Furious British Spy Agency Slams "Utterly Ridiculous" Claim It Wiretapped Trump

Tyler Durden's picture

After a report by Fox News' Judge Napolitano that UK spies helped Obama spy on president Trump during the presidential campaign, the British spy agency GCHQ issued a rare and angry denial of the "utterly ridiculous" allegation that it eavesdropped on President Donald Trump during the election campaign.

In a rare public statement, the furious Britain's eavesdropping agency said the charge, made first on Tuesday by Fox News analyst judge Andrew Napolitano, was "utterly ridiculous".  The signal intelligence agency went public after Spicer quoted judge Napolitano to support Trump's claim that he was wiretapped by President Barack Obama.

In a testy press briefing Thursday, Spicer cited former New Jersey judge Andrew Napolitano, who alleged on Fox News that Obama "went outside the chain of command" and used the British agency so that there were "no American fingerprints" on surveillance of Trump. Spicer said it was one of many reports that suggest the president's claims "merit looking into." It brought a swift, highly unusual and furious public response from GCHQ, which is broadly similar to America's NSA and monitors global communications.

"Recent allegations made by media commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano about GCHQ being asked to conduct 'wire tapping' against the then President Elect are nonsense," a spokesman for GCHQ said, adding that "they are utterly ridiculous and should be ignored."

Traditionally, GCHQ never comments on criticism of its work beyond saying it always operates under a strict legal framework.

Earlier in the week, Reuters reported that an unidentified British security official had denied the allegation that GCHQ had eavesdropped on Trump.

Trump, who became president in January, tweeted earlier this month that his Democratic predecessor had wiretapped him during the late stages of the 2016 campaign. The Republican president offered no evidence for the allegation, which an Obama spokesman said was "simply false".

As discussed earlier in the week, on the "Fox & Friends" program, Napolitano, a political commentator and former New Jersey judge, said that rather than ordering U.S. agencies to spy on Trump, Obama obtained transcripts of Trump's conversations from Britain's Government Communications Headquarters, or GCHQ, the equivalent of the U.S. National Security Agency, which monitors overseas electronic communications. On Thursday, Sean Spicer quoted Napolitano's comment on GCHQ.

GCHQ, based in a futuristic building named the doughnut because of its shape located in Cheltenham in western England, is one of three main British spy agencies alongside the MI6 Secret Intelligence Service and the MI5 Security Service.

The White House maintains Trump will ultimately be vindicated over his March 4 tweet that "Obama had my 'wires tapped' in Trump Tower," despite bipartisan statements from both the House and Senate intelligence committee leaders saying they had seen no evidence, yet.

To be sure, for now the heated debate boils down to "he said, she said", as neither said has offered evidence to justify its claims.

Spicer emphasized that investigations were incomplete and that Trump had meant general surveillance when he wrote about wiretapping. Napolitano repeated his theory on his personal website, saying the NSA had given GCHQ "the digital versions of all electronic communications made in America in 2016, including Trump's."

"So by bypassing all American intelligence services, Obama would have had access to what he wanted with no Obama administration fingerprints," he wrote.

Obama has already waved away Trump's claim as "simply false."

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Belrev's picture

That does not stop Brits from blaming Russia for hacking western democracies


beemasters's picture

"Recent allegations made by media commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano about GCHQ being asked to conduct 'wire tapping' against the then President Elect are nonsense."

So was the service offered instead of requested? Please clarify.

BigFatUglyBubble's picture

If I was a giant I would pinch a loaf right off in that courtyard.  Looks like a nice spot.

Arnold's picture

Hemorrhoid relief doughnut?

AlaricBalth's picture

The GCHQ says "We work within a strict legal framework."
The CIA says "We are bound by Constitution of the United States"

A well known propaganda tool is to state a narrative, repeatedly and boisterously, and the people will believe it.

"A lie told once remains a lie but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth."
Joseph Goebbels

The business of spycraft is lying.

Low-Withers's picture

Isn't 5 Eyes an agreement to work around both British Legal Framework and the US Constitution.

The former NSA contractor Edward Snowden described the Five Eyes as a "supra-national intelligence organisation that doesn't answer to the known laws of its own countries".[6] Documents leaked by Snowden in 2013 revealed that the FVEY have been spying on one another's citizens and sharing the collected information with each other in order to circumvent restrictive domestic regulations on surveillance of citizens.


RiverRoad's picture

It's a spook's job to lie, prevaricate and feign so it's confirmed all right.

SoDamnMad's picture

PRICELESS, (I love semantics)

AntiLeMaire's picture

>> about GCHQ being asked to conduct 'wire tapping' against

Oh boy... That was indeed not what was asked. Not literally.

What was asked is: about whether GCHQ would be so kind as to check & read intercepts already made by the NSA on US-US (and US-FOR) communications (on US soil) to which GCHQ already has access (alledgedly :) ).

How difficult is it to simply correctly answer a direct question?


"Did you order the Code Red?!

land_of_the_few's picture

Or paying the White Helmets.

Just Another Vietnam Vet's picture


 .....and Blair was one of the big salesmen for the IRAQ war....


.....the Brits, ya gotta lov em,..have the same kinda agency issues as the US, 

like....lol........"We do not spy on citizens"


Some sources might even have us conclude that the Russians are determining the elections

at least in the US and Britian. 

doctor10's picture

if its possible, the only bigger control freaks in the world than the NSA/CIA is MI5/MI6!!!

Gimme a break!! And quit insulting the intelligence of the peons and peasants in the colonies

SubjectivObject's picture

Cunts!  Cunts.  We're all cunts in here.

And visible from space too.

