Obama: Clapper ‘should have been more careful’ in congressional testimony
Source: The Hill
Obama said Clapper felt "that he was caught between a rock and a hard place."
President Obama said Friday that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper should have been more careful when he testified to a Senate panel last year that the National Security Agency did not collect data on millions of Americans.
I think that Jim Clapper himself would acknowledge, and has acknowledged, that he should have been more careful about how he responded, Obama told CNNs Jake Tapper. His concern was that he had a classified program that he couldn't talk about and he was in an open hearing in which he was asked, he was prompted to disclose a program, and so he felt that he was caught between a rock and a hard place.
In July, Clapper apologized to the Senate Intelligence Committee for his clearly erroneous testimony.
Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/197060-obama-clapper-should-have-been-more-careful-in-congressional
truthisfreedom
(23,151 posts)Response to jakeXT (Original post)
truthisfreedom This message was self-deleted by its author.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)NutmegYankee
(16,201 posts)If Congress really wanted an answer, they could have closed the hearing. The guy was basically entrapped. He was required to state an answer, but any answer would be illegal.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)Come on!
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Autumn
(45,120 posts)Yeah, a fucking lot of people are.
Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)If the topic of discussion was a classified "secret" program then this should not have been an open hearing. Mr. Clapper should have answered that the line of questioning involved a classified program and he was not going to answer that in an open hearing and request a closed session.
But the Senate should also not have asked these questions in an open session.
Before you hit the reply with a scathing response let me say this....We are at a very dangerous crossroads in this country. We have good people in the Congress, especially in the Senate, who want to inform the American people about what is going on. The problem is they are bound by confidentiality not to disclose anything material that comes out of a closed hearing or a classified report. They can face criminal charges if they do.
So if they can't tell us what the government is up to then the only option we have is to make those hearings open so the American people can hear for themselves what is going on and it frees Congress to discuss and report on these programs to their constituents.
But as long as you have these secret programs and Congressional oversight requires no one can publicly disclose details of these programs, we are screwed. It is only when whistleblowers like Edward Snowden pull back the veil do we see for ourselves that our government is doing in secret.
Titonwan
(785 posts)Anyone of us that tried that would be in Guantanamo Bay or the SuperMax in Colorado. More of our two tiered justice system.
brisas2k
(76 posts)"If we wish to be free; if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending; if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtainedwe must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms, and to the God of hosts, is all that is left us."
-- Patrick Henry, Speech in Virginia Convention, Richmond, March 23, 1775
bullwinkle428
(20,629 posts)MisterP
(23,730 posts)DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)What is worse, they know they don't have to come up with anything plausible. They can trot this sorry-ass ''he misspoke and should have been more careful'' crappola and who's gonna say anything? Listen, if Crapper is so inept, how the hell can he be in-charge of the nation's secrets? Oh, that's right -- I forgot, Snowden. Never mind.
- You all are out of your league.....
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Carry on.
PeoViejo
(2,178 posts)Don't get caught.