FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Trump's wire taps
Trump's wire taps
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
 | |||
"the sound that he thought was a camera shutter taking photos was in fact his oven telling him his dinners were ready .... perhaps he mistook it because "ping" was muffled by the rustling of his bacofoil hat which he wears when he's at home in his bed-sit " | |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
"So it seems like both sides of the aisle agree that there is no proof of Trump having been tapped. Is Trump going to see any consequences as a result of having lied? Is Obama owed an apology? " An apology from a narcissistic sociopath seems unlikely. Did he apologise to obama over his birther movement. | |||
"So it seems like both sides of the aisle agree that there is no proof of Trump having been tapped. Is Trump going to see any consequences as a result of having lied? Is Obama owed an apology? " let see if centaur enters this thread first..... hmmmmmmm can someone mail him, i am sure he would to know the results from the committee hearings.... or lets see if trump throws out another tax return to try and switch the topic.....  | |||
| |||
"deeper meaning .... like warming up a cold cup of coffee he forgot about while he was looking for clown porn in his bed-sit?" He could claim it was the side effect of a medication. Say it was a Halcion moment. The white house press staff are certainly going to earning their keep. | |||
"deeper meaning .... like warming up a cold cup of coffee he forgot about while he was looking for clown porn in his bed-sit? He could claim it was the side effect of a medication. Say it was a Halcion moment. The white house press staff are certainly going to earning their keep." clearly ..... here's the latest whitehouse press release https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHl0LNSl6v4 | |||
| |||
"Well I wasn't expecting that! The reason why both sides of the aisle couldn't find evidence of the tap was because they have been looking at US intelligence agencies, however the administration is now claiming that our very own GCHQ did the spying. " This is the relevant text for his Fox interview CARLSON: On March 4th, 6:45 in the morning, you are down in Florida, and you tweet, “The former administration wiretapped me, surveilled me at Trump Tower during the last election.” How did you find out? You said “I just found out,” how did you learn that? TRUMP: I had been reading about things. I read in – I think it was January 20th, a New York Times article where they were talking about wiretapping. There was an article, I think they used that exact term. I read other things. I watched your friend Bret Baier the day previous, where he was talking about certain, very complex sets of things happening, and wiretapping. I said “Wait a minute, there’s a lot of wiretapping being talked about.” I have been seeing a lot of things. | |||
 | |||
"does anyone in britain even make microwaves these days? "MI6? | |||
"Well I wasn't expecting that! The reason why both sides of the aisle couldn't find evidence of the tap was because they have been looking at US intelligence agencies, however the administration is now claiming that our very own GCHQ did the spying. This is the relevant text for his Fox interview CARLSON: On March 4th, 6:45 in the morning, you are down in Florida, and you tweet, “The former administration wiretapped me, surveilled me at Trump Tower during the last election.” How did you find out? You said “I just found out,” how did you learn that? TRUMP: I had been reading about things. I read in – I think it was January 20th, a New York Times article where they were talking about wiretapping. There was an article, I think they used that exact term. I read other things. I watched your friend Bret Baier the day previous, where he was talking about certain, very complex sets of things happening, and wiretapping. I said “Wait a minute, there’s a lot of wiretapping being talked about.” I have been seeing a lot of things. " So he wasn't busy on 20th Jan? Nothing important happening that day? He didn't have anywhere to go or to do? He was reading the paper? | |||
| |||
"I would pretty much guarantee he was monitored by the CIA and probably mi6 , possibly by the FSA and mossad. Thats there job, whether he knew it or is just paranoid is a different question" Well both candidates start getting secret service protection and daily intelligence briefings during the election so Id be surprised if they werent given counter intelligence support as well. | |||
"Well I wasn't expecting that! The reason why both sides of the aisle couldn't find evidence of the tap was because they have been looking at US intelligence agencies, however the administration is now claiming that our very own GCHQ did the spying. This is the relevant text for his Fox interview CARLSON: On March 4th, 6:45 in the morning, you are down in Florida, and you tweet, “The former administration wiretapped me, surveilled me at Trump Tower during the last election.” How did you find out? You said “I just found out,” how did you learn that? TRUMP: I had been reading about things. I read in – I think it was January 20th, a New York Times article where they were talking about wiretapping. There was an article, I think they used that exact term. I read other things. I watched your friend Bret Baier the day previous, where he was talking about certain, very complex sets of things happening, and wiretapping. I said “Wait a minute, there’s a lot of wiretapping being talked about.” I have been seeing a lot of things. So he wasn't busy on 20th Jan? Nothing important happening that day? He didn't have anywhere to go or to do? He was reading the paper? " Probably couldn't sleep. Picked up a 2 month old newspaper, something caught his eye. Come on, we've all done it. More than likely an attempt to divert that he picked got this allegation from Mark Levin and Breitbart. What he's doing reading failing fake news is another question, more so given the intelligence resources he has available. As you already noted, the latest suggestion is GCHQ was behind it. Its just another version of 'a big boy did it and ran away' defence. Trump and the New York Times have a long history. He's called them liars so many times, made noises about suing them. But still smart enough not to actually do it, he knows they would destroy him in court. | |||
"I would pretty much guarantee he was monitored by the CIA and probably mi6 , possibly by the FSA and mossad. Thats there job, whether he knew it or is just paranoid is a different question Well both candidates start getting secret service protection and daily intelligence briefings during the election so Id be surprised if they werent given counter intelligence support as well." . Yea no doubt but lets be honest i would pretty much be assured that the CIA wire tapped every phone he had and analysed everything. We know there not meant to work internally but thats bollocks, theyve spied on every president going | |||
| |||
| |||
"Can't help but wonder how Theresa May is taking the accusation from her new best friend that her spy agency was helping Obama. Ooops, where did that special relationship go?" "Listen Theresa, if you still want that trade deal, you gonna need you to back me up on this" | |||
"CIA may well have done. Probably also tapping Obama.....it's what these agencies do. Law unto themselves. GCHQ have pretty much free rein to do the same over here.....just not admitted to. In the end....who cares? Not saying we shouldn't....just that we will never be able to do anything about it!" It's fuel to the fire. The issue really is not so much his allegations but more that he lied. Remember Clinton and Monica? It will make the Republicans look bad if they don't fully investigate, hence the backtracking. In some ways it brings his position into disrepute, possibly self incriminatory. I would also think that if the GCHQ allegations were taking seriously that the US Govt would regard it as hostile act by a nation state and they would be talk of delivering US style freedom in the form of Raytheon, Boeing and Lockheed Martin armaments. | |||
| |||
"So much for Britain at the front of the que ..no wonder Brexiters are avoiding this thread " Who mentioned brexit ? | |||
"Can't help but wonder how Theresa May is taking the accusation from her new best friend that her spy agency was helping Obama. Ooops, where did that special relationship go?" She's probably still trying to bleach her eyeballs from the videos from his time in Russia  | |||
"So much for Britain at the front of the que ..no wonder Brexiters are avoiding this thread " nooo.... more like throwing ya best mates under the bus.... anyway under "five eyes" all intelligence is shared between the us, uk, canada, australia and new zealand.... so they don't spy on each other so GCHQ and the UK government can deny it.... | |||
| |||
| |||
 | |||
"Funny how some people so vociferous in their outrage have suddenly gone all.. " I baked a pie for them. | |||
| |||
"....... and now the spokeperson for the PM had said the whitehouse have said the allegations that GCHQ spied on Trump will not be repeated.... so.... who they gonna blame next? lol "And the best thing is, the heads of CIA/NSA etc could have been forced to appear before the select committee and put their respective necks on the block and state they didn't do it. But as it's the British they don't have to go through that. Oh to be able to make such wild claims without a single shred of evidence to back them up, yet still be believed by millions. Is he Jesus? | |||
"apparently "spicey" got the GCHQ claim from someone who said it on fox news..... now why does it all add up.... "And now he's had to go and say sorry to our ambassador! | |||
"apparently "spicey" got the GCHQ claim from someone who said it on fox news..... now why does it all add up....
And now he's had to go and say sorry to our ambassador! "It is beyond belief. The white house press secretary, a prestigious position, the voice of the executive branch of government, making allegations based on what a news commentator claims his intelligence sources told him. | |||
"....... and now the spokeperson for the PM had said the whitehouse have said the allegations that GCHQ spied on Trump will not be repeated.... so.... who they gonna blame next? lol
And the best thing is, the heads of CIA/NSA etc could have been forced to appear before the select committee and put their respective necks on the block and state they didn't do it. But as it's the British they don't have to go through that.
Oh to be able to make such wild claims without a single shred of evidence to back them up, yet still be believed by millions. Is he Jesus? ". Why not? The Dems did it with Russia and the leaks,i mean sure they said the intelligence service said it but in reality nobody had any actual evidence | |||
"....... and now the spokeperson for the PM had said the whitehouse have said the allegations that GCHQ spied on Trump will not be repeated.... so.... who they gonna blame next? lol
And the best thing is, the heads of CIA/NSA etc could have been forced to appear before the select committee and put their respective necks on the block and state they didn't do it. But as it's the British they don't have to go through that.
Oh to be able to make such wild claims without a single shred of evidence to back them up, yet still be believed by millions. Is he Jesus? .
Why not?
The Dems did it with Russia and the leaks,i mean sure they said the intelligence service said it but in reality nobody had any actual evidence"Actually McCain was one of the first politicians to lend credence to that dossier and hes Republican. And the intelligence community did vet it and found some evidence to back it up. | |||
"because technically if the president lied... which i think we can say he did... and he lied about another president, which is about as bad a thing as you can do.... technically wouldn't this be grounds for impeachment? after all... clinton was impeached for lying about having sex with an intern... I'd say calling the former president a criminal is way... way worse! "I don't think he lied, I think he was simply told this and he believed without actually checking I think he believes a whole lot without finding out the truth first | |||
"because technically if the president lied... which i think we can say he did... and he lied about another president, which is about as bad a thing as you can do.... technically wouldn't this be grounds for impeachment? after all... clinton was impeached for lying about having sex with an intern... I'd say calling the former president a criminal is way... way worse!
I don't think he lied, I think he was simply told this and he believed without actually checking
I think he believes a whole lot without finding out the truth first"A bit like some of the posters on here then.... | |||
"because technically if the president lied... which i think we can say he did... and he lied about another president, which is about as bad a thing as you can do.... technically wouldn't this be grounds for impeachment? after all... clinton was impeached for lying about having sex with an intern... I'd say calling the former president a criminal is way... way worse!
I don't think he lied, I think he was simply told this and he believed without actually checking
I think he believes a whole lot without finding out the truth first
A bit like some of the posters on here then...."speaking of which.... where is centaur..... wasn't he the 1st one to write the claim verbatum as if it was gospel... i would have thought "pravda" would have had his he say by now......
actually.... before he does that i am sure he is checking breibart to check the correct way to spin it.... | |||
"because technically if the president lied... which i think we can say he did... and he lied about another president, which is about as bad a thing as you can do.... technically wouldn't this be grounds for impeachment? after all... clinton was impeached for lying about having sex with an intern... I'd say calling the former president a criminal is way... way worse!
I don't think he lied, I think he was simply told this and he believed without actually checking
I think he believes a whole lot without finding out the truth first
A bit like some of the posters on here then....
speaking of which.... where is centaur..... wasn't he the 1st one to write the claim verbatum as if it was gospel...
i would have thought "pravda" would have had his he say by now......
actually.... before he does that i am sure he is checking breibart to check the correct way to spin it.... "To be fair C&M can't comment on the matter without checking with Centaur first.... | |||
"....... and now the spokeperson for the PM had said the whitehouse have said the allegations that GCHQ spied on Trump will not be repeated.... so.... who they gonna blame next? lol
And the best thing is, the heads of CIA/NSA etc could have been forced to appear before the select committee and put their respective necks on the block and state they didn't do it. But as it's the British they don't have to go through that.
Oh to be able to make such wild claims without a single shred of evidence to back them up, yet still be believed by millions. Is he Jesus? .
Why not?
The Dems did it with Russia and the leaks,i mean sure they said the intelligence service said it but in reality nobody had any actual evidence
Actually McCain was one of the first politicians to lend credence to that dossier and hes Republican. And the intelligence community did vet it and found some evidence to back it up.". Last time i looked there was no evidence whatsoever that the Russians hacked Clintons lot. I dont deny the secret service said it was "likely to be them". What struck me more was the remark above that said and millions believe it! I think we tend to believe stuff way more than we should in politics | |||
"because technically if the president lied... which i think we can say he did... and he lied about another president, which is about as bad a thing as you can do.... technically wouldn't this be grounds for impeachment? after all... clinton was impeached for lying about having sex with an intern... I'd say calling the former president a criminal is way... way worse!
I don't think he lied, I think he was simply told this and he believed without actually checking
I think he believes a whole lot without finding out the truth first"That's still lying. | |||
"....... and now the spokeperson for the PM had said the whitehouse have said the allegations that GCHQ spied on Trump will not be repeated.... so.... who they gonna blame next? lol
And the best thing is, the heads of CIA/NSA etc could have been forced to appear before the select committee and put their respective necks on the block and state they didn't do it. But as it's the British they don't have to go through that.
Oh to be able to make such wild claims without a single shred of evidence to back them up, yet still be believed by millions. Is he Jesus? .
Why not?
The Dems did it with Russia and the leaks,i mean sure they said the intelligence service said it but in reality nobody had any actual evidence
Actually McCain was one of the first politicians to lend credence to that dossier and hes Republican. And the intelligence community did vet it and found some evidence to back it up..
