposed surveillance is either a 'foreign power' or 'the agent of a foreign power' and, in the case of a U.S. citizen or resident alien, that the target may be involved in the commission of a crime."
Presiding over the FISC is a three-member Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, empowered to critique the decisions of the FISC if a government agency requests a review. Until 2002, the Court of Review had never convened.
With the passage of the USA Patriot Act of 2001, however, the role of the FISC changed somewhat. The Patriot Act extended the time periods during which surveillance can be conducted.
The Patriot Act also increased the number of FISC judges from seven to 11; the four additional judges were appointed by conservative Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
FISC under attack
Recognized as the nation's most secretive court, the FISC has long been a lightning rod for criticism, especially by civil libertarians. As early as 2008, U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and other prominent officials began a campaign to open the proceedings and decisions of the FISC to greater scrutiny.
That campaign reached a fever pitch in June 2013 after The Guardian revealed that the FISC had approved an NSA request to collect the telephone data of millions of U.S. customers of telecom giant Verizon.
Their exposé resulted from a leak of classified information by whistleblower Edward Snowden. The Verizon data collection, however, is just one part of a much wider surveillance program involving many more telephone service providers (such as AT&T and Sprint) as well as emails and credit-card data going back several years.
Eight senators have now introduced legislation that will require the FISC to declassify information about its decisions. "Americans deserve to know how much information about their private communications the government believes it's allowed to take under the law," said Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), as quoted in The Hill.
The controversial NSA surveillance program also prompted the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) to file a motion with the FISC to release its opinions.
"The program goes far beyond even the permissive limits set by the Patriot Act and represents a gross infringement of the freedom of association and the right to privacy," Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the ACLU, said in a statement.
Follow Marc Lallanilla on Twitter and Google+. Follow us @livescience, Facebook & Google+. Original article on LiveScience.com.

DNI Chief James Clapper Admits He Lied

Posted on July 3, 2013 by Cowboy Byte


Director of National Intelligence James Clapper has apologized for a “clearly erroneous” statement he made to Congress over the National Security Agency’s surveillance activity.




In a letter to Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) released publicly on Tuesday, Clapper said he was mistaken when he told Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) that the United States did not collect data on millions of Americans.
“My response was clearly erroneous — for which I apologize,” Clapper wrote in the letter dated June 21.


Read more: http://cowboybyte.com/22755/dni-chie...#ixzz2YZ6Iv9rI

http://cowboybyte.com/22755/dni-chie...pying-program/


Sorry!!!!! Did he say sorry!!!!!! He needs to go to jail he lied to the court that is perjury!!! Any one else would be in jail the minute it was uncovered...Sorry!!!!! Sorry to you criminal clapper !!!

Director of National Intelligence Uses Child’s Excuse About Lying to Congress

Posted by Dave Jolly






Anyone who has had kids or been around young kids knows that they are quick to lie when asked about something they did wrong. One of the more frequent excuses a parent will hear is ‘I forgot’ or ‘I don’t remember.’ Ask them why they didn’t do something they were supposed to, you almost always heard them say they forgot. They think this is the easy way to avoid admitting their guilt for whatever they are being accused of.
This excuse may work for young kids, but adults are supposed to be more responsible and the ‘I forgot’ excuse is just not acceptable, especially from someone with an extensive military background.
James Robert Clapper, Jr, was born in 1941 and entered the military in 1963. Thirty-two years later in 1995, Clapper retired as a Lieutenant General (3 stars) in the Air Force. The last four years of his military service was spent as the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. In 2001, Clapper was appointed to the position of Director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency by then President George W. Bush. In April 2007, Clapper was appointed to be the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, again by President George W. Bush. When Barack Obama was sworn in as President, he kept Clapper on in his position. Then in August of 2010, Obama appointed Clapper to be the Director of National Intelligence.
Retired General Clapper has an impressive record of serving his country and being involved with national intelligence. However, in March of this year, Clapper displayed an obvious lack of intelligence when he testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee. At that hearing, Clapper told the committee that the NSA didn’t wittingly collect any type of data on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans.
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), says that Clapper was informed about the question prior to the March hearing and that after the hearing, his office contacted Clapper’s staff to correct the hearing record. It wasn’t long before Clapper found himself coming under fire for his statements to the committee, especially once it was obvious that he had lied.
Trapped by his own lies, Gen. Clapper sent a letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee. In the letter, he stated that he gave false answers because:

“I simply didn’t think of Section 215 of the Patriot Act.”
“I apologize. While my staff acknowledged the error to Senator Wyden’s staff soon after the hearing, I can now openly correct it because the existence of the metadata program has been declassified.”

It seems that this is Clapper’s way of saying ‘I forgot’ just like a 5 year old child would do. After 32 years in the military and 22 years in the upper echelons of the intelligence community, I find it hard to believe that Clapper simply forgot about something that he’s involved in on a daily basis. Obviously, Clapper also forgot what it says in 1 Cor. 13:11:

“When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways.”

I’m not the only one that has a problem with Clapper’s excuse. Tom Caiazza, spokesman for Sen. Wyden responded to Clapper’s letter saying:

“The ODNI [Office of the Director of National Intelligence] acknowledged that the statement was inaccurate but refused to correct the public record when given the opportunity. Senator Wyden's staff informed the ODNI that this was a serious concern.”

If the Director of National Intelligence can’t remember the provisions of the Patriot Act that they are using to spy on Americans, then he clearly in incapable of fulfilling his duties. If he lied to the Senate and then uses the excuse of a 5 year old to cover it up, it shows that he can’t be trusted and therefore is not trustworthy enough to hold his position. Clapper needs to put away childish ways and start acting like the responsible intelligence leader that he’s supposed to be. If he can’t, it’s time for him to consider stepping down as Director of National Security to enjoy his family and retirement.

http://godfatherpolitics.com/11572/d...g-to-congress/


He needs to stick it in his ear, a liar is a liar. Or the very least " clap on clap off".