President 'The Donald' Trump and Surprising Consequences - Mod warning in OP

Amerika

robinph wrote: »

Is this now the first admission of lying by the Trump team?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39300191

Trump: Obama did it.
Spicer: Nope, he meant Obamas people did it.
Spicer: No, you misunderstood us again, we meant the British did it.
GCHQ: Don't be fupping daft.
No 10: Take that back you idiots.
White House: Oops, sorry. Won't say that line again. Give us a moment whilst we think who else we can deflect this onto. I thought GCHQ were just going to stay quiet and not comment on anything as usual.

“Wire tapping” is just a term used these days to describe surveillance of a person’s communications preformed over some form of technology. Actual wire taps in today’s age are not needed. Since 2005, the NSA has 24/7 access to the mainframe computers of all telecom providers, all computer service providers, and to all digital traffic carried by fiber optics in the US. NSA has the digital version of every telephone call made to, from and within the US... also texts, emails and other digital traffic. In addition, the NSA has given GCHQ full 24/7 access to its computers. No 10-D may be shocked over the allegations, but it isn’t too far a stretch to determine that information was leaked by someone who had access to them. How else did the newspapers get the information?

BabyCheeses

Amerika wrote: »

“Wire tapping” is just a term used these days to describe surveillance of a person’s communications preformed over some form of technology. Actual wire taps in today’s age are not needed. Since 2005, the NSA has 24/7 access to the mainframe computers of all telecom providers, all computer service providers, and to all digital traffic carried by fiber optics in the US. NSA has the digital version of every telephone call made to, from and within the US... also texts, emails and other digital traffic. In addition, the NSA has given GCHQ full 24/7 access to its computers. No 10-D may be shocked over the allegations, but it isn’t too far a stretch to determine that information was leaked by someone who had access to them. How else did the newspapers get the information?

Great, another time where the man who says it as it is means something different to what he actually said.

Inquitus

Trump refuses to shake Merkel's hand and looks like a petulant child in the process.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-angela-merkel-shake-hand-refuse-a7635911.html

mcmoustache

Amerika wrote: »

“Wire tapping” is just a term used these days to describe surveillance of a person’s communications preformed over some form of technology. Actual wire taps in today’s age are not needed. Since 2005, the NSA has 24/7 access to the mainframe computers of all telecom providers, all computer service providers, and to all digital traffic carried by fiber optics in the US. NSA has the digital version of every telephone call made to, from and within the US... also texts, emails and other digital traffic. In addition, the NSA has given GCHQ full 24/7 access to its computers. No 10-D may be shocked over the allegations, but it isn’t too far a stretch to determine that information was leaked by someone who had access to them. How else did the newspapers get the information?

Are you saying that Trump was tapped in the sense that everyone's online activity is recorded by the 5 eyes? It's stretching the definition of "tapped". A reasonable person would assume that "tapped" involves some focus as opposed to being picked up in a dragnet. If Trump got a shock from being picked up in a dragnet in the same way as every other US resident and felt compelled to tweet about it, it hardly reflects well on him.

That said, I do appreciate you defending him. It's important in this thread to have someone willing to do that. I haven't seen much of it from other Trump supporters. I've mostly seen deflection, triumphalism and whataboutery. It's refreshing to see someone actually have the balls to offer a defense.

K.Flyer

Inquitus wrote: »

Trump refuses to shake Merkel's hand and looks like a petulant child in the process.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-angela-merkel-shake-hand-refuse-a7635911.html

Considering his attitude towards the press, I imagine it was him deliberately not responding to their requests, seeing as he has already been photographed twice shaking her hand.

Inquitus

K.Flyer wrote: »

Considering his attitude towards the press, I imagine it was him deliberately not responding to their requests, seeing as he has already been photographed twice shaking her hand.

He didn't even look her in the eye and refused to shake her hand when she asked. He has also shaken every other foreign leaders hand at that point in the visit.

Water John

WTF is the clown at?
I suppose he had to do something to match Putin's (his friend) treatment of her when he left his dog ramble around.
I suppose DT did in one sense as Bannon is his dog.
It is now becoming clear to any foreign leader not to go near him.

mattser

K.Flyer wrote: »

Considering his attitude towards the press, I imagine it was him deliberately not responding to their requests, seeing as he has already been photographed twice shaking her hand.

