Wiretapping

[lefty]

So....no evidence? :lol

So Beisbol fan lied ...isn't that a major offense for a U.S prez?

[baseline bum]

That's much smaller than Dear Leader's lies on providing everyone insurance and not blowing up medicaid. Oh well, at least it's his strongest supporters that are going to be the ones who bear the brunt of the damage from his reverse robin hood Trumpcare.

[rmt]

That's much smaller than Dear Leader's lies on providing everyone insurance and not blowing up medicaid. Oh well, at least it's his strongest supporters that are going to be the ones who bear the brunt of the damage from his reverse robin hood Trumpcare.

There may be some of us who are thinking of the future of the country (you young people), know that this proposed health care law will adversely affect them personally, but still think that in the case of 5/4.8:1 instead of ACA's 3:1, it is better to have a true reflection of the risk - after all, if we old people use the most healthcare (and can more afford it), we should be paying the most - not forcing you young people (who are starting out and saddled with college debt) to foot the bill for us. ACA was the Robin Hood law - stealing from the young and healthy to pay for the old and sick - this proposal is just putting it back to the correct risk.

[baseline bum]

There may be some of us who are thinking of the future of the country (you young people), know that this proposed health care law will adversely affect them personally, but still think that in the case of 5/4.8:1 instead of ACA's 3:1, it is better to have a true reflection of the risk - after all, if we old people use the most healthcare (and can more afford it), we should be paying the most - not forcing you young people (who are starting out and saddled with college debt) to foot the bill for us. ACA was the Robin Hood law - stealing from the young and healthy to pay for the old and sick - this proposal is just putting it back to the correct risk.

LOL when tax breaks for the rich are sold as looking out for the nation's future.

[rmt]

LOL when tax breaks for the rich are sold as looking out for the nation's future.

I wasn't aware that it was the RICH who were Trump's "strongest supporters that are going to be the ones who bear the brunt of the damage from his reverse robin hood Trumpcare." So I assumed you were talking about those you consider uneducated, old (but not yet on Medicare), etc.

[baseline bum]

I wasn't aware that it was the RICH who were Trump's "strongest supporters that are going to be the ones who bear the brunt of the damage from his reverse robin hood Trumpcare." So I assumed you were talking about those you consider uneducated, old (but not yet on Medicare), etc.

Have you been sniffing glue today? I'm talking about older low income people who will lose insurance under Trumpcare.

[rmt]

Have you been sniffing glue today? I'm talking about older low income people who will lose insurance under Trumpcare.

One of us must be, and I don't think it's me. Didn't you post this in response to my post?


LOL when tax breaks for the rich are sold as looking out for the nation's future.

[baseline bum]

One of us must be, and I don't think it's me. Didn't you post this in response to my post?

Must be you. Lots of Trump's core voters losing their insurance so Trump can give tax breaks to the rich is a pretty shitty health plan.

[rmt]

I think you introduced the rich and tax breaks to deflect - we were previously talking about older Trump voters who would be hurt by the current proposal and the nation's future (the young). My point is that the current proposal is resetting what ACA turned on its ear - the correct rating of young, old, healthy and sick. Obamacare is what created those extra taxes on the rich - now, you call this current proposal "tax breaks to the rich"

[baseline bum]

I think you introduced the rich and tax breaks to deflect - we were previously talking about older Trump voters who would be hurt by the current proposal and the nation's future (the young). My point is that the current proposal is resetting what ACA turned on its ear - the correct rating of young, old, healthy and sick. Obamacare is what created those extra taxes on the rich - now, you call this current proposal "tax breaks to the rich"

In addition to the explicit tax cut for the rich in Trumpcare, every cent Trumpcare cuts off the budget is going to be lost in his tax cuts for the rich next.

LOL deflecting. Every piece of the GOP's sociopathic budget that kills off the safety net is supposed to be for the good of the children. What a load of horseshit. Medicare vouchers were supposed to be for everyone's children back in 2012 when they were really to cut spending to make room for more tax cuts for the rich. You can't even front that the GOP wants anything but tax cuts for the rich when Romney was whining about income tax paid by the lower classes in the 2012 election.

