So, James Clapper, US Director of national Intelligence, lies to Congress. First he calls the lie the “least untruthful” answer he could publicly provide, and then cites a momentary memory failure. Seven congressmen take issue with James Clapper’s testimony, but Obama administration unlikely to turn against director.
Let me recap: James Clapper, a retired lieutenant general in the United States Air Force (you’d think he knows right from wrong, truth from lie), lies under oath to US Congress and it is not likely to have any consequences for him.
Initially I’m astounded, but after a while, I’m sadly less surprised.
What kind of a message does that send?
If guys like him lie willfully under oath, how does that say about their credibility when not under oath?