Clapper’s mouth just keeps moving, now as an analyst on CNN.
(CNN) Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said Friday night that the intelligence community’s assessment of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential race “cast doubt” on the legitimacy of President Donald Trump’s victory.
“Our intelligence community assessment did, I think, serve to cast doubt on the legitimacy of his victory in the election,” Clapper said on CNN’s “Erin Burnett Out Front.”
Kevin Johnson, USA TODAY
Funny how on the day the FISA court renews it, Obama comes out to give a race lecture on Trayvon Martin.
When I read the statement it just rubs salt in the wound. No changes but they decided to make it public that they are doing it.
So they announce that they are collecting data “in bulk”, after lying. First, Clapper said “no” they are not. “Not wittingly,” he said. “There are cases where they could inadvertently perhaps collect, but not wittingly.”
Now he breezes though it as business of usual and makes no bones about it. He flaunts the renewal to the public. Everything Clapper does just makes me grit my teeth.
So we finally got to the very real “wittingly”, intentional part. Now they drop the pretense. It happens to be on a Friday, when Obama runs out to talk about Trayvon Martin. Then media gushes over his comments. (but then that is business as usual)
BY:
June 28, 2013 3:35 pm
Senators are questioning whether the National Security Agency collected bulk data on more than just Americans’ phone records, such as firearm and book purchases.
A bipartisan group of 26 senators, led by Sen. Ron Wyden (D., Ore.) asked Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to detail the scope and limits of the National Security Agency’s surveillance activities in a letter released Friday.
“We are concerned that by depending on secret interpretations of the PATRIOT Act that differed from an intuitive reading of the statute, this program essentially relied for years on a secret body of law,” the senators wrote in the letter.
The NSA’s surveillance program has come under intense scrutiny following a leak revealing the agency harvested the phone metadata of millions of American citizens.
The senators noted that the federal government’s authority under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act is broad and rife with potential for abuse. Among the senators’ concerns was whether the NSA’s bulk data harvesting program could be used to construct a gun registry or violate other privacy laws.
“It can be used to collect information on credit card purchases, pharmacy records, library records, firearm sales records, financial information, and a range of other sensitive subjects,” the senators wrote. “And the bulk collection authority could potentially be used to supersede bans on maintaining gun owner databases, or laws protecting the privacy of medical records, financial records, and records of book and movie purchases.”
Link to lawmakers’ letter
Read more: http://freebeacon.com/senators-ask-if-nsa-collected-gun-data/
While liberal-progs and their lamestream media salivate over what Romney described as a policy to hire more women in his administration — supplied to him in “a binder” — they could ignore the flagrant searching and appointments of Muslims in Barry Hussein’s administration to key positions.
Obama’s policy was reported by a few websites, but other than that the media couldn’t touch it with a hundred-foot pole. And they certainly did not question it.
Cal Thomas reported in Feb. 2010: http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/32840
President Obama’s appointment of Rashad Hussain, his deputy associate counsel, as special envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference — the second largest intergovernmental organization after the United Nations, charged with safeguarding and protecting “the interests of the Muslim world” — should be of serious concern to Congress and the American public.
/….
In 1991, a memo written by Mohamed Akram for the Shura Council of the Muslim Brotherhood spelled out the objective of the organization. Akram said the Muslim Brotherhood “must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”
Remember the James Clapper testimony where he said that Muslim Brotherhood was “heterogeneous[diverse] and largely secular”. That was in discussion to the Brotherhood in Egypt and their influence.
No real outrage over either of them; certainly no questions.
But Mitt Romney mentions a binder of women’s names given him by a women’s group for prospective appointments, and they feign outrage across the media before the sun can come up. “Sound the sirens, man the guns!”
Which one of those is worse, and which one more bizarre behavior? Just a cursory look at Hussain’s record should raise concerns, not only about his appointment but in the process and intentions of Obama. But no cries from media about that.
When Romney speaks about what he did as governor they are outraged about “binders”. Maybe they should look at the prez, show some outrage over lack of transparency, secret records, and appointments that pander to some group. Never happen.
Romney looks to hire women and Obama seeks out loyal Muslims. Which one do you care about?