Nice one K. None so blind as those who will not see.

Amerika

mcmoustache wrote: »

Are you saying that Trump was tapped in the sense that everyone's online activity is recorded by the 5 eyes? It's stretching the definition of "tapped". A reasonable person would assume that "tapped" involves some focus as opposed to being picked up in a dragnet. If Trump got a shock from being picked up in a dragnet in the same way as every other US resident and felt compelled to tweet about it, it hardly reflects well on him.

That said, I do appreciate you defending him. It's important in this thread to have someone willing to do that. I haven't seen much of it from other Trump supporters. I've mostly seen deflection, triumphalism and whataboutery. It's refreshing to see someone actually have the balls to offer a defense.

The part of the 'tapped' involves someone looking into what was actually discussed. Even though the NSA has access to everything, they need cause for actually looking into something. Obviously someone was actively looking at (investigating) what was going on with the Trump organization. Even if they were monitoring communications of the Russians (foreign agents), our laws state that without cause the NSA is not supposed to listen to or record that is talked about by an American. This obviously was not followed, evidenced by the illegal leaks to news organizations.

And thanks. It's not easy being a US conservative (and former Tea Party member) on this board. And I'm not above using whataboutery on occasion. :P

listermint

Amerika wrote: »

The part of the 'tapped' involves someone looking into what was actually discussed. Even though the NSA has access to everything, they need cause for actually looking into something. Obviously someone was actively looking at (investigating) what was going on with the Trump organization. Even if they were monitoring communications of the Russians (foreign agents), our laws state that without cause the NSA is not supposed to listen to or record that is talked about by an American. This obviously was not followed, evidenced by the illegal leaks to news organizations.

And thanks. It's not easy being a US conservative (and former Tea Party member) on this board. And I'm not above using whataboutery on occasion. :P

I'd imagine it's not easy because the facts claimed are so so hard to prove and we demand facts .

robinph

robinph wrote: »

Is this now the first admission of lying by the Trump team?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39300191

Trump: Obama did it.
Spicer: Nope, he meant Obamas people did it.
Spicer: No, you misunderstood us again, we meant the British did it.
GCHQ: Don't be fupping daft.
No 10: Take that back you idiots.
White House: Oops, sorry. Won't say that line again. Give us a moment whilst we think who else we can deflect this onto. I thought GCHQ were just going to stay quiet and not comment on anything as usual.

Now Trump has come out and said that Spicer didn't actually say what he said for the last couple of days about GCHQ, someone else said it and then we just quoted him for some unknown reason. Of course they still aren't telling us who did it.

Every question from the press should just be asking them if each thing that Spicer has just said is made up, a quote from someone else, or talking in riddles before letting him move onto the next topic. This messing about with spending a couple of days going round proving they are spouting rubbish before Trump then comes back saying he didn't mean it is getting silly.

mcmoustache

Amerika wrote: »

The part of the 'tapped' involves someone looking into what was actually discussed. Even though the NSA has access to everything, they need cause for actually looking into something. Obviously someone was actively looking at (investigating) what was going on with the Trump organization. Even if they were monitoring communications of the Russians (foreign agents), our laws state that without cause the NSA is not supposed to listen to or record that is talked about by an American. This obviously was not followed, evidenced by the illegal leaks to news organizations.

And thanks. It's not easy being a US conservative (and former Tea Party member) on this board. And I'm not above using whataboutery on occasion. :P

The NSA tend to abuse their powers so while they can warrant to monitor, say Sergey, they'll also monitor the Jack Johnson who was talking to Sergey.

In the case of Trump, it's likely that they may have been monitoring Russians and those that were compromised and as a result, Trump's conversations could have been a part of it. It's very shady on their part but it does raise some questions - mainly along the lines of "Why is Trump talking to and surrounded by so many people who seem to have such close ties to one of the US's main geopolitical rivals?".

Leroy42

I agree Robinph, each jounalist should repeat back to Trump/spokesperson what the line was and ask if they meant that or something else.

Real baby stuff but that is how they are asking to be treated.

