4 ms·

I don't think it's necessarily odd that he wouldn't have seen the question if it was sent only a day ahead of time. Was there a list of questions that all of t

I don't think it's necessarily odd that he wouldn't have seen the question if it was sent only a day ahead of time. Was there a list of questions that all of the Senators had compiled, or was this just one question independently sent from Sen Wyden's office? Was it sent in the morning or afternoon? What was Clapper doing that day? Was he in his office? Was he out in meetings/briefings all day? If it sat in his inbox for a week I'd be less likely to give him the benefit of the doubt, but there's probably a whole host of reasons that something sent the day prior could have been overlooked. Was his answer misleading? I definitely agree with you there. Was it a lie? That would imply that it was deliberate, which is tough to prove. He's gone on the record saying that he misunderstood the question and tried to correct it after the fact[1]. If it was deliberate, why lie directly to people that he knows know the truth? I don't see a flagrant lie in the GC's writing. That quote goes back into the content/metadata issue. There hasn't been any leak so far showing content collection of Americans' communications. All of the debate in Congress regarding these programs has centered around bulk metadata collection. The issue everyone brings up when they accuse Clapper of perjury is the content/metadata issue, not the definition of collection. I haven't seen any government official denying that the NSA collects American cell phone metadata (besides this one instance with Clapper, which he admitted was erroneous). [1] http://www.lawfareblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/2013-06-21-DNI-Ltr-to-Sen.-Feinstein.pdf http://www.lawfareblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/2013-0...

dllthomas 13y ago
"That quote goes back into the content/metadata issue. There hasn't been any leak so far showing content collection of Americans' communications. All of the debate in Congress regarding these programs has centered around bulk metadata collection." First, the metadata distinction is absurd in this context. The question asked was "Does the NSA collect any kind of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans." Data on whether I call my mother every Friday is clearly data about me. Second, even granting the metadata distinction, it's still false using any reasonable definition of "collect". Garbage men collect my trash by putting it into trucks and dumping it in a big pile. Numerous programs have been revealed under which the NSA is reading content of the communications of Americans and storing it in a database. Using "collects", precisely defined, in a way different than the rest of the world uses it in legal opinions and internal memos is possibly iffy but I don't think clearly unacceptable; using it that way with no clarification or definition in a communication directed at people predominately unfamiliar with the distinction you're drawing is nothing but a lie. "Honey, I wasn't lying when I said I didn't cheat on you. I know I slept with my secretary, but the way I use the word 'cheat' it only applies if I cook her breakfast afterwards." The testimony at the congressional hearing may have been such a communication; the opinion letter in the NYT was clearly so.

dllthomas 13y ago

"That quote goes back into the content/metadata issue. There hasn't been any leak so far showing content collection of Americans' communications. All of the debate in Congress regarding these programs has centered around bulk metadata collection." First, the metadata distinction is absurd in this context. The question asked was "Does the NSA collect any kind of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans." Data on whether I call my mother every Friday is clearly data about me. Second, even granting the metadata distinction, it's still false using any reasonable definition of "collect". Garbage men collect my trash by putting it into trucks and dumping it in a big pile. Numerous programs have been revealed under which the NSA is reading content of the communications of Americans and storing it in a database. Using "collects", precisely defined, in a way different than the rest of the world uses it in legal opinions and internal memos is possibly iffy but I don't think clearly unacceptable; using it that way with no clarification or definition in a communication directed at people predominately unfamiliar with the distinction you're drawing is nothing but a lie. "Honey, I wasn't lying when I said I didn't cheat on you. I know I slept with my secretary, but the way I use the word 'cheat' it only applies if I cook her breakfast afterwards." The testimony at the congressional hearing may have been such a communication; the opinion letter in the NYT was clearly so.