Last time i looked there was no evidence whatsoever that the Russians hacked Clintons lot.
I dont deny the secret service said it was "likely to be them".
What struck me more was the remark above that said and millions believe it!
I think we tend to believe stuff way more than we should in politics"'The point of modern propaganda isn't only to misinform or push an agenda. It is to exhaust your critical thinking, to annihilate truth' Garry Kasparov | |||
so.... special friendship and getting that sweetheart trade deal then.. hmmmm
| |||
| |||
"Yeah did you see the look on Merkel's face when he told it. Not amused. And how Trump said he never passed comment on the wiretaps and that was quoting a source on Fox. Does he even know what he tweeted?! I loved the commentator Channel 4 had on after it. -Matt" wasn't the most pleasing face i've ever seen merkel give, cool lets make spying on the east german jokes!!!!.... i would have love to have seen the faces of all his staff knowing he made the situation worse.... there state dept must have been groaning! anyway.... so donald is hanging fox news out to dry, fox news are now putting out a statement there is no proof, so hanging napolitano out to dry..... lead story on the german news networks... and the uk networks.... and this is apparently how you now treat "ya besties!!!" | |||
"if trump is going to tell wiretap jokes at press conferences... the last one i would do it in front of is the one who the americans actually did wiretap...... that was cringeworthy..... and left the british hanging out there (so much for that apology....) so left the british out to dry, and hanging out fox news as well..... so now creating international incidences in berlin and london.... brilliant!!!
so.... special friendship and getting that sweetheart trade deal then.. hmmmm
"Mrs Merkel is probably beyond his comprension. She's intelligent and very able. He was like a sullen brat beside her. There was an article earlier this week that called her Leader of the world. I bet that bothered him. Probably hates that she has stood up to Putin as well. Only 7 weeks in.... | |||
"if trump is going to tell wiretap jokes at press conferences... the last one i would do it in front of is the one who the americans actually did wiretap...... that was cringeworthy..... and left the british hanging out there (so much for that apology....) so left the british out to dry, and hanging out fox news as well..... so now creating international incidences in berlin and london.... brilliant!!!
so.... special friendship and getting that sweetheart trade deal then.. hmmmm
Mrs Merkel is probably beyond his comprension. She's intelligent and very able. He was like a sullen brat beside her. There was an article earlier this week that called her Leader of the world. I bet that bothered him. Probably hates that she has stood up to Putin as well. Only 7 weeks in...."Frau Merkel is a very unusual politician; if she was mourinho (she is no way like him), she would call herself special one and I would think she was right and also arrogant. She grew up in communism/socialism (she speaks russian fluently) and completed a Ph.D. In quantum chemistry. Love or hate her, she is special among politicians... I would suggest anyone interested in politics to enjoy her for as long as she is an active politician. | |||
| |||
"if trump is going to tell wiretap jokes at press conferences... the last one i would do it in front of is the one who the americans actually did wiretap...... that was cringeworthy..... and left the british hanging out there (so much for that apology....) so left the british out to dry, and hanging out fox news as well..... so now creating international incidences in berlin and london.... brilliant!!!
so.... special friendship and getting that sweetheart trade deal then.. hmmmm
Mrs Merkel is probably beyond his comprension. She's intelligent and very able. He was like a sullen brat beside her. There was an article earlier this week that called her Leader of the world. I bet that bothered him. Probably hates that she has stood up to Putin as well. Only 7 weeks in....
Frau Merkel is a very unusual politician; if she was mourinho (she is no way like him), she would call herself special one and I would think she was right and also arrogant. She grew up in communism/socialism (she speaks russian fluently) and completed a Ph.D. In quantum chemistry. Love or hate her, she is special among politicians... I would suggest anyone interested in politics to enjoy her for as long as she is an active politician."he would hate her for some many reasons.... that she got along with obama so well that the world actually respect her as a leader... that she won times "person of the year" in the year that trump thought he should have won it.... that headline today "the leader of the free world... meets trump" would have grinded his gears even more..... | |||
"So much for Britain at the front of the que ..no wonder Brexiters are avoiding this thread " WTF has this thread got to do with Brexit? Oh wait a minute, I've just realised... "It's all because of Brexit, you know " How pathetic. | |||
"still, there's his state visit to britain look forward to .... " .... it just occured to me that when he meets the queen it's formal tradition to exchange gifts .... i reckon madge should give him a nice new microwave oven made by the chinese white goods manufacturing giant Galanz | |||
"still, there's his state visit to britain look forward to .... " I heard on Fox that GCHQ asked the Queen herself to bug Trump Towers and that she scaled the outside of the building mission impossible style. | |||
"So much for Britain at the front of the que ..no wonder Brexiters are avoiding this thread WTF has this thread got to do with Brexit? Oh wait a minute, I've just realised... "It's all because of Brexit, you know " How pathetic." Yet you have ignored the entire thread and only picked up on a comment about Brexit. 
Do you have anything to contribute regarding the wiretap? | |||
"So much for Britain at the front of the que ..no wonder Brexiters are avoiding this thread WTF has this thread got to do with Brexit? Oh wait a minute, I've just realised... "It's all because of Brexit, you know " How pathetic. Yet you have ignored the entire thread and only picked up on a comment about Brexit.
Do you have anything to contribute regarding the wiretap? "To be honest with you I'd only just read the thread, so had not ignored it at all. But, if you'd like me to comment, and I'm glad you value my comments so highly you asked me to do so, then here we go, although its a little bit more complex than just 'were Trump's phones hacked'?. First off, I dont particularly like Trump, but like others on here have said- everyone listens to everyone. With regard to the USA's agencies denying wire tapping his phones, I seem to remember a few years ago (under Obama's presidency), accusations by the Germans, French, and other EU countries that the USA were spying on them.. Phones tapped , electronic systems hacked, etc. This was also vehemently denied by the USA at the time, including the CIA, the NSA and Obama. And then they had to backtrack and admit it, 'but we've stopped doing it now' - Obama had known about it for 3 years. They were even tapping Merkel's phones BEFORE she was elected, FFS. The only reason that whole sorry episode died a death was because every country does it to everyone else. We even know now that every country's 'secret services' have whole departments and hundreds, if not thousands, of people dedicated to hacking the IT systems of other countries - whether those countries are friendly or not. And those systems include computer networks, transport systems, air , road, rail, shipping, navigational systems, power grids, telephone systems, satellite systems, even individual controls in our cars and the TV's in our homes. Government officials are advised to tape over the cameras and microphones on their personal computers because of the possibility of them being hacked and 'watched and listened to'. You can go to at least one police authority in the UK (I have had this demonstrated), give them your registration number, and they can tell you everywhere you've been and how long for within a 30 mile radius of that city centre, including motorways. With the advent of all the 'purple pipes' being installed on motorways, which hold data cables, soon our every movement in cars will be known. Very many CCTV cameras now have facial recognition, and these will only increase. And the data protection act that means you can only keep such information for 28 days unless required for investigation purposes? There's a massive loophole in that which means it can be kept for as long as you want. Were the Russians meddling in the USA election? Very likely. But come on, that's a bit rich of the USA to cry 'foul', when they have done nothing but interfere in the elections of very many countries around the world for at least the last 70 years... To further their own ends and agenda. Was Obama, or Clinton, or the democrats, or a government agency 'spying' on Trump and his campaign team in some way? Absolutely. As was Trump's side on Clinton. They may even, almost certainly, have had people 'on the inside' passing information backwards and forwards. Every party in every country in every election in the world tries to 'steal a march' on the opposition by finding out what they're up to, their strategies, digging the dirt, and generally other unsavory and underhand tactics (even to the point of spreading rumours and suppositions that then get printed in papers, thus effectively becoming 'false news and alternative facts'). Do I think that Trump's phones were tapped? I've no idea. But it's not beyond the realms of possibility. But, like I said before.... None of this is because if Brexit! | |||
"So much for Britain at the front of the que ..no wonder Brexiters are avoiding this thread WTF has this thread got to do with Brexit? Oh wait a minute, I've just realised... "It's all because of Brexit, you know " How pathetic. Yet you have ignored the entire thread and only picked up on a comment about Brexit.
Do you have anything to contribute regarding the wiretap?
To be honest with you I'd only just read the thread, so had not ignored it at all.
But, if you'd like me to comment, and I'm glad you value my comments so highly you asked me to do so, then here we go, although its a little bit more complex than just 'were Trump's phones hacked'?.
First off, I dont particularly like Trump, but like others on here have said- everyone listens to everyone.
With regard to the USA's agencies denying wire tapping his phones, I seem to remember a few years ago (under Obama's presidency), accusations by the Germans, French, and other EU countries that the USA were spying on them.. Phones tapped , electronic systems hacked, etc. This was also vehemently denied by the USA at the time, including the CIA, the NSA and Obama. And then they had to backtrack and admit it, 'but we've stopped doing it now' - Obama had known about it for 3 years. They were even tapping Merkel's phones BEFORE she was elected, FFS. The only reason that whole sorry episode died a death was because every country does it to everyone else. We even know now that every country's 'secret services' have whole departments and hundreds, if not thousands, of people dedicated to hacking the IT systems of other countries - whether those countries are friendly or not. And those systems include computer networks, transport systems, air , road, rail, shipping, navigational systems, power grids, telephone systems, satellite systems, even individual controls in our cars and the TV's in our homes. Government officials are advised to tape over the cameras and microphones on their personal computers because of the possibility of them being hacked and 'watched and listened to'.
You can go to at least one police authority in the UK (I have had this demonstrated), give them your registration number, and they can tell you everywhere you've been and how long for within a 30 mile radius of that city centre, including motorways. With the advent of all the 'purple pipes' being installed on motorways, which hold data cables, soon our every movement in cars will be known. Very many CCTV cameras now have facial recognition, and these will only increase.
And the data protection act that means you can only keep such information for 28 days unless required for investigation purposes? There's a massive loophole in that which means it can be kept for as long as you want.
Were the Russians meddling in the USA election? Very likely. But come on, that's a bit rich of the USA to cry 'foul', when they have done nothing but interfere in the elections of very many countries around the world for at least the last 70 years... To further their own ends and agenda.
Was Obama, or Clinton, or the democrats, or a government agency 'spying' on Trump and his campaign team in some way? Absolutely. As was Trump's side on Clinton. They may even, almost certainly, have had people 'on the inside' passing information backwards and forwards.
Every party in every country in every election in the world tries to 'steal a march' on the opposition by finding out what they're up to, their strategies, digging the dirt, and generally other unsavory and underhand tactics (even to the point of spreading rumours and suppositions that then get printed in papers, thus effectively becoming 'false news and alternative facts').
Do I think that Trump's phones were tapped? I've no idea. But it's not beyond the realms of possibility.
But, like I said before....
None of this is because if Brexit!"No one said the wiretap was because of Brexit. Someone made what appears to be a jokey remark, that with Trump souring relationships with the UK that we are maybe not going to get that great deal that Trump promised (although of course he didn't really promise any such thing). I'd get a bit less annoyed by throwaway jokey comments if I were you. | |||
"So much for Britain at the front of the que ..no wonder Brexiters are avoiding this thread WTF has this thread got to do with Brexit? Oh wait a minute, I've just realised... "It's all because of Brexit, you know " How pathetic. Yet you have ignored the entire thread and only picked up on a comment about Brexit.
Do you have anything to contribute regarding the wiretap?
To be honest with you I'd only just read the thread, so had not ignored it at all.
But, if you'd like me to comment, and I'm glad you value my comments so highly you asked me to do so, then here we go, although its a little bit more complex than just 'were Trump's phones hacked'?.
First off, I dont particularly like Trump, but like others on here have said- everyone listens to everyone.
With regard to the USA's agencies denying wire tapping his phones, I seem to remember a few years ago (under Obama's presidency), accusations by the Germans, French, and other EU countries that the USA were spying on them.. Phones tapped , electronic systems hacked, etc. This was also vehemently denied by the USA at the time, including the CIA, the NSA and Obama. And then they had to backtrack and admit it, 'but we've stopped doing it now' - Obama had known about it for 3 years. They were even tapping Merkel's phones BEFORE she was elected, FFS. The only reason that whole sorry episode died a death was because every country does it to everyone else. We even know now that every country's 'secret services' have whole departments and hundreds, if not thousands, of people dedicated to hacking the IT systems of other countries - whether those countries are friendly or not. And those systems include computer networks, transport systems, air , road, rail, shipping, navigational systems, power grids, telephone systems, satellite systems, even individual controls in our cars and the TV's in our homes. Government officials are advised to tape over the cameras and microphones on their personal computers because of the possibility of them being hacked and 'watched and listened to'.
You can go to at least one police authority in the UK (I have had this demonstrated), give them your registration number, and they can tell you everywhere you've been and how long for within a 30 mile radius of that city centre, including motorways. With the advent of all the 'purple pipes' being installed on motorways, which hold data cables, soon our every movement in cars will be known. Very many CCTV cameras now have facial recognition, and these will only increase.
And the data protection act that means you can only keep such information for 28 days unless required for investigation purposes? There's a massive loophole in that which means it can be kept for as long as you want.
Were the Russians meddling in the USA election? Very likely. But come on, that's a bit rich of the USA to cry 'foul', when they have done nothing but interfere in the elections of very many countries around the world for at least the last 70 years... To further their own ends and agenda.