[ElNono]

There may be some of us who are thinking of the future of the country (you young people), know that this proposed health care law will adversely affect them personally, but still think that in the case of 5/4.8:1 instead of ACA's 3:1, it is better to have a true reflection of the risk - after all, if we old people use the most healthcare (and can more afford it), we should be paying the most - not forcing you young people (who are starting out and saddled with college debt) to foot the bill for us. ACA was the Robin Hood law - stealing from the young and healthy to pay for the old and sick - this proposal is just putting it back to the correct risk.

If you can't control costs, the risk isn't changing, for your generation and those coming right after. Removing access to healthcare to poor people doesn't bring down cost, it simply makes healthcare only available to those that can afford it. It's true that ACA didn't do shit about cost, and it was just as flawed, but at least it did provide wider access to healthcare.

[ElNono]

In addition to the explicit tax cut for the rich in Trumpcare, every cent Trumpcare cuts off the budget is going to be lost in his tax cuts for the rich next.

LOL deflecting. Every piece of the GOP's sociopathic budget that kills off the safety net is supposed to be for the good of the children. What a load of horseshit. Medicare vouchers were supposed to be for everyone's children back in 2012 when they were really to cut spending to make room for more tax cuts for the rich. You can't even front that the GOP wants anything but tax cuts for the rich when Romney was whining about income tax paid by the lower classes in the 2012 election.

Not only that, but they have this apparent constant bitterness with the fact that if you're too poor or a fucking convict, you get healthcare. The fixation with the 'moochers' and the 'welfare queens'. It's actually hilarious when guys like Wild Chodebra pretends to be upset because somebody brings up 'class warfare', but dudes like him can't stop thinking about that. :lol

[monosylab1k]

http://i67.tinypic.com/a2x855.jpg

[djohn2oo8]

That's much smaller than Dear Leader's lies on providing everyone insurance and not blowing up medicaid. Oh well, at least it's his strongest supporters that are going to be the ones who bear the brunt of the damage from his reverse robin hood Trumpcare.
he lied about wiretapping, that's grounds for impeachment.

[baseline bum]

he lied about wiretapping, that's grounds for impeachment.

I'm sure Ryan will get right on that.

[AaronY]

842196143727607809

[DMX7]

So....no evidence? :lol

So Beisbol fan lied ...isn't that a major offense for a U.S prez?

Yeah, it is. But the GOP in control of congress won't do anything because they need his signature on their stuff.

[boutons_deux]

Yeah, it is. But the GOP in control of congress won't do anything because they need his signature on their stuff.

Pence would veto nothing

[djohn2oo8]

I'm sure Ryan will get right on that.

GOP will turn on Trump. Trump is already blaming Ryan for the Healthcare failure.

[baseline bum]

Trump is already blaming Ryan for the Healthcare failure.

Link?

[DMX7]

Pence would veto nothing

They can't impeach Trump. It would piss off their base if they impeached him. And if it failed, Trump would go after them all personally and in a spectacular way.

[SnakeBoy]

he lied about wiretapping, that's grounds for impeachment.

lol How so?

[AaronY]

Clinton was impeached for lying in the house but opposite party had the house then and it was struck down in the senate so it's been tried before

[AaronY]

Would need 67 Senate votes for impeachment iirc so total pipe dream

[AaronY]

Clinton lied under oath though iirc not on Twitter obv

[Blake]

CARLSON: So on March 4, 6:35 in the morning, you're 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: Well, I've been reading about things. I read in, I think it was January 20 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've been seeing a lot of things.

Now, for the most part, I'm not going to discuss it, because we have it before the committee and we will be submitting things before the committee very soon that hasn't been submitted as of yet. But it's potentially a very serious situation.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/03/16/donald-trump-explained-twitter-the-universe-and-everything-to-tucker-carlson/?utm_term=.c51ee1b359ef

So he's been on this wiretapping rant because of something he saw in FAKE NEWS.

Lolsmh our president

[lefty]

Yeah, it is. But the GOP in control of congress won't do anything because they need his signature on their stuff.

I see
Thanks

[da_suns_fan]

Spicer is having a meltdown today on this. Trying to bring up previous NY times reports...most of which are concerning Russian financial servers etc.

He's doing the Chewbacca defense.

