Motley Moose – Archive

Since 2008 – Progress Through Politics

Least Untruthful

Tags:

It seems that back in March Senator Wyden (D-Ore) asked Director of National Intelligence James Clapper a direct question about NSA surveillence (h/t emptywheel🙂


“Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?” Wyden asked Clapper at the March 12 hearing.

“No, sir,” Clapper answered.

“It does not?” Wyden pressed.

Clapper quickly and haltingly softened his answer. “Not wittingly,” he said. “There are cases where they could, inadvertently perhaps, collect – but not wittingly.”

Lara Jakes – Wyden cites contradiction in eavesdropping answer AP via Independent Mail 11 Jun 13

One suspects that in this exchange Senator Wyden already has a pretty good idea of the correct answer so the question to the administration’s most senior intelligence director is purposeful and significant.

Tellingly Director Clapper discussed this exchange further in a recent NBC interview with Andrea Mitchell:


ANDREA MITCHELL: Senator Wyden made quite a lot out of your exchange with him last March during the hearings. Can you explain what you meant when you said that there was not data collection on millions of Americans?

JAMES CLAPPER: 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.

Transcript of Interview with DNI Clapper NBC 9 Jun 13

If ‘least untruthful’ has become an acceptable standard of response to Congress on domestic surveillance questions then we are in a difficult place. As Charles P Pierce notes:


When I asked politely this morning that the government tell me what is being done in my name so I can be prepared for the consequences of its actions, and so I can judge for myself whether or not I want to be complicit in what it’s doing, this is not what I had in mind.

Charles P Pierce – In Which My Plea Goes Unanswered Esquire 11 Jun 13

Wyden, among others, has introduced legislation Tuesday to force the government to declassify, at least, opinions of the secret court that authorises the surveillance; legislation that progressives should wholeheartedly support.


Categories: Uncategorized.

/ 60 Comments

60 comments

  1. Jim in IA

    I find the wholesale mining and fishing of all internet and phone traffic to not fit those criteria. That action assume everyone is a potential enemy of the state and needs to be watched. Kind of disturbing.

    On the other hand, my data and records and movements and emails are gathered by many groups and companies. Does the fact that I signed or clicked the I Agree button on a form make that data gathering different?

    There are a lot of questions in this BIG issue. I don’t exactly know where I come down on them. The public should be involved in a large open discussion with a lot more transparency than we now have. Sadly, I don’t think many people really care enough about it.

  2. HappyinVT

    simply carefully parsing his words but I find I cannot.

    Wyden’s question can clearly be answered in a yea or nay fashion.

    The other thing that strikes me is that the Administration isn’t being blamed for the leak ~ the fault is currently all directed at Snowden.  I would have thought that conservatives would have seen this as a huge Administration screw up (unless they are and I just don’t hang out at the right sites).  And I’m not suggesting it is; we just all know that the Right doesn’t need any evidence of misconduct to make accusations.

  4. louisprandtl

    Expect that your phone calls, intrrnet browsing, skype, emails, etal electronic communications are being monitored or data mined in some fashion either by the companies or by the government..i’m delightfully surprised when proven wrong.

  5. fogiv

    It’s only acceptable if you’re wearing your sport coat open to reveal the naked manliness beneath, in which case it helps hold back the jacket. And provide better crotchular viewing.

    If you’re posing for a shot, try something neutral like “omg i don’t know what to do with my hands” dead-arms or more professionally clasping your hands in front of you like oh so many baby CEO’s before you. It’s a nice compromise between uncomfortable (hands in pockets) and camwhore (oh, I’m sorry, I was just readjusting my glasses in a ludicrously sexy manner).

    – Edward Snowden

  6. bubbanomics

    not being a legal novice (much less expert), I don’t know the details of the laws and statutes and constitutional interpretations.

    I have this vague feeling that the law has not really caught up with the tech, meaning how to define basic notions of what’s what in a tech environment.  “Seizure” and “property” at least have definitions in telephonic context, but it took some years between invention of the original tech, invention of the monitoring tech, and court ruling on what was allowable. Now we have to parse data, meta-data, etc. This is the job of guys who don’t even know what rape is.  

    Seizure of property in “open fields” has a history.  I guess it’s legal for cops to search in garbage cans left on the curb (lawyers correct me if wrong).  On the internet, no dog knows it’s in an open field?  What constitutes an open field here?

    I’m very uncomfortable with the level of monitoring.  I’ll admit a slightly lower level of discomfort under Obama than Bush (like a case of the flu versus Ebola).  I’ll admit that corporate monitoring (which we mostly permit without question) worries me more than gov’t monitoring (like worrying will I be fired tomorrow versus worrying can I afford a sit down meal over McDonald).

    Clapper’s least untruthful statement is similarly disturbing, and it’s an incredibly ill-considered response to a question.  The original question, however, can be viewed as Clinton’s questioning concerning sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky.  Having defined oral sex out of sexual relations, Clinton could say “no.”  If meta data is not data, Clapper can say no.

    As an old buddy from grad school used to say, “that’s some shit.”

Comments are closed.