Was Obama, or Clinton, or the democrats, or a government agency 'spying' on Trump and his campaign team in some way? Absolutely. As was Trump's side on Clinton. They may even, almost certainly, have had people 'on the inside' passing information backwards and forwards.
Every party in every country in every election in the world tries to 'steal a march' on the opposition by finding out what they're up to, their strategies, digging the dirt, and generally other unsavory and underhand tactics (even to the point of spreading rumours and suppositions that then get printed in papers, thus effectively becoming 'false news and alternative facts').
Do I think that Trump's phones were tapped? I've no idea. But it's not beyond the realms of possibility.
But, like I said before....
None of this is because if Brexit!
No one said the wiretap was because of Brexit.
Someone made what appears to be a jokey remark, that with Trump souring relationships with the UK that we are maybe not going to get that great deal that Trump promised (although of course he didn't really promise any such thing).
I'd get a bit less annoyed by throwaway jokey comments if I were you.
"I take it you don't have any comment with anything on the rest of my post then? | |||
| |||
"So much for Britain at the front of the que ..no wonder Brexiters are avoiding this thread WTF has this thread got to do with Brexit? Oh wait a minute, I've just realised... "It's all because of Brexit, you know " How pathetic. Yet you have ignored the entire thread and only picked up on a comment about Brexit.
Do you have anything to contribute regarding the wiretap?
To be honest with you I'd only just read the thread, so had not ignored it at all.
But, if you'd like me to comment, and I'm glad you value my comments so highly you asked me to do so, then here we go, although its a little bit more complex than just 'were Trump's phones hacked'?.
First off, I dont particularly like Trump, but like others on here have said- everyone listens to everyone.
With regard to the USA's agencies denying wire tapping his phones, I seem to remember a few years ago (under Obama's presidency), accusations by the Germans, French, and other EU countries that the USA were spying on them.. Phones tapped , electronic systems hacked, etc. This was also vehemently denied by the USA at the time, including the CIA, the NSA and Obama. And then they had to backtrack and admit it, 'but we've stopped doing it now' - Obama had known about it for 3 years. They were even tapping Merkel's phones BEFORE she was elected, FFS. The only reason that whole sorry episode died a death was because every country does it to everyone else. We even know now that every country's 'secret services' have whole departments and hundreds, if not thousands, of people dedicated to hacking the IT systems of other countries - whether those countries are friendly or not. And those systems include computer networks, transport systems, air , road, rail, shipping, navigational systems, power grids, telephone systems, satellite systems, even individual controls in our cars and the TV's in our homes. Government officials are advised to tape over the cameras and microphones on their personal computers because of the possibility of them being hacked and 'watched and listened to'.
You can go to at least one police authority in the UK (I have had this demonstrated), give them your registration number, and they can tell you everywhere you've been and how long for within a 30 mile radius of that city centre, including motorways. With the advent of all the 'purple pipes' being installed on motorways, which hold data cables, soon our every movement in cars will be known. Very many CCTV cameras now have facial recognition, and these will only increase.
And the data protection act that means you can only keep such information for 28 days unless required for investigation purposes? There's a massive loophole in that which means it can be kept for as long as you want.
Were the Russians meddling in the USA election? Very likely. But come on, that's a bit rich of the USA to cry 'foul', when they have done nothing but interfere in the elections of very many countries around the world for at least the last 70 years... To further their own ends and agenda.
Was Obama, or Clinton, or the democrats, or a government agency 'spying' on Trump and his campaign team in some way? Absolutely. As was Trump's side on Clinton. They may even, almost certainly, have had people 'on the inside' passing information backwards and forwards.
Every party in every country in every election in the world tries to 'steal a march' on the opposition by finding out what they're up to, their strategies, digging the dirt, and generally other unsavory and underhand tactics (even to the point of spreading rumours and suppositions that then get printed in papers, thus effectively becoming 'false news and alternative facts').
Do I think that Trump's phones were tapped? I've no idea. But it's not beyond the realms of possibility.
But, like I said before....
None of this is because if Brexit!
No one said the wiretap was because of Brexit.
Someone made what appears to be a jokey remark, that with Trump souring relationships with the UK that we are maybe not going to get that great deal that Trump promised (although of course he didn't really promise any such thing).
I'd get a bit less annoyed by throwaway jokey comments if I were you.
I take it you don't have any comment with anything on the rest of my post then?"No, because it wasn't particularly interesting. | |||
"So are people convinced yet that Trump was talking bullshit? Where is this evidence that he said was going to be produced? There is one, single person in the US who can declassify anything. That is the president of the United States. All the authority to classify documents is given to the various government agencies and branches of the military stems from executive orders from the president. The president can declassify anything he wants, so if he has the proof, he should make it public. "
Really ?
If only reality was that simple !
You are that naive ! or you just don't get do you ? | |||
"So are people convinced yet that Trump was talking bullshit? Where is this evidence that he said was going to be produced? There is one, single person in the US who can declassify anything. That is the president of the United States. All the authority to classify documents is given to the various government agencies and branches of the military stems from executive orders from the president. The president can declassify anything he wants, so if he has the proof, he should make it public.
Really ?
If only reality was that simple !
You are that naive ! or you just don't get do you ? "You don't believe that's the way the classification system in the US works? | |||
"So are people convinced yet that Trump was talking bullshit? Where is this evidence that he said was going to be produced? There is one, single person in the US who can declassify anything. That is the president of the United States. All the authority to classify documents is given to the various government agencies and branches of the military stems from executive orders from the president. The president can declassify anything he wants, so if he has the proof, he should make it public.
Really ?
If only reality was that simple !
You are that naive ! or you just don't get do you ? "Trump said he was going to reveal the information. We heard it from him that yes, it was going to be that simple. And if Obama had tapped his phones then it would be very easy to release the information. They've no problem investigating Russia and there could be serious consequences from that investigation. If Obama had tapped Trumps phones it would be the biggest win that Republicans could ever get. And yet no one,except the deluded Donald and his even more deluded fans think anything will come of this. | |||
"So much for Britain at the front of the que ..no wonder Brexiters are avoiding this thread WTF has this thread got to do with Brexit? Oh wait a minute, I've just realised... "It's all because of Brexit, you know " How pathetic. Yet you have ignored the entire thread and only picked up on a comment about Brexit.
Do you have anything to contribute regarding the wiretap?
To be honest with you I'd only just read the thread, so had not ignored it at all.
But, if you'd like me to comment, and I'm glad you value my comments so highly you asked me to do so, then here we go, although its a little bit more complex than just 'were Trump's phones hacked'?.
First off, I dont particularly like Trump, but like others on here have said- everyone listens to everyone.
With regard to the USA's agencies denying wire tapping his phones, I seem to remember a few years ago (under Obama's presidency), accusations by the Germans, French, and other EU countries that the USA were spying on them.. Phones tapped , electronic systems hacked, etc. This was also vehemently denied by the USA at the time, including the CIA, the NSA and Obama. And then they had to backtrack and admit it, 'but we've stopped doing it now' - Obama had known about it for 3 years. They were even tapping Merkel's phones BEFORE she was elected, FFS. The only reason that whole sorry episode died a death was because every country does it to everyone else. We even know now that every country's 'secret services' have whole departments and hundreds, if not thousands, of people dedicated to hacking the IT systems of other countries - whether those countries are friendly or not. And those systems include computer networks, transport systems, air , road, rail, shipping, navigational systems, power grids, telephone systems, satellite systems, even individual controls in our cars and the TV's in our homes. Government officials are advised to tape over the cameras and microphones on their personal computers because of the possibility of them being hacked and 'watched and listened to'.
You can go to at least one police authority in the UK (I have had this demonstrated), give them your registration number, and they can tell you everywhere you've been and how long for within a 30 mile radius of that city centre, including motorways. With the advent of all the 'purple pipes' being installed on motorways, which hold data cables, soon our every movement in cars will be known. Very many CCTV cameras now have facial recognition, and these will only increase.
And the data protection act that means you can only keep such information for 28 days unless required for investigation purposes? There's a massive loophole in that which means it can be kept for as long as you want.
Were the Russians meddling in the USA election? Very likely. But come on, that's a bit rich of the USA to cry 'foul', when they have done nothing but interfere in the elections of very many countries around the world for at least the last 70 years... To further their own ends and agenda.
Was Obama, or Clinton, or the democrats, or a government agency 'spying' on Trump and his campaign team in some way? Absolutely. As was Trump's side on Clinton. They may even, almost certainly, have had people 'on the inside' passing information backwards and forwards.
Every party in every country in every election in the world tries to 'steal a march' on the opposition by finding out what they're up to, their strategies, digging the dirt, and generally other unsavory and underhand tactics (even to the point of spreading rumours and suppositions that then get printed in papers, thus effectively becoming 'false news and alternative facts').
Do I think that Trump's phones were tapped? I've no idea. But it's not beyond the realms of possibility.
But, like I said before....
None of this is because if Brexit!
No one said the wiretap was because of Brexit.
Someone made what appears to be a jokey remark, that with Trump souring relationships with the UK that we are maybe not going to get that great deal that Trump promised (although of course he didn't really promise any such thing).
I'd get a bit less annoyed by throwaway jokey comments if I were you.
I take it you don't have any comment with anything on the rest of my post then?
No, because it wasn't particularly interesting. "
Of course not !
Because you are either too lazy or dishonest to actually put some thought into the subject !
The post by JandS66 was actually the first on the thread that reflects any type of intelligence and honest analysis!
The remainder are largely rabid anti Trump zealots getting their daily fix !
For this reason I have thus far stayed of the the thread , because one cannot reason with fanatics who are unable to see beyond a simplistic superficial scenario that is created for public consumption. The big picture is only available to those who are part of it , or those who willing to question and go beyond appearances!
To get to facts, and/or reality, and ascertain the truth , in the Security/intelligence arena one has to often work with titbits of data and form a puzzle image ! Its called "information analysis"
So, if you don't belong in category I described above, I challenge you to actually dare to respond to the question put to you by JandS66 .
But... I suspect you will chicken out ..... because it takes actual thought and effort !   | |||
"So are people convinced yet that Trump was talking bullshit? Where is this evidence that he said was going to be produced? There is one, single person in the US who can declassify anything. That is the president of the United States. All the authority to classify documents is given to the various government agencies and branches of the military stems from executive orders from the president. The president can declassify anything he wants, so if he has the proof, he should make it public.
Really ?
If only reality was that simple !
You are that naive ! or you just don't get do you ?
Trump said he was going to reveal the information. We heard it from him that yes, it was going to be that simple. And if Obama had tapped his phones then it would be very easy to release the information. They've no problem investigating Russia and there could be serious consequences from that investigation.
If Obama had tapped Trumps phones it would be the biggest win that Republicans could ever get. And yet no one,except the deluded Donald and his even more deluded fans think anything will come of this."There you go !
Proving my point again !
You are clueless !
Trumps only mistake was to shoot his mouth of !
Problem is some information is not for public domain !
And his inexperience in government shows in these instances !
There is no doubt on a technical level he was under surveillance and had his communications monitored. Why ? because its normal on a certain level !!
There is Plenty of evidence in that sense , but if you are expecting a smoking gun ..... forget it ! | |||
"So are people convinced yet that Trump was talking bullshit? Where is this evidence that he said was going to be produced? There is one, single person in the US who can declassify anything. That is the president of the United States. All the authority to classify documents is given to the various government agencies and branches of the military stems from executive orders from the president. The president can declassify anything he wants, so if he has the proof, he should make it public.
Really ?
If only reality was that simple !
You are that naive ! or you just don't get do you ?
You don't believe that's the way the classification system in the US works? "In Theory yes, in practice ...no, its not that simple ! A lot more issues and interests are involved! And to prove my point , if an executive order form the president is "all" it takes for something to happen , then why was the one on the travel ban contested and illegally blocked by some courts ? | |||
"So are people convinced yet that Trump was talking bullshit? Where is this evidence that he said was going to be produced? There is one, single person in the US who can declassify anything. That is the president of the United States. All the authority to classify documents is given to the various government agencies and branches of the military stems from executive orders from the president. The president can declassify anything he wants, so if he has the proof, he should make it public.
Really ?
If only reality was that simple !
You are that naive ! or you just don't get do you ?
You don't believe that's the way the classification system in the US works?
In Theory yes, in practice ...no, its not that simple !
A lot more issues and interests are involved!
And to prove my point , if an executive order form the president is "all" it takes for something to happen , then why was the one on the travel ban contested and illegally blocked by some courts ? "Because they have a system of balance and checks for laws. Immigration falls under the purview of executive,legislative and courts. Declassification is something that can be ordered by the courts but the court cant decide something is classified if the executive says it isnt. The reason being that no one would be able to take that lawsuit to say it should be classified because classification only exists to protect the the executive branch. You shouldnt try to pretend you know more than you do. Yourr just jumping through hoops to justify his actions. But why? If he's wrong about this why not just say so? I supported Obama for president both times but I disagreed with him a lot and had no problem criticising him when he was wrong, but with Trump supporters its like listening to the worst football fans. Every goal against shouldnt have stood, their players are never deserving of cards, they are the best and everyone else is wrong. | |||
"So are people convinced yet that Trump was talking bullshit? Where is this evidence that he said was going to be produced? There is one, single person in the US who can declassify anything. That is the president of the United States. All the authority to classify documents is given to the various government agencies and branches of the military stems from executive orders from the president. The president can declassify anything he wants, so if he has the proof, he should make it public.
Really ?
If only reality was that simple !
You are that naive ! or you just don't get do you ?