[spurraider21]

Clinton was impeached for lying in the house but opposite party had the house then and it was struck down in the senate so it's been tried beforeclinton was under oath. it's a big difference. lying isn't a crime, perjury is

edit: saw ur follow up post after

[baseline bum]

clinton was under oath. it's a big difference. lying isn't a crime, perjury is


If it's such a big deal why is Sessions still the AG?

[spurraider21]

If it's such a big deal why is Sessions still the AG?because he can weasel out of it due to the context of the question. its shady and misleading, but i dont think there's enough to go on

[TSA]

Interesting timing to release

Joint Unclassified Statement Before the Committee on the Judiciary United States House of Representatives at a Hearing Entitled “Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act”

https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/testimonies/227-congressional-testimonies-2017/1490-joint-unclassified-statement-before-the-committee-on-the-judiciary-united-states-house-of-representatives-at-a-hearing-entitled-%E2%80%9Csection-702-of-the-fisa-amendments-act%E2%80%9D

[Quadzilla99]

Lol pizza boy still reading tea leaves

[Quadzilla99]

842495578311409666
842517941690290176

[Reck]

842495578311409666
842517941690290176

The right is so paranoid they give Obama extra credit. :lol

So now he can order other country's top intelligence agency to spy for him. Obama be ballin. Big dick Obama. :lol

[lefty20]

Is it really a lie if Trump wholeheartedly believes it to be true?

[TSA]

The right is so paranoid they give Obama extra credit. :lol

So now he can order other country's top intelligence agency to spy for him. Obama be ballin. Big dick Obama. :lolread up on the CANUKUS agreement

https://luxexumbra.blogspot.com/2017/01/atipper-6-1957-division-of-effort.html?m=1

More from the Access to Information (ATI) files:

Some nice information here from the Isbister Report (Intelligence Operations in the Canadian Government, 9 November 1970) about how CBNRC (now CSE) set its intelligence processing tasks and priorities at that time:



Note especially the revelation that "the division of main responsibilities for SIGINT tasks [was] reached at a Tripartite (US-UK-Canada) SIGINT Conference in 1957 in the interests of avoiding unnecessary duplication. A working arrangement for the allocation of tasks was proposed by CBNRC/GCHQ/NSA. It was approved by [the Director of Communications Security] and reported in October 1957 to [the Communications Security Board] which exercised policy control before [the Intelligence Policy Committee] was formed."

A 1990 document (The Canadian Intelligence Community, 16 March 1990; discussed here earlier) adds the further detail that "Canada undertook to bear the main responsibility for the collection and analysis of SIGINT on the Soviet Arctic."



The passage also suggests that the 1957 division of effort may have been part of a larger Canada-United Kingdom-United States CANUKUS Agreement, the exact date of which has never been clear to me. (Tripartite COMINT conferences were already being held by the three countries by 1950.)

The allied division of effort was subsequently expanded to all of the Five Eyes members and covered "not only the exchange and exploitation of intelligence on Communist countries, but also on the most important strategic areas of the world."

Canada's decision to largely abandon its cryptanalysis program in 1957 was probably related to the task-allocation decisions made by the three partners that year. (CSE's cryptanalytic capabilities were revived in the 1980s.)

The end of the Cold War may well have spelled the end to any formal division of effort among the Five Eyes allies.

CSE's statutory mandate, added to the National Defence Act in 2001, specifies that CSE foreign intelligence collection must be done "in accordance with government of Canada intelligence priorities", and CSE Chief John Adams, testifying in 2007, denied that any sort of formal division of effort then existed among the allies:
The Chairman: Do protocols exist where you have divided up the spectrum, as it were?

Mr. Adams: No, they do not, senator. It is based purely on our priorities as defined by the government.

The Chairman: Allied countries do not get together and say, ``You seem to be doing fairly well in this area, but we have a bit of a gap over here; any chance of you moving into it?''

Mr. Adams: No, we do not. If it is important to Canada, we will be there, if we can get there, obviously.

In discussions, as I said earlier, knowing the priorities that we have, we would share if there are mutual priorities and mutual national interests.
That being said, I rather suspect that, formally or informally, one of our national intelligence priorities is to make sure that we continue to collect enough intelligence of sufficient interest to our Five Eyes allies to ensure that they continue to see value in sharing the intelligence they collect with us.