(you peons would not let us act this way if we did not have the State-backed power)

Everybodys All American's picture

For all our recollections. Obama admittedly was caught tapping Angela Merkel ...


so we are to believe that Obama would not wire tap a political rival in Donald Trump. Yeah right.

Collectivism Killz's picture

Which means they did help wire tap Trump. They seem to be using the same denial tactic as my three old or my dog.

New_Meat's picture

Parse the statement as though Bill Clinton had said it.


rbg81's picture

Notice they deny "wire-tapping".  But no one wire taps any more (Trump used the wrong term).  So its a non-denial denial.

beemasters's picture

Plus they never denied doing it. They only denied "being asked". They could have been politically coerced, instructed or even paid to do it, and were never asked.

wide mouth kid's picture

separately there has been denial on the basis of there being no evidence of wire tapping, which may of course be true.

but absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence.

Lore's picture

...Cue the next whistleblower leak.

This is like a silly circus. Latest bumper sticker seen on a local truck: "BLAME PUTIN." 

NoPension's picture

Point I tried to make in another post. Phones are mostly VOIP now. Voice over Internet Protocol.

"Tapping" a phone now means hacking or gaining access to a computer system. No wires are " tapped", but the end result is the same. AND, it's quite a bit easier than the old days. A desk at Langley or Ft. Meade.

blanketof ash's picture

The new term for the new reality should be "pre- tapping" or perhaps "retro-tapping". All information, on everone, is collected and stored for future use. Data centers like the one in Utah, with capacaties rated in yottabytes (a trillion terabytes) make this possible.

ndree's picture

woo hoo! I was expectng them to come out and say...Oh Yeah! real sorry! My Bad!

Was Obama in London recently? Seems he was in Hawaii with that nit wit judge opposing Trump's travel EO.

Trumps should be keeping tabs on Obama.... he wants to be America's Fidel!

buzzsaw99's picture

we wouldn't lie. /s

IridiumRebel's picture

I totally take this at face value.

Yup. Truth. Uh huh.

Doc Farmer's picture

Sounds like the perfect reason to believe the Judge, considering how "trustworthy" their spy agency is...

Joe Sichs Pach's picture

Reminds of the vehement denial:

"I did NOT have sexual relations with that woman..."

Cardinal Fang's picture

They were afraid Trump was going to change our policy in regard to The Falklands and Gibraltar...

Arnold's picture

Now, that rated a perpectly sober chuckle.

SubjectivObject's picture

You're fibbing about the sober though.

SoDamnMad's picture

But if they share information and get information on their citizens from other countries, then they would hack the queen and lie their "arses off" about it.   Hell, nobody in that country knew Sir Jimmy Saville was a dangerous pedofile for decades ( That or GCHQ runs the pedofile ring to ensnare people they can then blackmail and or use as spies). In which case, screw the kids, we got an intelligence service to run.

actionjacksonbrownie's picture

Jimmy Saville... what a fucking slimeball. I remember my mom seeing him on tv in the 70's and saying he was a molester.

Everybody knew, and no one did diddly about it.

Dancing Disraeli's picture

George Webb believes the Awan brothers did it.

VinceFostersGhost's picture



Well John McCain thinks Rand Paul is running Russia.....anything is possible.


I will tell you this.....a LOT......of sides are getting pretty damn sloppy!

New_Meat's picture

Looka' dat!  They solved the problem of the "five-sided-puzzle-palace" there in Chenley.  There's only one side!

gregga777's picture

Apple CONporation's real headquarters are in the Communist People's Republic of China.  The vast majority of everything that Apple does is happens in the PRC.  The Apple CONporation are bosom buddies of the Chinese Communist Party.


Arnold's picture

Inside and the restuvus.

Sandmann's picture

NSA funds GCHQ


The US government has paid at least £100m to the UK spy agency GCHQ over the last three years to secure access to and influence over Britain's intelligence gathering programmes.

The top secret payments are set out in documents which make clear that the Americans expect a return on the investment, and that GCHQ has to work hard to meet their demands. "GCHQ must pull its weight and be seen to pull its weight," a GCHQ strategy briefing said.


The NSA also paid £15.5m towards redevelopments at GCHQ's sister site in Bude, north Cornwall, which intercepts communications from the transatlantic cables that carry internet traffic. "Securing external NSA funding for Bude has protected (GCHQ's core) budget," the paper said. one revealing document from 2010, GCHQ acknowledged that the US had "raised a number of issues with regards to meeting NSA's minimum expectations". It said GCHQ "still remains short of the full NSA ask".

Ministers have denied that GCHQ does the NSA's "dirty work", but in the documents GCHQ describes Britain's surveillance laws and regulatory regime as a "selling point" for the Americans.

When GCHQ does supply the US with valuable intelligence, the agency boasts about it. In one review, GCHQ boasted that it had supplied "unique contributions" to the NSA during its investigation of the American citizen responsible for an attempted car bomb attack in Times Square, New York City, in 2010.

No other detail is provided – but it raises the possibility that GCHQ might have been spying on an American living in the US. The NSA is prohibited from doing this by US law.

NoPension's picture

So, give the Brits the technology and access to our citizens, help offset their budget...and gratefully receive information that would otherwise be " technically " illegal for a domestic agency to obtain.


Plausible deniability.

How is this different than my hiring a hit man?

New_Meat's picture

You catch da Judge's point.

How is it different?  You b goin' to jail, boy.

Vilfredo Pareto's picture

100 million?


Lol.   You can get a whore to do almost anything for 1000.


For a hundred million they would gladly suck Obama's dick if he asked.

coltek's picture

It's not true until it is officially denied...

negatratoron's picture

(my hobby: officially denying things that are false)

RagaMuffin's picture

" He doth protest too much"...................