You don't believe that's the way the classification system in the US works?
In Theory yes, in practice ...no, its not that simple !
A lot more issues and interests are involved!
And to prove my point , if an executive order form the president is "all" it takes for something to happen , then why was the one on the travel ban contested and illegally blocked by some courts ?
Because they have a system of balance and checks for laws. Immigration falls under the purview of executive,legislative and courts. Declassification is something that can be ordered by the courts but the court cant decide something is classified if the executive says it isnt. The reason being that no one would be able to take that lawsuit to say it should be classified because classification only exists to protect the the executive branch. You shouldnt try to pretend you know more than you do.
Yourr just jumping through hoops to justify his actions. But why? If he's wrong about this why not just say so? I supported Obama for president both times but I disagreed with him a lot and had no problem criticising him when he was wrong, but with Trump supporters its like listening to the worst football fans. Every goal against shouldnt have stood, their players are never deserving of cards, they are the best and everyone else is wrong."Dont evade the issue by calling me a Trump supporter, and all the "legal" mumbo jumbo! Its not about supporting or not supporting Trump , but rather about the event itself from a technical point of view ! LOL.... "jumping through hoops to justify his actions" Your reading skills seem to be off too ! Remember what I wrote on a previous post ? .... NO, I will remind you: "Trumps only mistake was to shoot his mouth of ! Problem is some information is not for public domain ! And his inexperience in government shows in these instances ! There is no doubt on a technical level he was under surveillance and had his communications monitored. Why ? because its normal on a certain level !! There is Plenty of evidence in that sense , but if you are expecting a smoking gun ..... forget it ! " Trump is not wrong about his wire tap allegation , but he went about it wrong ! Now here is one of those pieces of the puzzle I mentioned earlier , and.... it comes from a DEMOCRAT !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfLlNjE7M6c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOKIXJ8xaUM | |||
"So are people convinced yet that Trump was talking bullshit? Where is this evidence that he said was going to be produced? There is one, single person in the US who can declassify anything. That is the president of the United States. All the authority to classify documents is given to the various government agencies and branches of the military stems from executive orders from the president. The president can declassify anything he wants, so if he has the proof, he should make it public.
Really ?
If only reality was that simple !
You are that naive ! or you just don't get do you ?
You don't believe that's the way the classification system in the US works?
In Theory yes, in practice ...no, its not that simple !
A lot more issues and interests are involved!
And to prove my point , if an executive order form the president is "all" it takes for something to happen , then why was the one on the travel ban contested and illegally blocked by some courts ? "Classification authority and the travel ban are two completely separate issues. To compare the two is as daft as people who tried to compare the prerogative power to declare war, to the power to trigger article 50. Trump can't have it both ways, he can't talk about something in Twitter, and then say "oh no, I can't tell you about it, its classified". I agree that there are a lot of considerations that you would usually take into account before declassifying something, however Trump has already declassified other things off the cuff, for example telling Fox News that the CIA had been hacked. Had anyone else said that, they would have had their clearances revoked and investigated, however because he is the President and all classification authority stems from him, he is able to do that. If you are genuinely interested in the topic, a source of good information on the topic that's accessible to the general public is the "Military Justice" podcast. It has lots of information about how the US classification system works. | |||
"So are people convinced yet that Trump was talking bullshit? Where is this evidence that he said was going to be produced? There is one, single person in the US who can declassify anything. That is the president of the United States. All the authority to classify documents is given to the various government agencies and branches of the military stems from executive orders from the president. The president can declassify anything he wants, so if he has the proof, he should make it public.
Really ?
If only reality was that simple !
You are that naive ! or you just don't get do you ?
You don't believe that's the way the classification system in the US works?
In Theory yes, in practice ...no, its not that simple !
A lot more issues and interests are involved!
And to prove my point , if an executive order form the president is "all" it takes for something to happen , then why was the one on the travel ban contested and illegally blocked by some courts ?
Classification authority and the travel ban are two completely separate issues. To compare the two is as daft as people who tried to compare the prerogative power to declare war, to the power to trigger article 50.
Trump can't have it both ways, he can't talk about something in Twitter, and then say "oh no, I can't tell you about it, its classified".
I agree that there are a lot of considerations that you would usually take into account before declassifying something, however Trump has already declassified other things off the cuff, for example telling Fox News that the CIA had been hacked. Had anyone else said that, they would have had their clearances revoked and investigated, however because he is the President and all classification authority stems from him, he is able to do that.
If you are genuinely interested in the topic, a source of good information on the topic that's accessible to the general public is the "Military Justice" podcast. It has lots of information about how the US classification system works."The topic is not about classifying info, or how it works ! Mouthing off as he did about The CIA hack is not , and does not equate to declassifying information ! Besides since when has hacking, or trying to hack anything "secret" of any country news ? Its business as usual these days ! (this includes any campaign tampering by the Russians) Also, sometimes Mouthing off as he sometimes does about subjects that are "restricted" or "classified" is, or can be a "planned slip up" to achieve a goal! Sometimes on this level its difficult to tell which is which ! The topic of the thread YOU started is, and I quote: "So it seems like both sides of the aisle agree that there is no proof of Trump having been tapped. Is Trump going to see any consequences as a result of having lied? Is Obama owed an apology?" So to be short and sweet, and back on topic ; 1- No , Obama is not owed an apology ! 2- No , Trump didn't lie ! 3- No , there will be no consequences that will affect Trump in a negative way from a technical or legal standpoint! | |||
"So are people convinced yet that Trump was talking bullshit? Where is this evidence that he said was going to be produced? There is one, single person in the US who can declassify anything. That is the president of the United States. All the authority to classify documents is given to the various government agencies and branches of the military stems from executive orders from the president. The president can declassify anything he wants, so if he has the proof, he should make it public.
Really ?
If only reality was that simple !
You are that naive ! or you just don't get do you ?
You don't believe that's the way the classification system in the US works?
In Theory yes, in practice ...no, its not that simple !
A lot more issues and interests are involved!
And to prove my point , if an executive order form the president is "all" it takes for something to happen , then why was the one on the travel ban contested and illegally blocked by some courts ?
Classification authority and the travel ban are two completely separate issues. To compare the two is as daft as people who tried to compare the prerogative power to declare war, to the power to trigger article 50.
Trump can't have it both ways, he can't talk about something in Twitter, and then say "oh no, I can't tell you about it, its classified".
I agree that there are a lot of considerations that you would usually take into account before declassifying something, however Trump has already declassified other things off the cuff, for example telling Fox News that the CIA had been hacked. Had anyone else said that, they would have had their clearances revoked and investigated, however because he is the President and all classification authority stems from him, he is able to do that.
If you are genuinely interested in the topic, a source of good information on the topic that's accessible to the general public is the "Military Justice" podcast. It has lots of information about how the US classification system works.
The topic is not about classifying info, or how it works !
Mouthing off as he did about The CIA hack is not , and does not equate to declassifying information !
Besides since when has hacking, or trying to hack anything "secret" of any country news ? Its business as usual these days ! (this includes any campaign tampering by the Russians)
Also, sometimes Mouthing off as he sometimes does about subjects that are "restricted" or "classified" is, or can be a "planned slip up" to achieve a goal!
Sometimes on this level its difficult to tell which is which !
The topic of the thread YOU started is, and I quote:
"So it seems like both sides of the aisle agree that there is no proof of Trump having been tapped. Is Trump going to see any consequences as a result of having lied?
Is Obama owed an apology?"
So to be short and sweet, and back on topic ;
1- No , Obama is not owed an apology !
2- No , Trump didn't lie !
3- No , there will be no consequences that will affect Trump in a negative way from a technical or legal standpoint!
"I would say that classifying and declassifying information gets to the heart of the issue as if there was any evidence of the wire tap, that supposedly Trump has but the NSA and FBI dont have, he could produce it. Given the testimony of the directors of the FBI & NSA yesterday, if he has proof that they lied to Congress that would also be explosive. So I think it is crystal clear that Trump did lie, that Obama is owed an apology and that there will be consequences on Trumps attack on his own office. We will just have to wait and see what those consequences will be. | |||
| |||
".......... Is Obama owed an apology?" So to be short and sweet, and back on topic ; 1- No , Obama is not owed an apology ! 2- No , Trump didn't lie ! 3- No , there will be no consequences that will affect Trump in a negative way from a technical or legal standpoint! " You have to be joking???? If Trump did not lie then James Comey did. Both of them have made absolute declarative statements and both of them can't be right. If Trump lied, then he owes an apology to Obama. If Comey is lying to Congress then he will be arrested. Where would you put your money? Even Fox news are now getting behind the truth albeit still trying to hold some loyalty by trying to change the focus on to the Leakers. | |||
"So are people convinced yet that Trump was talking bullshit? Where is this evidence that he said was going to be produced? There is one, single person in the US who can declassify anything. That is the president of the United States. All the authority to classify documents is given to the various government agencies and branches of the military stems from executive orders from the president. The president can declassify anything he wants, so if he has the proof, he should make it public.
Really ?
If only reality was that simple !
You are that naive ! or you just don't get do you ?
You don't believe that's the way the classification system in the US works?
In Theory yes, in practice ...no, its not that simple !
A lot more issues and interests are involved!
And to prove my point , if an executive order form the president is "all" it takes for something to happen , then why was the one on the travel ban contested and illegally blocked by some courts ?
Classification authority and the travel ban are two completely separate issues. To compare the two is as daft as people who tried to compare the prerogative power to declare war, to the power to trigger article 50.
Trump can't have it both ways, he can't talk about something in Twitter, and then say "oh no, I can't tell you about it, its classified".
I agree that there are a lot of considerations that you would usually take into account before declassifying something, however Trump has already declassified other things off the cuff, for example telling Fox News that the CIA had been hacked. Had anyone else said that, they would have had their clearances revoked and investigated, however because he is the President and all classification authority stems from him, he is able to do that.
If you are genuinely interested in the topic, a source of good information on the topic that's accessible to the general public is the "Military Justice" podcast. It has lots of information about how the US classification system works.
The topic is not about classifying info, or how it works !
Mouthing off as he did about The CIA hack is not , and does not equate to declassifying information !
Besides since when has hacking, or trying to hack anything "secret" of any country news ? Its business as usual these days ! (this includes any campaign tampering by the Russians)
Also, sometimes Mouthing off as he sometimes does about subjects that are "restricted" or "classified" is, or can be a "planned slip up" to achieve a goal!
Sometimes on this level its difficult to tell which is which !
The topic of the thread YOU started is, and I quote:
"So it seems like both sides of the aisle agree that there is no proof of Trump having been tapped. Is Trump going to see any consequences as a result of having lied?
Is Obama owed an apology?"
So to be short and sweet, and back on topic ;
1- No , Obama is not owed an apology !
2- No , Trump didn't lie !
3- No , there will be no consequences that will affect Trump in a negative way from a technical or legal standpoint!
"I am at work at the moment so I'll answer the 3 points when I get home, won't have time on my break to go through all the amounts of "wrong" you are..... | |||
" The topic is not about classifying info, or how it works ! Mouthing off as he did about The CIA hack is not , and does not equate to declassifying information ! Besides since when has hacking, or trying to hack anything "secret" of any country news ? Its business as usual these days ! (this includes any campaign tampering by the Russians) Also, sometimes Mouthing off as he sometimes does about subjects that are "restricted" or "classified" is, or can be a "planned slip up" to achieve a goal! Sometimes on this level its difficult to tell which is which ! The topic of the thread YOU started is, and I quote: "So it seems like both sides of the aisle agree that there is no proof of Trump having been tapped. Is Trump going to see any consequences as a result of having lied? Is Obama owed an apology?" So to be short and sweet, and back on topic ; 1- No , Obama is not owed an apology ! 2- No , Trump didn't lie ! 3- No , there will be no consequences that will affect Trump in a negative way from a technical or legal standpoint! " How do you know Trump didnt lie? Why has everyone (Democrats, Republican leadership, intelligence community) disavowed Trumps tweet as being baseless if there is evidence? How can you foretell what consequences will come from this? Obama could, if he so desired, pursue a libel case against Trump which is a legal affect this could have. | |||
"So are people convinced yet that Trump was talking bullshit? Where is this evidence that he said was going to be produced? There is one, single person in the US who can declassify anything. That is the president of the United States. All the authority to classify documents is given to the various government agencies and branches of the military stems from executive orders from the president. The president can declassify anything he wants, so if he has the proof, he should make it public.
Really ?
If only reality was that simple !
You are that naive ! or you just don't get do you ?
You don't believe that's the way the classification system in the US works?
In Theory yes, in practice ...no, its not that simple !
A lot more issues and interests are involved!
And to prove my point , if an executive order form the president is "all" it takes for something to happen , then why was the one on the travel ban contested and illegally blocked by some courts ?
Classification authority and the travel ban are two completely separate issues. To compare the two is as daft as people who tried to compare the prerogative power to declare war, to the power to trigger article 50.
Trump can't have it both ways, he can't talk about something in Twitter, and then say "oh no, I can't tell you about it, its classified".
I agree that there are a lot of considerations that you would usually take into account before declassifying something, however Trump has already declassified other things off the cuff, for example telling Fox News that the CIA had been hacked. Had anyone else said that, they would have had their clearances revoked and investigated, however because he is the President and all classification authority stems from him, he is able to do that.
If you are genuinely interested in the topic, a source of good information on the topic that's accessible to the general public is the "Military Justice" podcast. It has lots of information about how the US classification system works.
