back to article FBI, NSA top brass: We've seen jack squat to back up Trump's claims of Obama wiretaps

Monday mornings are never pleasant, are they? Take FBI director James Comey and head of the NSA Admiral Mike Rogers, for example, who kicked off their week by being grilled by the US House Select Intelligence Committee. The meeting was scheduled to give Congress an update on claims of Russian meddling in the presidential …

This post has been deleted by its author

Silver badge

Leaks

In my view leaks are a public service.

They happen everywhere, and are often the only way mere citizens can find out what their Government is up to.

22
2
Silver badge

Re: Leaks

But not intelligence leaks. Those can damage a government, can affect the lives of people in the intelligence community and, most importantly, can also affect those living in fascist dictatorships such as Russia who are passing information back to the West.

Mind you, if you want to stop all the leaks in the USA all you need to do is to take Trump's phone away from him or shut down Twitter.

7
1

Re: Leaks

Snowden - damaging intelligence leak or enlightening public service?

4
1
Silver badge

What I find interesting

Is that these big chiefs of intelligence can rock up and state an absolute - and huge swathes of people can shrug their shoulders and just see this as one side of the argument.

Now I personally believe Trump is a delusional-narcissistic-fantasist - but what I can admire him for is being the first 'leader' who has recognized that in this post-wikileaks and all the rest age, realizes he can step up and call them liars to their faces and we collectively shrug and go "yeah, we know, but maybe they aren't this time?"

They burnt their integrity a while back, but this is the first time we're actually having to see them pay for doing so.

Sitting back a bit, is there actually anybody we can trust any more? A bit further back still, I realize we've kindof collectively brought this all on ourselves and that the only way out of this is to decide we're going to come down with custodial sentences and personal humiliation on anybody who, bluntly, "lies"

Reap what you sow, and all that.

13
2
Anonymous Coward

There has been a very curious omission here, though

As of yet, nobody has asked James Comey why he saw fit to break pre-election protocol with reporting on findings on Hillary's email, but did NOT do so regarding the investigation of the Trump team despite that too being in progress since July 2016?

In other words, who is going to investigate the FBI director about active partisan interference with the electoral process?

19
3
Silver badge

Re: There has been a very curious omission here, though -- and the rationale --

-- given is that the Clinton investigation was "complete" while the Trump investigation is "in progress".

I'm not sure I buy it, but that's the rationale Comey gave. IIRC.

The challenge of good governance in a "post-truth" world: if belief in objective fact is destroyed, if the very existence of fact is denied, then there is no rational basis for decision-making. When Trump-fact rules, decisions are based on ego, personality, and emotion.

7
0
Silver badge

Re: There has been a very curious omission here, though

It is water under the bridge at this point. It would be more appropriate for congress to pass a law directing the FBI in what circumstances they have a duty to provide or withhold such information about ongoing investigations, so it isn't up to whoever happens to be running it at the time. Had Obama appointed a partisan democrat to the position into a republican, a different decision might have been made, but decisions like that should not be political so clear guidelines need to be established.

3
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: There has been a very curious omission here, though

It is water under the bridge at this point. It would be more appropriate for congress to pass a law directing the FBI in what circumstances they have a duty to provide or withhold such information about ongoing investigations

There IS a protocol, Comey broke it..

4
2
Silver badge

Perhaps we should be thinking that GCHQ is actually very good at covering their tracks and/or the FBI/NSA are rubbish at investigating stuff? Now that would be a turn up for the books !!!

Personally I think Trump is a twat and someone should shout at his tweets "FAKE NEWS everyone, it's FAKE NEWS" as he does to everything he doesn't like.

12
1
Silver badge

President Trump's tweets are more worthless than most, and it would be better if we all simply ignored them.

6
0
Silver badge

GCHQ might not have wiretapped trump tower, but if they weren't bugging the shit out of him last time he was in Scotland then they weren't doing their jobs.

1
0
Bronze badge

Maybe worthless, but not valueless.

Where there's muck, there's brass.

One enterprising group created a twitterbot to use sentiment analysis of Trumptweets to its benefit,

shorting stocks of firms that received disdain from POTUS. All for the Puppies, of course.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/01/31/trump-and-dump-when-potus-tweets-and-stocks-fall-this-animal-charity-benefits/

1
0
Silver badge

I watched nearly all of the hearing, and then read some of the opinion that passes for news (NY Times, Washington Post).

Congratulations to The Register for a report that was both more succinct and more accurate.

5
0

FBI and NSA not innocent

Of course the FBI and NSA are claiming they "see no evidence" of Obama's ordered wiretapping of Trump. If they admit to it, they admit their complicity. Just who the hell does anyone think orchestrated the taps? Ask yourself who it was that proposed to "the One" that a wiretap might be a good idea in the first place? Imagine how inside info on Trump financials and plans could benefit some/anyone's personal pocketbook? Then examine records to see how many politicians - and Directors of TLA's- ad-infinitum - have entered government service much "poorer" than they are when they leave.

0
13
WTF?

Trump-Kremlin links probe?

"[Comey] was not asked why he went public, twice, about investigations into the Clinton campaign while keeping the Trump-Kremlin links probe quiet."

The elephant in the room.

4
1
Silver badge

The true story

While nobody may have directly wiretapped anyone involved with Trump it's fairly certain that any calls made internationally were recorded by the vast mass surveillance machine. So it's possible and even likely that calls from Trump's team were recorded without specifically having been ordered. After all, in order to avoid recording calls from certain parties they'd have to which calls were made by those parties to know which calls not to record. Welcome to Big Brother's world.

Sorry Trump, just because you've got a massive ego it doesn't mean you weren't bycatch.

1
0
Silver badge

Funny isn't it

On one hand we must clamp down hard on leaks and leakers, and on the other tiny hand we must tweet our support for Julian Assange.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Where's the evidence?

Anyone who leaks any hard evidence is guaranteed to be p̶r̶o̶s̶e̶c̶u̶t̶e̶d̶ sentenced under the Espionage Act and have an all expenses paid trip to some third world black site.

Truth - the first casualty of war.

And they ARE at war.

1
1

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017