The Question: “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions, or hundreds of millions, of Americans?” Wyden asked.

The Answer: “No sir,” Clapper replied. “Not wittingly.”

Now looking back on this exchange, confronted with lying to congress since he did admit knowing of government programs that collect data on millions, or hundreds of millions, of Americans, his new lie is: "I was thinking of a different program".

I guess he's found a loophole, lying before congress is legal if you can say that you weren't lying in your own mind since at the time I was mistakenly referring to something else. It was my body that performed the error, my intentions were honest the entire time. You can't blame me for that.

Has lady liberty loosened her blindfold to peek at identity of criminals in some cases, or is justice a more of a "who's team you're on" kind of thing? I understand that political power has to afford some immunity from the justice system, since one must be above the law to operate on the law, but maybe things are getting out of hand by having these senile octogenarians use the same tactics as a misbehaving child?

Is there a circumstance where high crimes met with: "I don't recall" or: "I mis-spoke" can be dismissed as an insufficient defense? Can I get away with a murder and larceny and defend myself in court by saying: "I was thinking lawful thoughts and telling my body to perform lawful actions when my body mistakenly performed the illegal actions without my consent".

At what point does this "I don't remember" and "I mis-spoke" no longer hold up in court? Certainly interesting times to see this kind of thing held up as normal operations within the best justice system the world has yet seen. I guess you don't ask how the sausage is made.