The topic is not about classifying info, or how it works !
Mouthing off as he did about The CIA hack is not , and does not equate to declassifying information !
Besides since when has hacking, or trying to hack anything "secret" of any country news ? Its business as usual these days ! (this includes any campaign tampering by the Russians)
Also, sometimes Mouthing off as he sometimes does about subjects that are "restricted" or "classified" is, or can be a "planned slip up" to achieve a goal!
Sometimes on this level its difficult to tell which is which !
The topic of the thread YOU started is, and I quote:
"So it seems like both sides of the aisle agree that there is no proof of Trump having been tapped. Is Trump going to see any consequences as a result of having lied?
Is Obama owed an apology?"
So to be short and sweet, and back on topic ;
1- No , Obama is not owed an apology !
2- No , Trump didn't lie !
3- No , there will be no consequences that will affect Trump in a negative way from a technical or legal standpoint!
I would say that classifying and declassifying information gets to the heart of the issue as if there was any evidence of the wire tap, that supposedly Trump has but the NSA and FBI dont have, he could produce it.
Given the testimony of the directors of the FBI & NSA yesterday, if he has proof that they lied to Congress that would also be explosive.
So I think it is crystal clear that Trump did lie, that Obama is owed an apology and that there will be consequences on Trumps attack on his own office. We will just have to wait and see what those consequences will be. "Again !
You are being naive !
Trying to keep it short, ask yourself ;
1-Have these agencies ever lied before ?
2- Are they the only ones that carry out of verify the existence of surveillance operations ? How many other agencies are there that have their own operations and agendas ?
3- Has not the history of these agencies demonstrated that when they cant do certain things legally , they carry on regardless , in some cases with "black ops" then cover it up by slapping the "classified" or "top secret" label on it and invoking national security ?
4- Obama !!! is not owed an apology ! Under his watch allies friends and foes alike were under surveillance , including the fore mentioned Frau Merkel !
No ! As I mentioned before ;
"Trumps only mistake was to shoot his mouth of !
Problem is some information is not for public domain !
And his inexperience in government shows in these instances !
There is no doubt on a technical level he was under surveillance and had his communications monitored. Why ? because its normal on a certain level !!
There is Plenty of evidence in that sense , but if you are expecting a smoking gun ..... forget it ! "
Trump is not wrong about his wire tap allegation , but he went about it wrong !
Now here is one of those pieces of the puzzle I mentioned earlier , and.... it comes from a DEMOCRAT !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfLlNjE7M6c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOKIXJ8xaUM "
One thing is public debate on the subject , another is what happens behind the scenes !
In fact , if he actually produced evidence to contradict the NSA and FBI as you state , then he might be in breach of the law, and affect national security !
Remember that statement that got some on here foaming at the mouth ? And the more "intelligent" ones in their utter innocence couldn't wrap their heads around it!
" the news is false but the leak was real "
Would you bet your life that he is wrong, and his communications weren't monitored?-) | |||
| |||
" The topic is not about classifying info, or how it works ! Mouthing off as he did about The CIA hack is not , and does not equate to declassifying information ! Besides since when has hacking, or trying to hack anything "secret" of any country news ? Its business as usual these days ! (this includes any campaign tampering by the Russians) Also, sometimes Mouthing off as he sometimes does about subjects that are "restricted" or "classified" is, or can be a "planned slip up" to achieve a goal! Sometimes on this level its difficult to tell which is which ! The topic of the thread YOU started is, and I quote: "So it seems like both sides of the aisle agree that there is no proof of Trump having been tapped. Is Trump going to see any consequences as a result of having lied? Is Obama owed an apology?" So to be short and sweet, and back on topic ; 1- No , Obama is not owed an apology ! 2- No , Trump didn't lie ! 3- No , there will be no consequences that will affect Trump in a negative way from a technical or legal standpoint! How do you know Trump didnt lie? Why has everyone (Democrats, Republican leadership, intelligence community) disavowed Trumps tweet as being baseless if there is evidence? How can you foretell what consequences will come from this? Obama could, if he so desired, pursue a libel case against Trump which is a legal affect this could have." As for the first part of your questions , read my posts again ! the answer is there, but if you don't get it I might bother to spell it out for you!
As for Obama taking legal action ! lol...Elementary
He doesn't dare go there, for various reasons, of which I will just mention two to keep it short :
1-National security .
2-Such action would trigger an investigation that would probably not be viable for reason 1, but even if done with limitations would expose all the shit done under Obamas 8 years ! Thus Obamas "legacy" would be even worse than is currently known ! | |||
"Trump said Obama ordered a wiretap of Trump Towers. Youre wild theories, Trump himself and the facts of the matter show no evidence to back up this claim. Going on tangents about Merkle is irrelevant. The question is did Obama order a wiretap on Trump Tower during the election. He did not." Jesus man !
How naive are you ?
Ever heard of the term "plausible denial-ability " ??
Or do you think anyone believes Obama gave the order and planted the bug himself ....lol... | |||
"Trump said Obama ordered a wiretap of Trump Towers. Youre wild theories, Trump himself and the facts of the matter show no evidence to back up this claim. Going on tangents about Merkle is irrelevant. The question is did Obama order a wiretap on Trump Tower during the election. He did not. Jesus man !
How naive are you ?
Ever heard of the term "plausible denial-ability " ??
Or do you think anyone believes Obama gave the order and planted the bug himself ....lol... "Yes, trump believes Obama gave the order and like you everyone is laughing out loud at him. | |||
" In fact , if he actually produced evidence to contradict the NSA and FBI as you state , then he might be in breach of the law, and affect national security !" Again, Trump cant break the law when it comes to unclassifying data, as all classification authority stems from him. If it affects national security, then Trump has proved he is not fit for office by shooting his mouth off on Twitter. | |||
"Trump said Obama ordered a wiretap of Trump Towers. Youre wild theories, Trump himself and the facts of the matter show no evidence to back up this claim. Going on tangents about Merkle is irrelevant. The question is did Obama order a wiretap on Trump Tower during the election. He did not. Jesus man !
How naive are you ?
Ever heard of the term "plausible denial-ability " ??
Or do you think anyone believes Obama gave the order and planted the bug himself ....lol... "Yes I know what it is and its a single word spelt deniability.
Your theory is that Donald Trump has evidence he won't release. That Republicans are willingly turning on him despite the fact its true. That the FBI director perjured himself and inferred the President is a liar all because....why?
Some half thought out speculation on classifications and some random theorising on intelligence strategy. You cant even come up with a plausible fully thought out theory where this makes any sense let alone one backed by evidence. | |||
" The topic is not about classifying info, or how it works ! Mouthing off as he did about The CIA hack is not , and does not equate to declassifying information ! Besides since when has hacking, or trying to hack anything "secret" of any country news ? Its business as usual these days ! (this includes any campaign tampering by the Russians) Also, sometimes Mouthing off as he sometimes does about subjects that are "restricted" or "classified" is, or can be a "planned slip up" to achieve a goal! Sometimes on this level its difficult to tell which is which ! The topic of the thread YOU started is, and I quote: "So it seems like both sides of the aisle agree that there is no proof of Trump having been tapped. Is Trump going to see any consequences as a result of having lied? Is Obama owed an apology?" So to be short and sweet, and back on topic ; 1- No , Obama is not owed an apology ! 2- No , Trump didn't lie ! 3- No , there will be no consequences that will affect Trump in a negative way from a technical or legal standpoint! How do you know Trump didnt lie? Why has everyone (Democrats, Republican leadership, intelligence community) disavowed Trumps tweet as being baseless if there is evidence? How can you foretell what consequences will come from this? Obama could, if he so desired, pursue a libel case against Trump which is a legal affect this could have. As for the first part of your questions , read my posts again ! the answer is there, but if you don't get it I might bother to spell it out for you!
As for Obama taking legal action ! lol...Elementary
He doesn't dare go there, for various reasons, of which I will just mention two to keep it short :
1-National security .
2-Such action would trigger an investigation that would probably not be viable for reason 1, but even if done with limitations would expose all the shit done under Obamas 8 years ! Thus Obamas "legacy" would be even worse than is currently known ! "National security wouldnt be affected by releasing information that Obama broke the law. | |||
"Trump said Obama ordered a wiretap of Trump Towers. Youre wild theories, Trump himself and the facts of the matter show no evidence to back up this claim. Going on tangents about Merkle is irrelevant. The question is did Obama order a wiretap on Trump Tower during the election. He did not. Jesus man !
How naive are you ?
Ever heard of the term "plausible denial-ability " ??
Or do you think anyone believes Obama gave the order and planted the bug himself ....lol...
Yes I know what it is and its a single word spelt deniability.
Your theory is that Donald Trump has evidence he won't release. That Republicans are willingly turning on him despite the fact its true. That the FBI director perjured himself and inferred the President is a liar all because....why?
Some half thought out speculation on classifications and some random theorising on intelligence strategy. You cant even come up with a plausible fully thought out theory where this makes any sense let alone one backed by evidence."Yep ! Your reply is self evident ! You are clueless !
You bother to correct my spelling of the word "deniability", but conveniently avoid discussing the implications of the same word !
Its not as you put it: "Donald Trump has evidence he won't release. "
Actually, its Donald Trump has evidence he Cant , not won't release. !
But you are so gullible , I suspect its a waste of my time to try and spell it out for you !
Its YOU, that , in your own words ;
" cant even come up with a plausible fully thought out theory where this makes any sense let alone one backed by evidence. "
I have! But you seem to either not get it , or prefer to be blind to the facts presented ! Or you simply don't understand or read my posts , so I will just copy paste some elements in them again for your benefit :
1-Have these agencies ever lied before ?
2- Are they the only ones that carry out of verify the existence of surveillance operations ? How many other agencies are there that have their own operations and agendas ?
3- Has not the history of these agencies demonstrated that when they cant do certain things legally , they carry on regardless , in some cases with "black ops" then cover it up by slapping the "classified" or "top secret" label on it and invoking national security ?
4- Obama !!! is not owed an apology ! Under his watch allies friends and foes alike were under surveillance , including the fore mentioned Frau Merkel ! "
"Now here is one of those pieces of the puzzle I mentioned earlier , and.... it comes from a DEMOCRAT !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfLlNjE7M6c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOKIXJ8xaUM "
Is this a pro Trump DEMOCRAT ?
Didn't the wickileaks documents reveal a massive surveillance program carried out by the US on friends and foes , and even on US citizens at home ?
While it was started under Bush , it grew exponentially under Obama !
So.... can you reply to these? Am I wrong when posing these questions ? | |||
" The topic is not about classifying info, or how it works ! Mouthing off as he did about The CIA hack is not , and does not equate to declassifying information ! Besides since when has hacking, or trying to hack anything "secret" of any country news ? Its business as usual these days ! (this includes any campaign tampering by the Russians) Also, sometimes Mouthing off as he sometimes does about subjects that are "restricted" or "classified" is, or can be a "planned slip up" to achieve a goal! Sometimes on this level its difficult to tell which is which ! The topic of the thread YOU started is, and I quote: "So it seems like both sides of the aisle agree that there is no proof of Trump having been tapped. Is Trump going to see any consequences as a result of having lied? Is Obama owed an apology?" So to be short and sweet, and back on topic ; 1- No , Obama is not owed an apology ! 2- No , Trump didn't lie ! 3- No , there will be no consequences that will affect Trump in a negative way from a technical or legal standpoint! How do you know Trump didnt lie? Why has everyone (Democrats, Republican leadership, intelligence community) disavowed Trumps tweet as being baseless if there is evidence? How can you foretell what consequences will come from this? Obama could, if he so desired, pursue a libel case against Trump which is a legal affect this could have. As for the first part of your questions , read my posts again ! the answer is there, but if you don't get it I might bother to spell it out for you!
As for Obama taking legal action ! lol...Elementary
He doesn't dare go there, for various reasons, of which I will just mention two to keep it short :
1-National security .
2-Such action would trigger an investigation that would probably not be viable for reason 1, but even if done with limitations would expose all the shit done under Obamas 8 years ! Thus Obamas "legacy" would be even worse than is currently known !
National security wouldnt be affected by releasing information that Obama broke the law."No ! really? How would you know ? Besides Breaking the law is the least of the worries, when compared to other issues that might come up as a result ! | |||
" In fact , if he actually produced evidence to contradict the NSA and FBI as you state , then he might be in breach of the law, and affect national security ! Again, Trump cant break the law when it comes to unclassifying data, as all classification authority stems from him. If it affects national security, then Trump has proved he is not fit for office by shooting his mouth off on Twitter. " How is he not fit ? Your opinion ! By that standard how would you classify Obama as being fit for the Job? here is one small example : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ULl1AWaWdo Did Trump on Twitter actually reveal any valid info that could be prejudicial to the security of the US ? | |||
"So are people convinced yet that Trump was talking bullshit? Where is this evidence that he said was going to be produced? There is one, single person in the US who can declassify anything. That is the president of the United States. All the authority to classify documents is given to the various government agencies and branches of the military stems from executive orders from the president. The president can declassify anything he wants, so if he has the proof, he should make it public.
Really ?
If only reality was that simple !
You are that naive ! or you just don't get do you ?
You don't believe that's the way the classification system in the US works?
In Theory yes, in practice ...no, its not that simple !
A lot more issues and interests are involved!
And to prove my point , if an executive order form the president is "all" it takes for something to happen , then why was the one on the travel ban contested and illegally blocked by some courts ?