26000 Elephants

Amerika wrote: »

“Wire tapping” is just a term used these days to describe surveillance of a person’s communications preformed over some form of technology. Actual wire taps in today’s age are not needed. Since 2005, the NSA has 24/7 access to the mainframe computers of all telecom providers, all computer service providers, and to all digital traffic carried by fiber optics in the US. NSA has the digital version of every telephone call made to, from and within the US... also texts, emails and other digital traffic. In addition, the NSA has given GCHQ full 24/7 access to its computers. No 10-D may be shocked over the allegations, but it isn’t too far a stretch to determine that information was leaked by someone who had access to them. How else did the newspapers get the information?

That is incorrect from a technical perspective.

It is impossible for a tier one carrier to 'record' every conversation it carries, the task would be onerous in the extreme. Its difficult enough to collate and correlate all the elements on the network that are involved in carrying data and calls from a billing perspective, never mind a surveillance one.
Billing and CDR data is stored, and the NSA have programs where they warehouse this data.

Active call data ( a recording as such) would need to be captured in line, and this would require intervention (and usually a specific request). This is probably more common than people would believe, but it is still targeted.

texts and other digital data are stored and are available. But usually only for a reasonably short time ( from carriers) The NSA may keep them indefinilty, but the job of trying to store, organise and index these would be impractical.

Hank Scorpio

26000 Elephants wrote: »

That is incorrect from a technical perspective.

It is impossible for a tier one carrier to 'record' every conversation it carries, the task would be onerous in the extreme. Its difficult enough to collate and correlate all the elements on the network that are involved in carrying data and calls from a billing perspective, never mind a surveillance one.
Billing and CDR data is stored, and the NSA have programs where they warehouse this data.

Active call data ( a recording as such) would need to be captured in line, and this would require intervention (and usually a specific request). This is probably more common than people would believe, but it is still targeted.

texts and other digital data are stored and are available. But usually only for a reasonably short time ( from carriers) The NSA may keep them indefinilty, but the job of trying to store, organise and index these would be impractical.

Christ, have you ever listened to William Binney ( the whistleblower who designed some of the programs ) , or Edward Snowden, the guy who leaked the name of the programs and what they do. They have both on several uncountable exchanges said EVERYTHING is recorded and stored. Your stance is an absolute denial of fact. The stance that OH NOES, THEY DON'T COLLECT EVERYTHING, is a fckin idiotic standpoint and usual liberal h0rsesh1t response when defending such programs. They have access to whatever they want. How did all those guys spy on their spouces for example? No court warrant, no oversight.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-surveillance-watchdog-idUSBRE98Q14G20130927

At least a dozen U.S. National Security Agency employees have been caught using secret government surveillance tools to spy on the emails or phone calls of their current or former spouses and lovers in the past decade

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)

Why is it to so hard for certain people to live in the real world, and what goes on? It's hilarious and disturbing at the same time. Deny deny deny for the putty made middle moral ground.

Hank Scorpio

Even Colbert is making fun of the hysteria

robinph

So what did Trump actually mean when he said "wiretapped" then? Bloke pretending to fix the TV putting a radio transmitter in his room or that the NSA collects everything on everybody? Where along that line did he mean by using that word?

What did he mean using the word "Obama"? Did he mean that Obama was the cable guy, that Obama had someone do it, that the administration had someone do it, that the security agencies do this as standard, that foreign agencies have access to the data as standard, that someone else from another foreign agency also has access to the data as standard (but not the UK despite saying that a couple of times)?

It seems to have become a very unclear tweet after all the multiple changes of direction of what was a very clear statement in the first place. Yet still no evidence of anything other than some commentators on Fox saying that various things could have happened, Trump hears that and takes it as the truth.

jooksavage

robinph wrote: »

So what did Trump actually mean when he said "wiretapped" then? Bloke pretending to fix the TV putting a radio transmitter in his room or that the NSA collects everything on everybody? Where along that line did he mean by using that word?

What did he mean using the word "Obama"? Did he mean that Obama was the cable guy, that Obama had someone do it, that the administration had someone do it, that the security agencies do this as standard, that foreign agencies have access to the data as standard, that someone else from another foreign agency also has access to the data as standard (but not the UK despite saying that a couple of times)?

