Do you remember when CNN's James Clapper was caught lying to the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2013 when he was still the Director of National Intelligence in response to a question about whether the NSA collected data on millions of Americans? Well, the good news for Clapper is he might be exonerated since it could be that it was not him but his "evil twin" that was the one who was doing the lying.
Clapper made the suggestion on Friday about his "evil twin" lying instead of him on CNN during an interview with Erin Burnett. Because President Donald Trump tweeted about Clapper's inconsistent testimony about his media contacts, Burnett had no choice but to ask him about it.
House Intelligence Committee votes to release final report. FINDINGS: (1) No evidence provided of Collusion between Trump Campaign & Russia. (2) The Obama Administrations Post election response was insufficient. (3) Clapper provided inconsistent testimony on media contacts.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 23, 2018
NewsBusters Executive Editor Tim Graham covered Clapper's habit of leaking on March 17 in Clapper News Network? CNN Pays Source for Leaking With Paid On-Air Gig by citing George Neumayr at the American Spectator.
According to Congressman Jim Jordan, speaking to Fox News, “Clapper was actually the guy leaking information” to CNN about the presidential briefing on the Steele dossier that served as the pretext for the media feeding frenzy over possible Russian blackmail of Trump.
One can only laugh at the utter fraudulence of CNN: it pads its panels with government officials who leak to it, then presents them to its audience as “nonpartisan” experts commenting on the aftershocks of the very stories they leaked.
Graham mocked Clapper's response to the revelation about his leaking:
Sara Carter made the point that Clapper denounced his own leak in a press release on January 11: “I expressed my profound dismay at the leaks that have been appearing in the press, and we both agreed that they are extremely corrosive and damaging to our national security.”
Now that Clapper's been exposed by the House Intelligence Committee, it's not at all surprising that Clapper is denouncing as "so partisan" it has "zero" credibility (wow, the chutzpah is amazing):
Equally as worthy of mockery is Clapper's laughable "evil twin" response to Trump's tweet about his testimony on Friday.
ERIN BURNETT: I want to ask, General, about something the president did about you today. He went out on Twitter, you know, when he was tweeting about the spending bill, he also came out and he tweeted, I want to read this one in full.
House Intelligence Committee votes to release final report findings, one, no evidence provided of collusion between Trump campaign and Russia. Two, the Obama administration's post-election response was in sufficient. Three, Clapper provided inconsistent testimony on media contacts.
Now, I want to emphasize, General, we have not seen the report, which, of course, is put out by the Republican majority on the committee. But I want to start with the president's accusation against you. Clapper provided inconsistent testimony on media contacts.
What's your response to President Trump?
JAMES CLAPPER: Well, first, the first thing struck me about -- there were many, many recommendations in this report, at least based on the press release, maybe dozens. I didn't get a chance to count them all up. And I thought it kind of strange that of all the many, many recommendations, most that he -- of the three he cited, one of them pertained to me, which I thought in the relative scheme of things is pretty inconsequential. So, I don't know why -- why he did it.
Secondly, I honestly don't know what they're talking about. My attorney reached out to the majority staff of the House Intelligence Committee to ask for some explanation or clarification, or amplification. And apparently, the process is going to be that they have to submit, and it's 150-page report, to the intelligence community to have it declassified which is a proper procedure, which could, of course, take weeks.
So I don't know when I'll find out about it, but, you know, it kind of blindsided me. They didn't reach out to me to ask me about it. I would just contrast this process with that which was followed by the subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee after Sally Yates and I testified last 8th of May. And there was some confusion about some questions that were asked of me and Senator Graham went on television saying that I had answered inconsistently.
We went back and read informal transcript, and there were a series of three questions, one posed by Senator Graham and two posed by Senator Grassley where they weren't the same question, I answered them differently. And we explained all that to the committee and they accepted it.
BURNETT: OK.
CLAPPER: Which to me is a better process than this. Maybe it was my evil twin. I don't know.
BURNETT: I mean, who knows what he's saying exactly here? But, I mean, if he's saying something like on media contacts, I don't know, that you were speaking to the media when you shouldn't have been, or anything like that. I mean, is that fair in any way?
CLAPPER: No. Well, it's not accurate. If talking about when I was in the government, I did not. Now, certainly afterwards, yes.
BURNETT: You work for CNN.
CLAPPER: I work for CNN. So, I just don't know what it's about.
Now, it could be something as simple as I didn't use the same phraseology in responding to similar question. But I think, frankly, the real point here was to put out a smear, an innuendo, which I can't respond to, because I don't know what they are talking about.
Yup! You very appropriately work for fake news CNN.
And for all you gamblers out there, take a look at Clapper lying to the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2013 and if you can't spot his oh so obvious "tell" you should give up playing poker forever.
