Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: it was GCHQ wot dunnit

By: Cactus Flower in ALEA | Recommend this post (0)
Sat, 18 Mar 17 10:43 PM | 74 view(s)
Boardmark this board | The Trust Matrix 		Msg. 21380 of 54959
(This msg. is a reply to 21379 by Cactus Flower)
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

"GCHQ practically never responds to stories about its operations. But the implications of this one are severe. There would be no way for the NSA and GCHQ, which are joined at the hip, to continue their partnership if GCHQ was willing to interfere in the US political process.

On Friday, 10 Downing Street said it had received assurances from the White House that it will not repeat the allegation, which suggests that the White House did not realize the implications of what it said.

The context matters here. Spicer repeated Napolitano’s allegation for the same reason Napolitano made it: to defend Trump’s evidence-free assertion, on 4 March, that Obama had Trump’s team placed under surveillance.

Spicer did so while reading off a long list of news reports, both credible and not, about aspects of surveillance intercepts related to Trump and Russia. Spicer’s implication is that if Trump was wrong – which he did not concede – it was because the journalists calling attention to Trump’s error lack credibility. Not a single credible news account Spicer read supports Trump’s 4 March claim. Napolitano’s did.

The context of Trump’s 4 March claim matters as well. Trump accused Obama of felonious surveillance – presidents cannot legally order their political opponents spied upon – to discredit evidence that Russia sought to aid his election.

That evidence of Russian interference, and the fallout from it, has been endorsed by three US intelligence agencies. It prompted Trump’s national security adviser to resign. It made his chief of staff, Reince Priebus, inquire about enlisting the FBI to refute news reports. It caused his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, to recuse himself from official inquiries. And the point of Trump’s claim, unequivocally denied by Obama, is to say all of this is smoke conjured by Trump’s political opponents.

One option always available to the White House is to forthrightly concede [sic] Trump was wrong."

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/17/donald-trump-gchq-obama-wiretapping-claims-uk-us-alliance

» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: it was GCHQ wot dunnit
By: Cactus Flower in ALEA
Sat, 18 Mar 17 9:22 PM 		Msg. 21379 of 54959

Napolitano ought not to matter. He's just a face on tv.

The US intelligence agencies have clearly told the house and senate committees the wire tapping claims are nonsense.

Trump was originally passing along a conspiracy theory from Breitbart because he's gullible. But he was in a position to check the truth of the story. He didn't. So this converts gossip to lie status. He would have shared his evidence with the house and senate himself if there was any evidence supporting the claim.

GCHQ is just the latest defence of the original lie after he realised the US intelligence agencies had revealed the truth. There was no wire tap. The latest defence is no better than the original claim. It's a lie heaped upon a lie.

The real issue is that Trump's a serial liar who will do anything to avoid admitting it. Including damaging the US' relationships with its allies. Crazy stuff.

At this point, I presume he is lying about everything he ever talks about. It will be a nice surprise if he tells the truth one day.

« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next