It seems to have become a very unclear tweet after all the multiple changes of direction of what was a very clear statement in the first place. Yet still no evidence of anything other than some commentators on Fox saying that various things could have happened, Trump hears that and takes it as the truth.

Trying to extract meaning from these Tweets and pronouncements is a futile waste of energy. They have no intrinsic value upon utterance. His representatives's scattergun, reaching attempts at explaining them away are woefully unconvincing. It's gotten to the point where we can assume the the most powerful man in the world is bullsh***ing us all of the time. Some of his supporters think it's his prerogative to lie. Fine, what happens when there's a national calamity and the country needs a little sincerity?

Igotadose

jooksavage wrote: »

Fine, what happens when there's a national calamity and the country needs a little sincerity?

This. Trump, probably deliberately, keeps his audience (the US) 'on edge' all the time with the endless spewing, bad speeches - yes, bad, I've seen better US high school student speeches, a joke team of sycophants posing as his crack administrative staff. When the sh1t hits the fan - be it a natural disaster, or an military threat, why would you believe him at all? It's been lies lies lies and endless deflections from the other inhabitants of the clown car.

Let alone letting the tGOP run rampant in government and basically dismantling it per Bannon's instructions, precipitating the crisis.

The only certainty so far is Trump WILL screw up. Just a matter of when.

Mr.Micro

Igotadose wrote: »

This. Trump, probably deliberately, keeps his audience (the US) 'on edge' all the time with the endless spewing, bad speeches - yes, bad, I've seen better US high school student speeches, a joke team of sycophants posing as his crack administrative staff. When the sh1t hits the fan - be it a natural disaster, or an military threat, why would you believe him at all? It's been lies lies lies and endless deflections from the other inhabitants of the clown car.

Let alone letting the tGOP run rampant in government and basically dismantling it per Bannon's instructions, precipitating the crisis.

The only certainty so far is Trump WILL screw up. Just a matter of when.

After an awkward meeting with Angea Merkel, it is clear he is no politician. At 70 he still may learn a degree of decorum and diplomacy, but I doubt it. He appears to take everything personally and runs with it. Can the US afford such an unpredictable and volatile person going forward?

Elmer Blooker

Mr.Micro wrote: »

After an awkward meeting with Angea Merkel, it is clear he is no politician. At 70 he still may learn a degree of decorum and diplomacy, but I doubt it. He appears to take everything personally and runs with it. Can the US afford such an unpredictable and volatile person going forward?

Compared to the Nobel Peace Prize winner that came before him?
http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/01/18/510447582/after-8-years-of-unbroken-war-obama-hands-over-conflicts-to-trump

Leroy42

Trump really showed his lack of diplomacy skills, or even basic manners, yesterday on meeting Merkel. Those pointing out that he shook her hand before are missing the point. That is always the handshake photo. Always. He clearly refused to do it.

Whether it was a slight to her directly or because of some idea not to follow 'orders' of the press still just shows how he is incapable of separating his own priorities from that of the office he holds.

Whatever about how he deals with May or Enda, Merkel has proven that she is a very capable politician. In a political war there is only ever going to be one winner. Merkel handled it well,but she will have taken notice and will be awaiting her time to get him back.

Merkel understands that events have a habit of changing quickly and lets see how brash Trump will be in two years after the adrenaline of his win has worn off not only him but his supporters as things continue to get bogged down in the realities of office.

Trump is busy making enemies of those around him.

Leroy42

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Compared to the Nobel Peace Prize winner that came before him?
http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/01/18/510447582/after-8-years-of-unbroken-war-obama-hands-over-conflicts-to-trump

The Obama thread of over that way ---->

Water John

Gen Michael Hayden EX Head of CIA and NSA, gave a considered view as to what might have happened in the 'wiretap'. CNN source.
Say a Russian Oligarch is communicating with someone and an American citizen is mentioned. That is referred to as 'incidental'. This person's name is then not disclosed, unless a request is made an the internal lawyers agree.
This all happens regularly. The Head of Intelligence won't be told this unless it is warranted.
DT could pick up the phone to the Head of Intel and ask has he himself or anyone else of his associates come to their attention as an 'incidental'.
This could be done at any time and would have cleared up this, if DT wanted to.

