PRISM

Lamplighter · 06-11-2013, 01:19 PM

Shades of Sexabon...

The Hill
Jonathan Easley
1/11/13

Sen. Wyden presses Clapper for ‘straight answers’ on NSA

Quote:

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) on Tuesday called for public hearings to investigate
the scope of the National Security Agency’s electronic surveillance of Americans,
questioning if Director of National Intelligence James Clapper
had provided “straight answers” to lawmakers about the programs.

The Oregon senator pointed to Clapper’s testimony during a March 12 hearing,
where Wyden asked if the NSA collects “any type of data at all on millions of Americans.”

Quote:

“No, sir,” Clapper had responded. “There are cases where they could
inadvertently perhaps collect [intelligence on Americans], but not wittingly.”

<snip>

Quote:

“When NSA Director Alexander failed to clarify previous public statements about domestic surveillance,
it was necessary to put the question to the Director of National Intelligence,” he [Wyden] said.

“So that he would be prepared to answer,
I sent the question to Director Clapper’s office a day in advance.
After the hearing was over my staff and I gave his office
a chance to amend his answer,” he continued.

Clapper tried to clarify the remarks while speaking to MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell on Monday,
arguing that he meant to convey that the NSA doesn’t “voyeuristically pore through U.S. citizens' emails.”

glatt · 06-11-2013, 01:59 PM

Was that testimony given to a closed session of either the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) or the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI)? Or was it a public hearing?

I would hope that the NSA wouldn't give out top secret information during public hearings. That would be fairly stupid.

edit: I see that the article explains this. Wyden knew the answer already because he's on the Senate intelligence committee. He just wanted to put Clapper on the record disavowing a program they both knew existed.

Quote:

The exchange put Clapper in a difficult position. Wyden, a senior member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, had been briefed on the NSA program, but publicly led Clapper in a line of questioning that would either require him to disavow knowledge of the program, or to answer truthfully, breaking the law by revealing classified information.

I'm no fan of the NSA data collection, but that's a pretty slimy move.

Lamplighter · 06-11-2013, 11:47 PM

Slimmy ? I don't think so.

This question was being asked publically for the first time
...atfter PRISM had become public knowledge.

Wyden had previously pursued this in closed sessions, (2012)
and was not being given a straight answer by Clapper.
That is one of the reasons Wyden voted against renewing the Patriot Act.

At least that's the way I've understood these events.

sexobon · 06-12-2013, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

Shades of Sexabon...

And I make 'em look GOOD.

I just subscribed to PRISM ONLINE for $49.95 and now have access to everyone's metadata for a year. I'm tickled pink 'cause I never metadata I didn't like.

06-11-2013, 11:47 PM	#3
Lamplighter Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods Posts: 6,402	Slimmy ? I don't think so. This question was being asked publically for the first time ...atfter PRISM had become public knowledge. Wyden had previously pursued this in closed sessions, (2012) and was not being given a straight answer by Clapper. That is one of the reasons Wyden voted against renewing the Patriot Act. At least that's the way I've understood these events.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)