Classification authority and the travel ban are two completely separate issues. To compare the two is as daft as people who tried to compare the prerogative power to declare war, to the power to trigger article 50.
Trump can't have it both ways, he can't talk about something in Twitter, and then say "oh no, I can't tell you about it, its classified".
I agree that there are a lot of considerations that you would usually take into account before declassifying something, however Trump has already declassified other things off the cuff, for example telling Fox News that the CIA had been hacked. Had anyone else said that, they would have had their clearances revoked and investigated, however because he is the President and all classification authority stems from him, he is able to do that.
If you are genuinely interested in the topic, a source of good information on the topic that's accessible to the general public is the "Military Justice" podcast. It has lots of information about how the US classification system works.
The topic is not about classifying info, or how it works !
Mouthing off as he did about The CIA hack is not , and does not equate to declassifying information !
Besides since when has hacking, or trying to hack anything "secret" of any country news ? Its business as usual these days ! (this includes any campaign tampering by the Russians)
Also, sometimes Mouthing off as he sometimes does about subjects that are "restricted" or "classified" is, or can be a "planned slip up" to achieve a goal!
Sometimes on this level its difficult to tell which is which !
The topic of the thread YOU started is, and I quote:
"So it seems like both sides of the aisle agree that there is no proof of Trump having been tapped. Is Trump going to see any consequences as a result of having lied?
Is Obama owed an apology?"
So to be short and sweet, and back on topic ;
1- No , Obama is not owed an apology !
2- No , Trump didn't lie !
3- No , there will be no consequences that will affect Trump in a negative way from a technical or legal standpoint!
I am at work at the moment so I'll answer the 3 points when I get home, won't have time on my break to go through all the amounts of "wrong" you are....."
Look forward to it ! | |||
That could be about anything!
It just looked to me like Obama was saying he might be more able to come to some sort of compromise once elected. He was probably worried how the Right would kick up a fuss at any hint of a softening stance to Russia.
Yet now they have put Trump in, who is Putins bitch. | |||
"'By that standard how would you classify Obama as being fit for the Job? here is one small example : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ULl1AWaWdo Did Trump on Twitter actually reveal any valid info that could be prejudicial to the security of the US ? ' WTF
That could be about anything!
It just looked to me like Obama was saying he might be more able to come to some sort of compromise once elected. He was probably worried how the Right would kick up a fuss at any hint of a softening stance to Russia.
Yet now they have put Trump in, who is Putins bitch."Wow ! It never ceases to amaze me How fanatical blind or stupid can some people can be ? Lol... looks to me like its you bitching, actually accusing Trump of something that he hasn't done, but in your own words Obama actually did ! | |||
"'By that standard how would you classify Obama as being fit for the Job? here is one small example : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ULl1AWaWdo Did Trump on Twitter actually reveal any valid info that could be prejudicial to the security of the US ? ' WTF
That could be about anything!
It just looked to me like Obama was saying he might be more able to come to some sort of compromise once elected. He was probably worried how the Right would kick up a fuss at any hint of a softening stance to Russia.
Yet now they have put Trump in, who is Putins bitch.
Wow ! It never ceases to amaze me How fanatical blind or stupid can some people can be ?
Lol... looks to me like its you bitching, actually accusing Trump of something that he hasn't done, but in your own words Obama actually did ! "Your video doesn't actually make sense within this discussion which is about wiretapping and classified information. You video seems to be more aimed at the Flynn scandal that forced him to resign, deeply embarrassing his boss in his first month in office. The key difference however is that Obama was talking whilst in office, and Flynn was talking before he was in office. Also Obama's campaign wasn't supported by the Russians when the US and other intelligence agencies have confirmed that Russia was clearly trying to influence the US election in Trump's favour. | |||
"'By that standard how would you classify Obama as being fit for the Job? here is one small example : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ULl1AWaWdo Did Trump on Twitter actually reveal any valid info that could be prejudicial to the security of the US ? ' WTF
That could be about anything!
It just looked to me like Obama was saying he might be more able to come to some sort of compromise once elected. He was probably worried how the Right would kick up a fuss at any hint of a softening stance to Russia.
Yet now they have put Trump in, who is Putins bitch.
Wow ! It never ceases to amaze me How fanatical blind or stupid can some people can be ?
Lol... looks to me like its you bitching, actually accusing Trump of something that he hasn't done, but in your own words Obama actually did !
Your video doesn't actually make sense within this discussion which is about wiretapping and classified information. You video seems to be more aimed at the Flynn scandal that forced him to resign, deeply embarrassing his boss in his first month in office. The key difference however is that Obama was talking whilst in office, and Flynn was talking before he was in office. Also Obama's campaign wasn't supported by the Russians when the US and other intelligence agencies have confirmed that Russia was clearly trying to influence the US election in Trump's favour."Wow ! How brilliant, You seem to have it all Figured out as far as the alleged Russian support for Trumps campaign ! I suggest you contact the US authorities an provide them with the source and proof of your intel !
Seriously ..... I can understand you are still in denial of the Trump victory , but its time you get over it !
Face the facts .....if you are willing or have the ability , that is ...
The only established fact in regards to the Russians and the US election , is that the Russians were in Contact with both the Clinton and Trump campaign before the election !
Any allegation of interference has not been established and proven !
It is so far mere propaganda and speculation from the sore losing loony left!
But if you choose to believe that .... its up to you !
Oh ! and to clarify since apparently you missed the point of my video !
I suggest you read the post again!
It came about in the context that Obama was a pathetic weak leader that was completely unable to stand up to the Russians, in complete opposition to the statement by Fille derobee !
So in reality it wasn't me that went of topic , was it ? | |||
| |||
"It just amazes me that there is anyone in Europe who is still peddling the Trump lie machine. Many of the people who I work with who decided to give Trump a go because they didn't like Hilary are now having serious buyers remorse. I spend my time in cities where the Democrats have always been strong but nevertheless there are always Republicans around. An Attorney colleague of mine who voted for Trump asked me on the phone today in a side conversation if Trump was being portrayed as embarrassingly in Europe as he is here in the US at the moment. The fact is he is embarrassing himself and he embarrasses this great nation and all it's people. His most recent humiliation whilst sat avoiding eye contact with Nerkel and pretending he couldn't hear her was truly stuff from the back of classroom. No one that I have met here now gives this guy a hope of seeing through his first term quite simply because his actions will slowly but surely impact his support base more than his empty words do." So what is new about your statement ? NOTHING !
It it the same attitude all the "experts" and pundits were spewing out since the day he announced his was running !
Yet...... all were wrong !
Now I am not saying its going to end well or not ! but any sensible person will not rush to judgement a mere two months into his presidency !
So it is utterly foolish to imply that he wont even finish his first term ! Unless you can see into the future !
While I personally don't like the man, I wouldn't bet against him , and so far all those that did ...lost .
But if you want to underestimate and diminish him , by all means do , but don't confuse feelings and opinions with facts !
Oh, and incidentally you are aware that stock market, consumer confidence, jobs and wages are all on the way up right now in the US !
Or do you prefer to ignore that too ? | |||
"... Oh, and incidentally you are aware that stock market, consumer confidence, jobs and wages are all on the way up right now in the US !
Or do you prefer to ignore that too ?"As it happens, the Trump Presidency will bring tax breaks for my Companies and his stated intentions to repeal financial services controls will have a very positive effect on my business. That doesn't mean that I personally don't recognise home for the douche bag that he is. Business is supremely confident at the moment because they are all about to get big tax breaks and a reduction of employee protection legislation. | |||
"It just amazes me that there is anyone in Europe who is still peddling the Trump lie machine. Many of the people who I work with who decided to give Trump a go because they didn't like Hilary are now having serious buyers remorse. I spend my time in cities where the Democrats have always been strong but nevertheless there are always Republicans around. An Attorney colleague of mine who voted for Trump asked me on the phone today in a side conversation if Trump was being portrayed as embarrassingly in Europe as he is here in the US at the moment. The fact is he is embarrassing himself and he embarrasses this great nation and all it's people. His most recent humiliation whilst sat avoiding eye contact with Nerkel and pretending he couldn't hear her was truly stuff from the back of classroom. No one that I have met here now gives this guy a hope of seeing through his first term quite simply because his actions will slowly but surely impact his support base more than his empty words do." The whole world is watching from behind their sofa in utter shock. | |||
"... Oh, and incidentally you are aware that stock market, consumer confidence, jobs and wages are all on the way up right now in the US !
Or do you prefer to ignore that too ?
As it happens, the Trump Presidency will bring tax breaks for my Companies and his stated intentions to repeal financial services controls will have a very positive effect on my business.
That doesn't mean that I personally don't recognise home for the douche bag that he is.
Business is supremely confident at the moment because they are all about to get big tax breaks and a reduction of employee protection legislation. "Mmmm... I see !
You cant deny facts, and thus confirm economic climate is better ! But..... you still cant resist implying there is a dark side to it , by referring to a "possible" :
" reduction of employee protection legislation."
Now is that fact or more "alternative facts"? Or is that something YOU intend to apply to you employees ?
The "douche bag" as you call him is bad, but... his tax breaks are good for you and your bottom line!
Curious.....
But its a telling sign... you only copy pasted and commented on the last bit of my post , so I take it, you either accepted the truth and validity of my statements , or, conveniently ignored them because they are self evident !
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Tony, As a slight aside, what are your thoughts on Trump in terms of all the personal money alleged loaned to him, and his family members and all the dodgy property deals and the likes he has done that very much look like money laundering operations? -Matt" Haven't really bothered to delve much into it ! Dodgy deals are sometimes part of business ! Even when one tries or wants to play straight , in the world we live in ,but unfortunately , there will always be someone bending and distorting the rules ! Besides... the biggest dodgy players out there are very often states themselves, or individuals who benefit using the power of the state (Putin comes to mind ) to bully the system ! As for deals regarding money laundering I have no problem with it , with two exceptions : Human trafficking/exploitation, and drugs ! If countries didn't act like pimps towards its citizens and business at large , applying lower and reasonable taxes, there would less need for tax evasion and money laundering !
Also , us in the western world, who havnt actually travelled and experienced different cultures on other continents , tend to project , and assume wrongly that values, business practice and rules are the same everywhere ! That is not the case. In some of these places and environments , ethics and following rules is perceived as weakness , and taken advantage of . In this context if you want to play , you have no option but to adjust !
Mind you ... to get back to the root of the thread , the same can be applied to politics.
In that context , and in spite of the fact I don't like Trump as a person, his hard bullish tough business like approach to issues regarding countries like Russia , China, N Korea , and all the islamic BS going on, is more likely to be successfull, then Obamas apologetic weak stance !
Time will tell .... | |||
"'By that standard how would you classify Obama as being fit for the Job? here is one small example : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ULl1AWaWdo Did Trump on Twitter actually reveal any valid info that could be prejudicial to the security of the US ? ' WTF
That could be about anything!
It just looked to me like Obama was saying he might be more able to come to some sort of compromise once elected. He was probably worried how the Right would kick up a fuss at any hint of a softening stance to Russia.
Yet now they have put Trump in, who is Putins bitch.
Wow ! It never ceases to amaze me How fanatical blind or stupid can some people can be ?
Lol... looks to me like its you bitching, actually accusing Trump of something that he hasn't done, but in your own words Obama actually did !
Your video doesn't actually make sense within this discussion which is about wiretapping and classified information. You video seems to be more aimed at the Flynn scandal that forced him to resign, deeply embarrassing his boss in his first month in office. The key difference however is that Obama was talking whilst in office, and Flynn was talking before he was in office. Also Obama's campaign wasn't supported by the Russians when the US and other intelligence agencies have confirmed that Russia was clearly trying to influence the US election in Trump's favour.
Wow ! How brilliant, You seem to have it all Figured out as far as the alleged Russian support for Trumps campaign !
I suggest you contact the US authorities an provide them with the source and proof of your intel !
Seriously ..... I can understand you are still in denial of the Trump victory , but its time you get over it !
Face the facts .....if you are willing or have the ability , that is ...
The only established fact in regards to the Russians and the US election , is that the Russians were in Contact with both the Clinton and Trump campaign before the election !
Any allegation of interference has not been established and proven !
It is so far mere propaganda and speculation from the sore losing loony left!
But if you choose to believe that .... its up to you !
Oh ! and to clarify since apparently you missed the point of my video !
I suggest you read the post again!
It came about in the context that Obama was a pathetic weak leader that was completely unable to stand up to the Russians, in complete opposition to the statement by Fille derobee !
So in reality it wasn't me that went of topic , was it ? "Why would I need to tell the US Intelligence establishment that the Russians tried to influence the US election when they concluded that and announced it back in January? Or did you miss that? | |||
"'By that standard how would you classify Obama as being fit for the Job? here is one small example : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ULl1AWaWdo Did Trump on Twitter actually reveal any valid info that could be prejudicial to the security of the US ? ' WTF
That could be about anything!
It just looked to me like Obama was saying he might be more able to come to some sort of compromise once elected. He was probably worried how the Right would kick up a fuss at any hint of a softening stance to Russia.
Yet now they have put Trump in, who is Putins bitch.
Wow ! It never ceases to amaze me How fanatical blind or stupid can some people can be ?
Lol... looks to me like its you bitching, actually accusing Trump of something that he hasn't done, but in your own words Obama actually did !
