James Clapper Won't Give Straight Answer on Whether He Gave Unclassified Information to a Reporter to Plant a Story

Clapper repeatedly said he did not give classified information to a reporter, "knowingly or wittingly."

But he didn't say if he gave unclassified information.

I proposed on Twitter he should be asked just that.

Senator Grassley did ask. He asked something like, "Have you ever given information of an unclassified nature to a reporter to get a story planted in the newspaper?"

Clapper's answer was -- and this is just from memory, but this is close -- "Uhhhhmmmmmmmm... well if it's not classified, it's not leaking."

The entire hall exploded in gales of laughter -- which I take to be "You've got to be fucking kidding me" laughter, not "Yeah, you tell 'em!" laughter.

Watch this story -- also watch the media not cover this big moment.

NBC did, in a tweet, but I don't think you'll see this moment on the evening newscasts:

They're going to bury this story, just like they bury stories about other people they feel, for some strange reason, must be protected.

Almost as if they have personal reasons they won't report on questions as to whether Clapper fed them information.

You will also note the CNN reporters -- who feel strangely compelled to flack for Clapper -- mounting pre-emptive defenses of him.

Context for anyone who's stupid enough to go to Jake Tapper for "analysis:"

Anytime there's a leak about a Republican, the media's story is about the (negative) contents of the leak.

Anytime there's a leak about a Democrat, the media ignores the contents of the leak and focuses with laser precision and intensity about what terrible skullduggery and crimes were committed in the process of leaking.

Does Jake Tapper remember Valerie Plame? She got her liberal husband the gig of reviewing the WMD evidence in Iraq -- did the media concentrate on that, or about how this dastardly leak occurred?

Quite very much the latter. They campaigned openly for a special prosecutor to find out who leaked this and ultimately got one -- and a prosecution, and a conviction.

Is Jake Tapper now calling for a special counsel to investigate how classified information and surveillance on unmasked Americans made it to the press?

No, he's not. Now he's warning the "young'uns" against being distracted by attempts to ask questions into exactly how so much information that passed across IC desks made it on to the air at CNN.

Even more brazenly, CNN's John Roberts grunting hunched silverback gorilla John King and Dana Bash accused Trump of witness intimidation for firing out a tweet undermining Sally Yates:

CNN's John King did not mince words while discussing President Donald Trump's Monday morning tweet about Sally Yates's upcoming congressional testimony.

"I used to cover the courts a lot," he said. "A lawyer would call that witness intimidation."

CNN colleague Dana Bash chimed in by saying, "Completely!" before adding, "from the President of the United States!"

Here was Trump's tweet-- and I think this is a good question:

Theory: CNN doesn't want to know who leaked because they already know who leaked, and they don't want to go to jail shielding their sources like Judith Miller was forced to do in the Valerie Plame prosecutions they acted as cheerleaders for.

Watch this story, folks.

The more they want to bury it, the more it needs to be dug into.

posted by Ace at 05:12 PM

| Access Comments