[spurraider21]

Is it really a lie if Trump wholeheartedly believes it to be true?sounds like we're back to wmd's

[Reck]

Having to not only retract comments made about the British spying on behalf of America, The WH was forced to apologized. TSA :lmao

[Trill Clinton]

So a bunch of tea n crumpets eating brits forced the whitehouse to retract and apologize? Sad!

America is looking sofT as fuck right now smh.

[TSA]

Having to not only retract comments made about the British spying on behalf of America, The WH was forced to apologized. TSA :lmao

You'll need to find a direct quote from Spicer.

As of now it's just "sources"

"Intelligence sources told The Telegraph that both Mr Spicer and General McMaster, the US National Security Adviser, have apologised over the claims. "The apology came direct from them," a source said."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/17/us-makes-formal-apology-britain-white-house-accuses-gchq-wiretapping/

[TSA]

Having to not only retract comments made about the British spying on behalf of America, The WH was forced to apologized. TSA :lmao

You blew your wad early.

842738200653324289

[Reck]

You blew your wad early.

842738200653324289

Oh shut the fuck up already.

They apologized. Had to. It was reported on by more credible news sites and networks.

If they didn't, then surely Spicer and group will continue to say it was them..if they dont, clearly they did issue it and had to eat it.

[TSA]

Oh shut the fuck up already.

They apologized. Had to. It was reported on by more credible news sites and networks.

If they didn't, then surely Spicer and group will continue to say it was them..if they dont, clearly they did issue it and had to eat it.

Please reveal your credible sources and be sure they don't link back to the Telegraph article I linked.

[mavsfan1000]

because he can weasel out of it due to the context of the question. its shady and misleading, but i dont think there's enough to go on
The question was very deceptive. It was really a 2 part question. He should've said yes he spoke with the Russians. No they didn't talk about the Campaign. Screw Al Franken trying to trip up Sessions under oath.

[mavsfan1000]

GOP will turn on Trump. Trump is already blaming Ryan for the Healthcare failure.
:lol He just said he is 100% behind the AHC Act.

[monosylab1k]

The question was very deceptive. It was really a 2 part question. He should've said yes he spoke with the Russians. No they didn't talk about the Campaign. Screw Al Franken trying to trip up Sessions under oath.

Franken never asked Sessions if he personally ever talked to the Russians :lmao Sessions volunteered that that information.

:cry Al Franken deceptively got me to lie to a question he never asked :cry so deceptive :cry

[rastaspur]

Franken never asked Sessions if he personally ever talked to the Russians :lmao Sessions volunteered that that information.

:cry Al Franken deceptively got me to lie to a question he never asked :cry so deceptive :cry

:lol

[mavsfan1000]

Franken never asked Sessions if he personally ever talked to the Russians :lmao Sessions volunteered that that information.

:cry Al Franken deceptively got me to lie to a question he never asked :cry so deceptive :cry
Sessions said he never talked to the Russians about the Trump Campaign. Which is true. The last part is implied based on the question asked. You are just angry he wants to criminalize Marijuana. :lol

[TSA]

Trump to Merkel: we have something in common, wiretapping :lol

[monosylab1k]

Sessions said he never talked to the Russians about the Trump Campaign. Which is true. The last part is implied based on the question asked. You are just angry he wants to criminalize Marijuana. :lol

And Franken never asked him about his personal interaction with the Russians. Sessions lied for no reason, not because :cry the question was so deceptive :cry

and I could care less about marijuana.

[TSA]

Nunes asking all IC heads to reveal Americans who could have been caught up in foreign intel gathering. Threatening subpoenas.

[mavsfan1000]

And Franken never asked him about his personal interaction with the Russians. Sessions lied for no reason, not because :cry the question was so deceptive :cry

and I could care less about marijuana.
You are free to your opinion. But your opinion is WRONG!

[Reck]

Please reveal your credible sources and be sure they don't link back to the Telegraph article I linked.