Your video doesn't actually make sense within this discussion which is about wiretapping and classified information. You video seems to be more aimed at the Flynn scandal that forced him to resign, deeply embarrassing his boss in his first month in office. The key difference however is that Obama was talking whilst in office, and Flynn was talking before he was in office. Also Obama's campaign wasn't supported by the Russians when the US and other intelligence agencies have confirmed that Russia was clearly trying to influence the US election in Trump's favour.
Wow ! How brilliant, You seem to have it all Figured out as far as the alleged Russian support for Trumps campaign !
I suggest you contact the US authorities an provide them with the source and proof of your intel !
Seriously ..... I can understand you are still in denial of the Trump victory , but its time you get over it !
Face the facts .....if you are willing or have the ability , that is ...
The only established fact in regards to the Russians and the US election , is that the Russians were in Contact with both the Clinton and Trump campaign before the election !
Any allegation of interference has not been established and proven !
It is so far mere propaganda and speculation from the sore losing loony left!
But if you choose to believe that .... its up to you !
Oh ! and to clarify since apparently you missed the point of my video !
I suggest you read the post again!
It came about in the context that Obama was a pathetic weak leader that was completely unable to stand up to the Russians, in complete opposition to the statement by Fille derobee !
So in reality it wasn't me that went of topic , was it ?
Why would I need to tell the US Intelligence establishment that the Russians tried to influence the US election when they concluded that and announced it back in January? Or did you miss that? "No , I didn't miss that, but it seems YOU missed the fact that it was "fake news" , not facts , a mere allegation.
In Fact A couple of days ago FBI director Comey confirmed that that was not proven , and there is still an ongoing investigation !
OR did you miss that ? | |||
"'By that standard how would you classify Obama as being fit for the Job? here is one small example : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ULl1AWaWdo Did Trump on Twitter actually reveal any valid info that could be prejudicial to the security of the US ? ' WTF
That could be about anything!
It just looked to me like Obama was saying he might be more able to come to some sort of compromise once elected. He was probably worried how the Right would kick up a fuss at any hint of a softening stance to Russia.
Yet now they have put Trump in, who is Putins bitch.
Wow ! It never ceases to amaze me How fanatical blind or stupid can some people can be ?
Lol... looks to me like its you bitching, actually accusing Trump of something that he hasn't done, but in your own words Obama actually did !
Your video doesn't actually make sense within this discussion which is about wiretapping and classified information. You video seems to be more aimed at the Flynn scandal that forced him to resign, deeply embarrassing his boss in his first month in office. The key difference however is that Obama was talking whilst in office, and Flynn was talking before he was in office. Also Obama's campaign wasn't supported by the Russians when the US and other intelligence agencies have confirmed that Russia was clearly trying to influence the US election in Trump's favour.
Wow ! How brilliant, You seem to have it all Figured out as far as the alleged Russian support for Trumps campaign !
I suggest you contact the US authorities an provide them with the source and proof of your intel !
Seriously ..... I can understand you are still in denial of the Trump victory , but its time you get over it !
Face the facts .....if you are willing or have the ability , that is ...
The only established fact in regards to the Russians and the US election , is that the Russians were in Contact with both the Clinton and Trump campaign before the election !
Any allegation of interference has not been established and proven !
It is so far mere propaganda and speculation from the sore losing loony left!
But if you choose to believe that .... its up to you !
Oh ! and to clarify since apparently you missed the point of my video !
I suggest you read the post again!
It came about in the context that Obama was a pathetic weak leader that was completely unable to stand up to the Russians, in complete opposition to the statement by Fille derobee !
So in reality it wasn't me that went of topic , was it ?
Why would I need to tell the US Intelligence establishment that the Russians tried to influence the US election when they concluded that and announced it back in January? Or did you miss that?
No , I didn't miss that, but it seems YOU missed the fact that it was "fake news" , not facts , a mere allegation.
In Fact A couple of days ago FBI director Comey confirmed that that was not proven , and there is still an ongoing investigation !
OR did you miss that ? "No, it was been proven that Russia tried to influence the elections (to influence the electorate into voting for Trump). What is still being investigated is if Trump's team had direct contact with the Russians. | |||
| |||
| |||
"'By that standard how would you classify Obama as being fit for the Job? here is one small example : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ULl1AWaWdo Did Trump on Twitter actually reveal any valid info that could be prejudicial to the security of the US ? ' WTF
That could be about anything!
It just looked to me like Obama was saying he might be more able to come to some sort of compromise once elected. He was probably worried how the Right would kick up a fuss at any hint of a softening stance to Russia.
Yet now they have put Trump in, who is Putins bitch.
Wow ! It never ceases to amaze me How fanatical blind or stupid can some people can be ?
Lol... looks to me like its you bitching, actually accusing Trump of something that he hasn't done, but in your own words Obama actually did !
Your video doesn't actually make sense within this discussion which is about wiretapping and classified information. You video seems to be more aimed at the Flynn scandal that forced him to resign, deeply embarrassing his boss in his first month in office. The key difference however is that Obama was talking whilst in office, and Flynn was talking before he was in office. Also Obama's campaign wasn't supported by the Russians when the US and other intelligence agencies have confirmed that Russia was clearly trying to influence the US election in Trump's favour.
Wow ! How brilliant, You seem to have it all Figured out as far as the alleged Russian support for Trumps campaign !
I suggest you contact the US authorities an provide them with the source and proof of your intel !
Seriously ..... I can understand you are still in denial of the Trump victory , but its time you get over it !
Face the facts .....if you are willing or have the ability , that is ...
The only established fact in regards to the Russians and the US election , is that the Russians were in Contact with both the Clinton and Trump campaign before the election !
Any allegation of interference has not been established and proven !
It is so far mere propaganda and speculation from the sore losing loony left!
But if you choose to believe that .... its up to you !
Oh ! and to clarify since apparently you missed the point of my video !
I suggest you read the post again!
It came about in the context that Obama was a pathetic weak leader that was completely unable to stand up to the Russians, in complete opposition to the statement by Fille derobee !
So in reality it wasn't me that went of topic , was it ?
Why would I need to tell the US Intelligence establishment that the Russians tried to influence the US election when they concluded that and announced it back in January? Or did you miss that?
No , I didn't miss that, but it seems YOU missed the fact that it was "fake news" , not facts , a mere allegation.
In Fact A couple of days ago FBI director Comey confirmed that that was not proven , and there is still an ongoing investigation !
OR did you miss that ?
No, it was been proven that Russia tried to influence the elections (to influence the electorate into voting for Trump). What is still being investigated is if Trump's team had direct contact with the Russians."No it hasnt ! by Who? Where ? During the campaign were they in contact? yes! Of course they were , but so were the Clinton campaign ! There is no secret there , and here are two examples : https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-10/russia-says-it-was-in-contact-with-trump-s-team-during-campaign http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/13/hillary-clintons-team-met-russian-ambassador-says-kremlin-spokesman/ | |||
"Donald Trump has been vindicated and Obama and FBI Director James Comey have been exposed for the wrong doing they were guilty of. The House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes has said so in a live press conference here that Trump was being monitored or was put under surveillance as an aside to any investigations that were ongoing about Russia. Trump used the term "Wire-tap" in his Twitter post but of course in this day and age wire-tap is a more general term for being under surveillance or being monitored. Press conference with Devin Nunes here... www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD5_Qi6lv3M Here another little clip with some background on it... www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Hyiuup1Kdw I think James Comey's time as FBI Director could soon be up, something really sinister has been going on here and Comey and Obama are upto their necks in it. " Round the fucking twist | |||
| |||
"Tony, how do you decide when something is fake news? Is it when Trump says it is? " No ! lol.... when analysing a bigger picture, and taking in consideration other factors and indicators! It doesn't matter if its Trump or a media outlet puts out a sound byte! Any single statement these days, from any source , demands a deeper scrutiny and lol...... almost forensic like analysis !
Then one might start to get the picture... ..... hopefully.... | |||
"You mean the Comey that released that letter into Clinton's emails that likely cost her the election? That one? How do you square that with your view above that him and Clinton are in it up to their necks, or am I misunderstanding you? And I think Trump tweeting that Obama had "tapped my phones" is quite unambiguous regardless of how much you try and say it means something else these days. -Matt" I never actually mentioned the name "Clinton" once in my post above, i said Obama and Comey are upto their necks in it. The letter Comey released about Clinton's emails should have led to Hillary Clinton being charged and put on trial for breaking the law. Its against the law and a threat to the national security of the USA that Clinton took classified material and put it on her own private email account, and was sending that classified material to god knows who outside the government? Hillary Clinton should be in jail right now and Comey let her walk away. | |||
"Tony, how do you decide when something is fake news? Is it when Trump says it is? No ! lol.... when analysing a bigger picture, and taking in consideration other factors and indicators! It doesn't matter if its Trump or a media outlet puts out a sound byte! Any single statement these days, from any source , demands a deeper scrutiny and lol...... almost forensic like analysis !
Then one might start to get the picture... ..... hopefully.... "So, when it comes to believing something, would you say track record is important? | |||
"Tony, how do you decide when something is fake news? Is it when Trump says it is? No ! lol.... when analysing a bigger picture, and taking in consideration other factors and indicators! It doesn't matter if its Trump or a media outlet puts out a sound byte! Any single statement these days, from any source , demands a deeper scrutiny and lol...... almost forensic like analysis !
Then one might start to get the picture... ..... hopefully....
So, when it comes to believing something, would you say track record is important?"What like the track record of the FBI telling lies to the FISA court on 73 previous occasions, which was revealed in one of the clips i posted. That sort of track record. | |||
"Tony, how do you decide when something is fake news? Is it when Trump says it is? No ! lol.... when analysing a bigger picture, and taking in consideration other factors and indicators! It doesn't matter if its Trump or a media outlet puts out a sound byte! Any single statement these days, from any source , demands a deeper scrutiny and lol...... almost forensic like analysis !
Then one might start to get the picture... ..... hopefully....
So, when it comes to believing something, would you say track record is important?
What like the track record of the FBI telling lies to the FISA court on 73 previous occasions, which was revealed in one of the clips i posted. That sort of track record. "The FBI misled the FISA court on 75 previous occasions not 73. | |||
| |||
"You mean the Comey that released that letter into Clinton's emails that likely cost her the election? That one? How do you square that with your view above that him and Clinton are in it up to their necks, or am I misunderstanding you? And I think Trump tweeting that Obama had "tapped my phones" is quite unambiguous regardless of how much you try and say it means something else these days. -Matt I never actually mentioned the name "Clinton" once in my post above, i said Obama and Comey are upto their necks in it. The letter Comey released about Clinton's emails should have led to Hillary Clinton being charged and put on trial for breaking the law. Its against the law and a threat to the national security of the USA that Clinton took classified material and put it on her own private email account, and was sending that classified material to god knows who outside the government? Hillary Clinton should be in jail right now and Comey let her walk away. " No you didn't mention Clinton, I did. I asked how you square Comey supposedly working against Trump yet seems he was quite clearly working in favour of Trump during the election. And so you support the impeachment and locking up of Trump and half the RNC due to their use of a private email server too? -Matt | |||
"You mean the Comey that released that letter into Clinton's emails that likely cost her the election? That one? How do you square that with your view above that him and Clinton are in it up to their necks, or am I misunderstanding you? And I think Trump tweeting that Obama had "tapped my phones" is quite unambiguous regardless of how much you try and say it means something else these days. -Matt I never actually mentioned the name "Clinton" once in my post above, i said Obama and Comey are upto their necks in it. The letter Comey released about Clinton's emails should have led to Hillary Clinton being charged and put on trial for breaking the law. Its against the law and a threat to the national security of the USA that Clinton took classified material and put it on her own private email account, and was sending that classified material to god knows who outside the government? Hillary Clinton should be in jail right now and Comey let her walk away. " You know VP Pence did the same thing when he was Governor right? Are we going to lock him up to? Or maybe it's different because Clinton was Secretary of State, a lot more classified info, I get that arguement. So you just lock up Clinton, oh and John Kerry because he did the same too right? Hmmm, now I think about it, didn't Colin Powell do it first? And the Condoleezza Rice do it after him? Are you going to lock them all up? | |||
"Tony, how do you decide when something is fake news? Is it when Trump says it is? No ! lol.... when analysing a bigger picture, and taking in consideration other factors and indicators! It doesn't matter if its Trump or a media outlet puts out a sound byte! Any single statement these days, from any source , demands a deeper scrutiny and lol...... almost forensic like analysis !
Then one might start to get the picture... ..... hopefully....
So, when it comes to believing something, would you say track record is important?"Important.... yes... but only part of the puzzle ! | |||
| |||
"You mean the Comey that released that letter into Clinton's emails that likely cost her the election? That one? How do you square that with your view above that him and Clinton are in it up to their necks, or am I misunderstanding you? And I think Trump tweeting that Obama had "tapped my phones" is quite unambiguous regardless of how much you try and say it means something else these days. -Matt I never actually mentioned the name "Clinton" once in my post above, i said Obama and Comey are upto their necks in it. The letter Comey released about Clinton's emails should have led to Hillary Clinton being charged and put on trial for breaking the law. Its against the law and a threat to the national security of the USA that Clinton took classified material and put it on her own private email account, and was sending that classified material to god knows who outside the government? Hillary Clinton should be in jail right now and Comey let her walk away. You know VP Pence did the same thing when he was Governor right? Are we going to lock him up to? Or maybe it's different because Clinton was Secretary of State, a lot more classified info, I get that arguement. So you just lock up Clinton, oh and John Kerry because he did the same too right? Hmmm, now I think about it, didn't Colin Powell do it first? And the Condoleezza Rice do it after him? Are you going to lock them all up? " Probably not .... and that would also explain why she isn't in Jail already ! | |||
"Are there any things Trump and his administration have said that you might consider iffy? " Are you kidding?
