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. But he didn't say if he gaveclassified information. I proposed on Twitter he should be asked just that. I proposed on Twitter he should be asked just that. Good question for Clapper: is he a source for the partisan Democrat shills at @CNN, whether of clasified or non-classified info? — Baby Goat Alliance (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 8, 2017

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?" 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." Clapper's answer was -- and this is just from memory, but this is close -- "Uhhhhmmmmmmmm... well if it's not classified, 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. 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. Watch this story -- also watch the mediacover this big moment. NBC did, in a tweet, but I don't think you'll see this moment on the evening newscasts: NBC did, in a tweet, but I don't think you'll see this moment on the evening newscasts: "Unclassified is not leaking": James Clapper when asked if he'd ever leaked unclassified information to the press https://t.co/HCfJ4Wk7pm — NBC News (@NBCNews) May 8, 2017

They're going to bury this story, just like they bury stories about other people they feel, for some strange reason, must be protected. 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. 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. You will also note the CNN reporters -- who feelto flack for Clapper -- mounting pre-emptive defenses of him. Context for the young'uns: Every president tries to make the story How Did The Scandal Get Leaked instead of How Did The Scandal Happen? — Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) May 8, 2017

Context for anyone who's stupid enough to go to Jake Tapper for "analysis:" 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 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. Anytime there's a leak about a, 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? 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. 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? 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. No, he's not.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 Even more brazenly, CNN'sgrunting hunched silverback gorilla John King and Dana Bash accused Trump offor 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: Here was Trump's tweet-- and I think this is a good question: Ask Sally Yates, under oath, if she knows how classified information got into the newspapers soon after she explained it to W.H. Counsel. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 8, 2017

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. Theory: CNN doesn't want to know who leaked because they alreadywho 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. Watch this story, folks. The more they want to bury it, the more it needs to be dug into. The more they want to bury it, the more it needs to be dug into. Posted by: Ace at 05:12 PM











MuNuvians MeeNuvians Polls! Polls! Polls! Frequently Asked Questions The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick Top Top Tens Greatest Hitjobs News/Chat