A senior administration official told CNN that Spicer and McMaster offered what amounted to an apology to the British government.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/17/politics/gchq-trump-wiretap-denial/

You're like a mule. You always refuse facts in favor of your own fantasy. :lol choosing to believe WH didn't apologize over reports that says yes, they did.

[TSA]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/17/politics/gchq-trump-wiretap-denial/

You're like a mule. You always refuse facts in favor of your own fantasy. :lol choosing to believe WH didn't apologize over reports that says yes, they did.

I asked for a reputable source and you give me a :lol CNN article with unnamed sources :lol

Try again

[mavsfan1000]

I asked for a reputable source and you give me a :lol CNN article with unnamed sources :lol

Try again
Yep Fake News source.

[spurraider21]

The question was very deceptive. It was really a 2 part question. He should've said yes he spoke with the Russians. No they didn't talk about the Campaign. Screw Al Franken trying to trip up Sessions under oath.:lol a comedian tripping up the attorney general during a legal proceeding :lol

[Reck]

I asked for a reputable source and you give me a :lol CNN article with unnamed sources :lol

Try again

It is reputable. They got sources. It isn't fake news. It is what happened.

I'm not going to argue this with you all day. Live in your pizza world fantasy.

[DMX7]

Trump to Merkel: we have something in common, wiretapping :lol

No one laughed except his little posse.

[TSA]

It is reputable. They got sources. It isn't fake news. It is what happened.

I'm not going to argue this with you all day. Live in your pizza world fantasy.It isn't reputable.

What makes a CNN unnamed source reputable? This is the same CNN that has been saying Trump colluded with the Russians.

You're not going to argue this because you realized you can't find a named source, specifically Spicer saying he apologized.

[Blake]

The problem starts with the White House administration being a group of nonreputable morons.

[Reck]

It isn't reputable.

What makes a CNN unnamed source reputable? This is the same CNN that has been saying Trump colluded with the Russians.

You're not going to argue this because you realized you can't find a named source, specifically Spicer saying he apologized.

LOL this dipshit.

Sources aren't named. They're call anonymous for a reason. Dumb fuck.

[TSA]

LOL this dipshit.

Sources aren't named. They're call anonymous for a reason. Dumb fuck.

Julian Borger is the world affairs editor for the Guardian. He put his name on it and said an apology never happened. Julian Borgen trumps any CNN unnamed source.
https://www.theguardian.com/profile/julianborger

:lol CNN unnamed source
:lol not going to argue this anymore
:lol instant response

[Quadzilla99]

Dear God, Trump's source is conspiracy nut Larry Johnson

https://mobile.twitter.com/EsotericCD/status/842938063236030466

[hater]

The problem starts with the White House administration being a group of nonreputable morons.

Barrack and Clinton had as bad or worse white house tbqh

Bill even found the time to fuck a fat intern in the oval office :lmao

[cd021]

The question was very deceptive. It was really a 2 part question. He should've said yes he spoke with the Russians. No they didn't talk about the Campaign. Screw Al Franken trying to trip up Sessions under oath.

I listened to that part of the confirmation hearing; Franken asked a pretty straight forward question and Sessions answered it, it turned out that he lied. Blame Franken though:lol

[mavsfan1000]

I listened to that part of the confirmation hearing; Franken asked a pretty straight forward question and Sessions answered it, it turned out that he lied. Blame Franken though:lol
It wasn't a lie though. He didn't communicate with the Russians about the Trump Campaign.

[boutons_deux]

Napolatino got his obama-got-brits-to-wiretap-trash lie from Putin

[Blake]

Barrack and Clinton had as bad or worse white house tbqh

Bill even found the time to fuck a fat intern in the oval office :lmao

No

[Spurminator]

Remember the wiretapp?

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/justice-department-confirms-no-evidence-obama-wiretapped-trump-tower/article/2633275
Justice Department confirms no evidence Obama wiretapped Trump Tower

[spurraider21]

Inb4 justice department is part of deep state coup

[Thread]

Remember the >>>>>>>>>"wiretapp"<<<<<<<<<?

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/justice-department-confirms-no-evidence-obama-wiretapped-trump-tower/article/2633275
Justice Department confirms no evidence Obama wiretapped Trump Tower

>>>>>>>>>Sure.<<<<<<<<<