When it comes to politicians and big business, irrespective of being left or right , "Iffy" is by nature part of the equation !
lol.... remember that saying, " How do you know a politician is lying? His lips are moving! "
I think that on this one ..... we might be in agreement ! | |||
| |||
"You mean the Comey that released that letter into Clinton's emails that likely cost her the election? That one? How do you square that with your view above that him and Clinton are in it up to their necks, or am I misunderstanding you? And I think Trump tweeting that Obama had "tapped my phones" is quite unambiguous regardless of how much you try and say it means something else these days. -Matt I never actually mentioned the name "Clinton" once in my post above, i said Obama and Comey are upto their necks in it. The letter Comey released about Clinton's emails should have led to Hillary Clinton being charged and put on trial for breaking the law. Its against the law and a threat to the national security of the USA that Clinton took classified material and put it on her own private email account, and was sending that classified material to god knows who outside the government? Hillary Clinton should be in jail right now and Comey let her walk away. You know VP Pence did the same thing when he was Governor right? Are we going to lock him up to? Or maybe it's different because Clinton was Secretary of State, a lot more classified info, I get that arguement. So you just lock up Clinton, oh and John Kerry because he did the same too right? Hmmm, now I think about it, didn't Colin Powell do it first? And the Condoleezza Rice do it after him? Are you going to lock them all up? " Maybe if one of them gets locked up then otherwise think twice about doing. | |||
"You mean the Comey that released that letter into Clinton's emails that likely cost her the election? That one? How do you square that with your view above that him and Clinton are in it up to their necks, or am I misunderstanding you? And I think Trump tweeting that Obama had "tapped my phones" is quite unambiguous regardless of how much you try and say it means something else these days. -Matt I never actually mentioned the name "Clinton" once in my post above, i said Obama and Comey are upto their necks in it. The letter Comey released about Clinton's emails should have led to Hillary Clinton being charged and put on trial for breaking the law. Its against the law and a threat to the national security of the USA that Clinton took classified material and put it on her own private email account, and was sending that classified material to god knows who outside the government? Hillary Clinton should be in jail right now and Comey let her walk away. No you didn't mention Clinton, I did. I asked how you square Comey supposedly working against Trump yet seems he was quite clearly working in favour of Trump during the election. And so you support the impeachment and locking up of Trump and half the RNC due to their use of a private email server too? -Matt" There is an irony in that there was one candidate that was actually being investigated on Election Day... and it wasn't Clinton | |||
| |||
"Meanwhile, Trump fails to replace Obamacare because his plan is so bad even his fellow Republicans won't support it. Maybe he should spend less time tweeting and more time on policy... "
The plan was going to cost more, and insure fewer people. | |||
"Donald Trump has been vindicated and Obama and FBI Director James Comey have been exposed for the wrong doing they were guilty of. The House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes has said so in a live press conference here that Trump was being monitored or was put under surveillance as an aside to any investigations that were ongoing about Russia. Trump used the term "Wire-tap" in his Twitter post but of course in this day and age wire-tap is a more general term for being under surveillance or being monitored. Press conference with Devin Nunes here... www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD5_Qi6lv3M Here another little clip with some background on it... www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Hyiuup1Kdw I think James Comey's time as FBI Director could soon be up, something really sinister has been going on here and Comey and Obama are upto their necks in it. " Hold on a second, nothing of the sort happened. Nunes said that some information had been shared among the intelligence community. And he said that this was "incidental collection", meaning they were monitoring someone and a member or members of the Trump team were in contact with that person(s). He also made the point that this information was collected legally, with a warrant and approved by a judge. So they were not the target and it was not ordered by the Obama administration. If you have to lie to make your point of view sound correct then you're probably in the wrong. | |||
"Donald Trump has been vindicated and Obama and FBI Director James Comey have been exposed for the wrong doing they were guilty of. The House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes has said so in a live press conference here that Trump was being monitored or was put under surveillance as an aside to any investigations that were ongoing about Russia. Trump used the term "Wire-tap" in his Twitter post but of course in this day and age wire-tap is a more general term for being under surveillance or being monitored. Press conference with Devin Nunes here... www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD5_Qi6lv3M Here another little clip with some background on it... www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Hyiuup1Kdw I think James Comey's time as FBI Director could soon be up, something really sinister has been going on here and Comey and Obama are upto their necks in it. Hold on a second, nothing of the sort happened. Nunes said that some information had been shared among the intelligence community. And he said that this was "incidental collection", meaning they were monitoring someone and a member or members of the Trump team were in contact with that person(s). He also made the point that this information was collected legally, with a warrant and approved by a judge. So they were not the target and it was not ordered by the Obama administration. If you have to lie to make your point of view sound correct then you're probably in the wrong." Hahahah... even better, Nunes revealed during that interview that he was aware of multiple FISA investigations going on. That in itself is classified information. This being just 48 hours after he was badgering Comey to confirm that reveling that there was communication between Trump and the Russians would be classed as a criminal act under the Espinage Act. Oh and don't forget Nunes is meant to be leading this investigation. -Matt | |||
"Donald Trump has been vindicated and Obama and FBI Director James Comey have been exposed for the wrong doing they were guilty of. The House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes has said so in a live press conference here that Trump was being monitored or was put under surveillance as an aside to any investigations that were ongoing about Russia. Trump used the term "Wire-tap" in his Twitter post but of course in this day and age wire-tap is a more general term for being under surveillance or being monitored. Press conference with Devin Nunes here... www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD5_Qi6lv3M Here another little clip with some background on it... www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Hyiuup1Kdw I think James Comey's time as FBI Director could soon be up, something really sinister has been going on here and Comey and Obama are upto their necks in it. Hold on a second, nothing of the sort happened. Nunes said that some information had been shared among the intelligence community. And he said that this was "incidental collection", meaning they were monitoring someone and a member or members of the Trump team were in contact with that person(s). He also made the point that this information was collected legally, with a warrant and approved by a judge. So they were not the target and it was not ordered by the Obama administration. If you have to lie to make your point of view sound correct then you're probably in the wrong." It would not be the first time that "incidental collection" of data was expanded under the umbrella of the original legal authorisation , resulting , and branching out to other targets not originally on the legal authorisation ! Then you slap on it the "classified " label to get away with it!
Even if he wasn't the initial target, he can still be "bundled" in !
And it was done under the Obama administration !
Now, Did Obama order it himself ? No one can say , Plausible deniability is an old trick for situations such as this!
"If you have to lie to make your point of view sound correct then you're probably in the wrong."
You are correct when you say "probably wrong" because it means you can actually be right !
In fact , sometimes , the truth can only be achieved with lies and deception !
As an example,Remember that statement :
"The leak was real , but the news were fake"
| |||
"It would not be the first time that "incidental collection" of data was expanded under the umbrella of the original legal authorisation , resulting , and branching out to other targets not originally on the legal authorisation ! Then you slap on it the "classified " label to get away with it!
Even if he wasn't the initial target, he can still be "bundled" in !"As an aside, this is why so many people have an issue with May's 'Snooper's Charter' that she tried to push through as Home Sec, and then eventually got through as PM... despite the ECJ saying that dragnet surveillance like this is illegal. And hence why David Davis was suing the government over it.... well that was until Davis Davis was put in charge of getting us out the EU. Convenient that. Oh, but don't worry... we won't end up with anything like Trumps situation affecting our MPs... as they have cunningly made themselves exempt of the law. -Matt | |||
| |||
"I find myself wondering: How will the the US federal authorities execute Trump if it turns out he has committed treason? Does he get hanged? I seem to remember that is how they used to kill civilian traitors. Or as he is the president and Commander in Chief will he get an officers death and get to watch his firing squad form up. And more importantly will Spicer and Conway have some alternative facts that will prove everything to be false news?" Treason !
Where did that come from? You joking right?
Come on Will you should know better then that!
Unless.... you are also indulging in spot of counter intelligence...
Or...is it fake news...lol... | |||
 | |||
"It would not be the first time that "incidental collection" of data was expanded under the umbrella of the original legal authorisation , resulting , and branching out to other targets not originally on the legal authorisation ! Then you slap on it the "classified " label to get away with it!
Even if he wasn't the initial target, he can still be "bundled" in !
As an aside, this is why so many people have an issue with May's 'Snooper's Charter' that she tried to push through as Home Sec, and then eventually got through as PM... despite the ECJ saying that dragnet surveillance like this is illegal. And hence why David Davis was suing the government over it.... well that was until Davis Davis was put in charge of getting us out the EU. Convenient that. Oh, but don't worry... we won't end up with anything like Trumps situation affecting our MPs... as they have cunningly made themselves exempt of the law.
-Matt"Yes...big brother is alive and well !
But we were forewarned by Orwell ...and that was more than half a century ago !
How proud would he have been to see his worst fears materialise in his native Britain !
And while there might have been some pride , it would be crushed by the shame and shock to see "Animal farm" and "1984" come to fruition and thrive in Britain ! How he would have loved a country with cameras all over the place ...in fact the country with the biggest massive surveillance system on its citizens on earth.....
All for our "safety" and well being... of course ! | |||
"Well if he has conspired with a hostile foreign power to subvert the presidential election then that would have to be pushing towards treason. If it turns out he did some sort of deal with the Russian government to get their help that has to treason... To be honest I don't think things would be allowed develop that far. He is 70, I expect the pressure of the job will get to him and he will just drop dead... Probably mid fake news tweet...
"No prove of that so far ! Mere speculation ! | |||
"Oh, but don't worry... we won't end up with anything like Trumps situation affecting our MPs... as they have cunningly made themselves exempt of the law. -Matt" Actually that is not quite true... PM's can claim Parliamentary Privilege but if they do it only protects them from the courts. Any MP that claims privilege become subject to Parliament sitting as a court, and Parliament being Sovereign is not bound by the laws as passed by parliament and can impose any sentence it wishes (that of course includes death). I fully accept that it is highly unlikely that such a thing would happen, but I expect it is because of the nature of the power of parliament sitting as a court that MP's do not claim privilege when push comes to shove. | |||
"No prove of that so far ! Mere speculation ! "Absolutely, and I doubt there ever will be... But if he suddenly drops dead... | |||
"Oh, but don't worry... we won't end up with anything like Trumps situation affecting our MPs... as they have cunningly made themselves exempt of the law. -Matt Actually that is not quite true... PM's can claim Parliamentary Privilege but if they do it only protects them from the courts. Any MP that claims privilege become subject to Parliament sitting as a court, and Parliament being Sovereign is not bound by the laws as passed by parliament and can impose any sentence it wishes (that of course includes death). I fully accept that it is highly unlikely that such a thing would happen, but I expect it is because of the nature of the power of parliament sitting as a court that MP's do not claim privilege when push comes to shove. " Ahh... I stand corrected then. But yes... I doubt they would actually do anything against one of their own. -Matt | |||
"No prove of that so far ! Mere speculation !
Absolutely, and I doubt there ever will be...
But if he suddenly drops dead... "Now that is wishful thinking on your part....
But I wouldn't mind "consoling" the widow!
| |||
"I doubt they would actually do anything against one of their own. -Matt" I would not be willing to take the gamble, politicians are backstabbing bastards when they think that they may be able to gain an advantage or that they may loose out. That is why governments use Crown Immunity Certificates rather than claiming privilege, better to say 'we did it' but under privilege of Sovereignty and dare the courts throw out the CIC than claim parliamentary privilege and take the chance that commons will smell blood... Just my read on how and why things go as they do, and my cynicism may be running in overdrive this morning. By the way put your clocks forward if you have not done already. | |||
" It would not be the first time that "incidental collection" of data was expanded under the umbrella of the original legal authorisation , resulting , and branching out to other targets not originally on the legal authorisation ! Then you slap on it the "classified " label to get away with it!
Even if he wasn't the initial target, he can still be "bundled" in !
And it was done under the Obama administration !
Now, Did Obama order it himself ? No one can say , Plausible deniability is an old trick for situations such as this!
"If you have to lie to make your point of view sound correct then you're probably in the wrong."
You are correct when you say "probably wrong" because it means you can actually be right !
In fact , sometimes , the truth can only be achieved with lies and deception !
As an example,Remember that statement :
"The leak was real , but the news were fake"
"You managed to write an awful lot there but not say anything at all. You should be a politician | |||
" It would not be the first time that "incidental collection" of data was expanded under the umbrella of the original legal authorisation , resulting , and branching out to other targets not originally on the legal authorisation ! Then you slap on it the "classified " label to get away with it!
Even if he wasn't the initial target, he can still be "bundled" in !
And it was done under the Obama administration !
Now, Did Obama order it himself ? No one can say , Plausible deniability is an old trick for situations such as this!
"If you have to lie to make your point of view sound correct then you're probably in the wrong."
You are correct when you say "probably wrong" because it means you can actually be right !
In fact , sometimes , the truth can only be achieved with lies and deception !
As an example,Remember that statement :
"The leak was real , but the news were fake"
You managed to write an awful lot there but not say anything at all. You should be a politician "Mmm.... really ? or is it more a case of you not understanding what I wrote because thinking is not your strong point !
Could also be you prefer not to recognise that what I wrote makes sense, and thus you dismiss it by deflecting with your comment!
It could actually be both!
But I suspect its the latter, so you tell me ! | |||