ECO_Mental

Leroy42 wrote: »

Trump really showed his lack of diplomacy skills, or even basic manners, yesterday on meeting Merkel. Those pointing out that he shook her hand before are missing the point. That is always the handshake photo. Always. He clearly refused to do it.

Whether it was a slight to her directly or because of some idea not to follow 'orders' of the press still just shows how he is incapable of separating his own priorities from that of the office he holds.

Whatever about how he deals with May or Enda, Merkel has proven that she is a very capable politician. In a political war there is only ever going to be one winner. Merkel handled it well,but she will have taken notice and will be awaiting her time to get him back.

Merkel understands that events have a habit of changing quickly and lets see how brash Trump will be in two years after the adrenaline of his win has worn off not only him but his supporters as things continue to get bogged down in the realities of office.

Trump is busy making enemies of those around him.

I think he just hates having to do these meetings, what he wants to be doing is golfing and chasing skirt. It all comes back to he really didn't want to become president. It was all to raise his profile and when he lost he could "hurl from the ditch" and claim voter fraud etc etc. They say he has an incredibly low attention span, has never read a book and won't even read the daily security brief that's why you only see him react to fox and cable news stories he is only capable of watching TV. He is also used to doing whatever he wants so when he HAS to do formal meetings and conferences he hates it. I am getting great pleasure out of it to think he is suffering living in that bubble in the WH.

But that was very ignorant the way he acted in the oval office, but he IS an incredibly ignorant man anyway. You could also see going into that press conference that he didn't want to be there because he knew he would actually have to answer a question. Now be did pick out a few softball questions for his own turn but when the German reporters' asked him about the wiretaps he got very angry.

He is playing senior hurling now and not shouting from the ditch like he loves doing. The thing is when you play senior Hurling and you don't have the skills you will get found out and you will play dirty and play the man not the ball. Trumpski doesn't have the skills to play with the big boys so he will play dirty like all junior B hatchet men.....

Water John

Good, real Irish explanation there, ECO.

26000 Elephants

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Christ, have you ever listened to William Binney ( the whistleblower who designed some of the programs ) , or Edward Snowden, the guy who leaked the name of the programs and what they do. They have both on several uncountable exchanges said EVERYTHING is recorded and stored. Your stance is an absolute denial of fact. The stance that OH NOES, THEY DON'T COLLECT EVERYTHING, is a fckin idiotic standpoint and usual liberal h0rsesh1t response when defending such programs. They have access to whatever they want. How did all those guys spy on their spouces for example? No court warrant, no oversight.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-surveillance-watchdog-idUSBRE98Q14G20130927

At least a dozen U.S. National Security Agency employees have been caught using secret government surveillance tools to spy on the emails or phone calls of their current or former spouses and lovers in the past decade

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)

Why is it to so hard for certain people to live in the real world, and what goes on? It's hilarious and disturbing at the same time. Deny deny deny for the putty made middle moral ground.

I work in telecoms, have done so for 14 years. Mostly mobile, some pots. Worked with AT&T, AWS, verizon and Rural Celular over the years. I know their equipment and its capabilities. Ive worked on a few RFP's from the NSA and I know exactly what they are capable of. But recordings of every single domestic and inward/outward call in the US? No.

And I now also know that you have serious issues correlating your beliefs with what actually goes on in reality. That is more indicative of being a "****ing idiot" than those who have an understanding what is and is not possible.

btw, as an fyi, the cases you cited above are examples of targeted surveillance. This, of course , does go on.

Inquitus

Not sure where he thinks he's going with this, NATO isn't a protection racket, and this is clearly not how it works.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/843088518339612673

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/843090516283723776

Leroy42

What the bests he didn't have the balls to actually say this to her face, or if he did that Merkel told him where to go with himself.

Actually, thinking about how petulant he was during the photo op it wouldn't surprise me if he tried to act the hard man and demanded Germany pay more and Merkel told to eff off.

SO he takes to Twitter to show how hard he is.

Pathetic

wildgreen

G19 seem to have turned the other cheek for the Great One (G1) who regards climate change as a hoax. If Sir Donald decided the Earth was flat, I think the G19 would be willing to accommodate him at least to the extent of to stop calling it round.

Unbelievable how rude he was to Frau Merkel.