4 ms·
>Wyden then asked Director Clapper, "Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?" He responded, "No, sir." Wy
by dictum 13y ago
>Wyden then asked Director Clapper, "Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?" He responded, "No, sir." Wyden asked "It does not?" and Clapper said "Not wittingly. There are cases where they could inadvertantly perhaps collect, but not wittingly."
>On July 1, 2013, Clapper issued an apology, saying that "My response was clearly erroneous – for which I apologize."
- nathan_long 13y agoA contemptible apology. "Erroneous" strongly implies a mistake, and thereby adds another lie to the lie he's "apologizing" for.
- tzs 13y agoWhat else was Clapper supposed to say to Wyden's question? If he answered truthfully, he'd illegally reveal classified information. If he said that he could not answer without revealing classified information, he'd effectively reveal classified information. Wyden knew all this and asked the question anyway, most likely to try to get Clapper to reveal classified information.
- nathan_long 13y agoYou're saying he was justified in lying. I disagree, but let's leave that aside. He could have said "I lied, but I had to for national security reasons. I don't apologize. The question was inappropriate and Wyden should apologize for asking." He could have said "I lied, and I shouldn't have. I apologize." (A resignation would be nice.) But he's quoted as saying "My response was clearly erroneous – for which I apologize." To me, this sounds like "I thought I was telling the truth but later learned that my statements were incorrect. I apologize." Which is itself either 1) an admission of incompetence or 2) an additional lie. #2 is much more likely. Do you see why I called this "apology" contemptible?
- dllthomas 13y agoI presume he could also have refused to answer.