DimWit Politics

More Claptrap from James Clapper – liar extraordinaire

 Breaking News

More Claptrap from James Clapper – liar extraordinaire

More Claptrap from James Clapper – liar extraordinaire
May 25
15:04 2018

James Clapper, the former Director of National Intelligence, has just published a book that claims the Russians flipped the 2016 election to Donald Trump.  He does not pose this as a theory or proffer it as a fact-based argument.  Nope!  He just declares it to be so without a scintilla of evidence.  This assertion may be – and should be – the coup de grace to whatever residual credibility Clapper may still have.  Unfortunately, the anti-Trump media cabal will continue to prop up the mendacious Clapper as a legitimate source of information and perspective.

Clapper is also the latest example of what I call “news creep.”  You may recall that after the election, as evidence mounted of Russian meddling, virtually everyone agreed, including the Intel community and including Clapper, that the Russians did NOT affect the outcome of the election and that the Russian social media efforts were designed to create chaos by posting items that helped or hurt both Trump and Clinton.  We were further assured that the ballots were not rigged by Russian hacking.  Trump won fair and square.

You Might Like
Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Of course, that answer did not sit well with the resistance movement.  Gradually – and with no change in evidence – the press began to question whether there was a pro-Trump influence in the Russian meddling.  That shifted to a “probability” that they had SOME influence in favor of Trump. 

Over time, the reporting began to claim as fact – and still no new evidence – that the Russians DID influence people’s votes, but that it did not change the outcome.  Finally, the prevailing media narrative – eagerly scooped up by the Democrats – is that the Russians stole the election from Hillary Clinton.

The latest person to proffer that bogus claim is none other than James Clapper.  By way of explaining his flipflop, the former head of National Intelligence simply said he changed his mind.  No new evidence.  In fact, no evidence that the Russians changed ANY votes.  But, Clapper changed his mind to sell a book, no doubt. 

We also must keep in mind exactly what the Russians did.  Apparently, they purchased a few hundred thousand dollars’ worth of social media advertising and used it to poke hostilities on both sides.  We were shown examples of anti-trump ads, anti-Clinton ads and some that were simply designed to provoke racial divisiveness.

When Special Counsel Robert Mueller indicted 13 Russians for engineering the plot to meddle, the document specifically said that no Americans were wittingly involved in the scheme.  That means that at least in terms of the social media campaign – which the press and Democrats had falsely claimed required American input – there was no collusion with the Trump campaign … hnkto.

Clapper is not just operating with an animus toward Trump.  He advances this false narrative as a means of salvaging his own crumbling reputation.  Concern about Russian meddling is not new.  It goes back years – even decades.  Such meddling is not even unique to Russia.  It is carried out to some degree or another by both allies and adversaries.  We do it ourselves.  You may recall that several major Obama advisors traveled to Israel to promote the opposition to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. American consultants have been involved in British elections.

Clapper would have us believe the preposterous idea that the Russians were spending their money and efforts to elect Trump.  It does not take a great memory to recall that virtually every observer, pundit and reporter gave Trump no chance of winning.  According to them, he had “no path” to an election victory.  Rarely in American politics has a campaign been foredoomed with such certainty – at least not since Franklin Roosevelt ran a serious of slam dunks.

What is disturbing about Clapper is how his concern has risen so late in the game.  For more than a year before the election, his intelligence community was picking up signals of Russian meddling.  That meddling was documented on Clapper’s watch.  He, CIA Director John Brennan and FBI Director James Comey all were aware of the meddling well in advance of the 2016 election – as was President Obama, who decided to keep it under wraps.

Obama & Co.’s response, according to Obama, himself, was to tell Russian President Vladimir Putin to “cut it out.”  There was no call for a broader investigation.  No threatened sanctions.  Just a meaningless finger-wagging admonition.

Of course, Clapper is a proven liar.  According to George Washington University law professor Jonathon Turley – who has been one of the most objective analysts on both MSNBC and FOX News – Clapper has clearly perjured himself in his sworn testimony before Congress. In a USA Today opinion piece, Turley said that “Even in a city with a notoriously fluid notion of truth, Clapper’s false testimony was a standout.”  

According to Turley, Clapper is protected from perjury indictments because it is rare for anyone to be prosecuted for lying to Congress, and the press defends liars who promote the media narratives and the statute of limitations has run out.  Clapper is free to continue his campaign of lies. 

When Clapper was confronted on ABC’s The View for lying, he said he never lied.  He was just thinking of something else when asked the question.  That feeble excuse could exonerate all those charged with lying to federal investigators.  Also, that answer did not address all his other lies.

Most recently, Clapper played sleight-of-word to say spies were not used to infiltrate the Trump campaign, but “informants” were used only to check-out the Russians who were in contact with the Trump campaign.  They were eavesdropping on the Russians (as they spoke with Trump folks).  Clapper knows that civilians are often used as spies – paid and otherwise – and you cannot say people are subjects of investigations and, at the same time, say there were only wiretapped incidentally.

Turley concluded his USA Today column with this.

“Clapper will establish a standard that will be hard to overcome in the future. He lied about a massive, unconstitutional surveillance program and then admitted that he made an “untruthful” statement. That would seem to satisfy the most particular prosecutor in submitting a case to a grand jury, but this is Washington.”

Indeed, it is.

About Author

Larry Horist

Larry Horist

Larry Horist is a conservative activist with an extensive background in economics, public policy and politics. Clients of his consulting firm have included such conservative icons as Steve Forbes and Milton Friedman, as well as the White House. He has testified as an expert witness before legislative bodies, including the U. S. Congress, and lectured at major colleges and universities. An award-winning debater, his insightful and sometimes controversial commentaries appear frequently on the editorial pages of newspapers across the nation. He can be reached at lph@thomasandjoyce.com.

Related Articles

1 Comment

  1. FDR II
    FDR II May 28, 13:49

    It’s well known that Putin despises Hillary and blames her for unrest in Russia some years ago, so he definitely steered his propaganda for Trump. Also racial unrest ads supported Trump who has made race baiting a pillar of his appeal.

    Reply to this comment

Write a Comment

Special Offer

Latest Comments

He avoids the truth surrounding the Civil War. He goes into comedy mode when touchy...

Is it possible the Democratic Party/Mainstream Media establishment has realized the big mistake they have...

30% of Americans are brainwashed sheeple that would bleat agreement with anything Leftist Democrats say--including...

Take a Look!

Don’t Miss This!

12174 - DimWit Politics - Display - 300x250 B - [WEB].txt Displaying 12174 - DimWit Politics - Display - 300x250 B - [WEB].txt.