>>gsr actually became a do you h cambridge analytica paid gsr? mr. wylie: it depends on what you mean by paid for. the way projects ran for the , all of thes we were were scl that paying for. invoicingpay for the to survey recruitment platforms. scl would pay for that directly. not that much money was actually passed through gsr. a lot of it was just paid directly. r was paidct fee, gs money. .14 pounds, pi, fee.he contract most of the money that was spent went directly to pay for cost -- when i was there. i don't know exactly. i know kogan stayed around longer after i left. point ifsure at that point if he made a commercial deal or not with scl. the deal was he could keep all the data and do whatever research he wanted to do with it. for him it was appealing, because you had a company that academic grant could compete with the amount of money you could spend on it, and we did not have to go through all of the compliance and reporting, so we could literally start next week and pay for whatever you want. my impression at the time, for an academic, tha

gsr actually became a company specifically to service cambridge analytica. gsr did not preexist. we were already working with a lot of professors in various ways, just ad hoc, that sort of thing, at cambridge, which is how we got introduced to hogan. it was not as directed. it was the fact that we were engaging a lot of the same people. it was through the interaction that we started talking. the first that we started working with -- the reason why we stopped working with them was because -- mikhail at the time was deputy director. when he found how much money we had, he asked for half $1 million and 50% royalties. which wasn't feasible on an experimental project to make that kind of commitment. it was kogan who said, i could do it, as long as you take the data and cost, we can figure out some kind of commercial deal after, so let's just see if this works. that is why kogan was ultimately selected to be the person to provide those services. dr. kaczynski wanted half $1 million and 50% royalties? >> do you know how much cambridge analytica paid gsr? mr. wylie: it depends on what yo

, who sold the data to them saying cambridge analytica was working in good faith but it was gsr that and they did comply with facebook so pointing fingers at the app developers saying there has been miscommunication by the mainstream press back over to you >> julia, thank you for that ed lee still on set with us. your reaction to that, particularly as it relates back to facebook. again, we know facebook was aware this data, whether it was gsr's fault, cambridge analytica's fault, they've only reacted once it's become public. >> this was something delved into by reporters. it's not as if facebook had some automated system or api or software discovered this is and they were trying to correct it reporters reached out and said, hey, we're seeing this data was misused. even cambridge analytica is saying, it's not our fault it was this third-party that misused the data and we since deleted it what it speaks to is clearly facebook does not have a systematic set of rules or procedures in place. you have to wonder how many other -- >> shares, by the way, are not off their lows despite that st

are undertaking a third-party audit to verify it does not still hold that gsr data. are still waiting remarks from president trump at the white house. there taking a look at diplomatic room. we are expecting him to sign the omnibus spending bill. we will bring you the latest as we get it. this is bloomberg. ♪ shery: the president is set to sign an omnibus spending bill after warning to veto the bill on twitter. that bill is worth one point $3 trillion. the president is not happy with -- with his request for border wall funding being totally abandoned by the democrats. by thejoined again former republican governor of new hampshire and chairman of the senate budget committee. from still what this florida. thank you for staying with us. what do you believe will be the biggest victory, if any, for president trump, once he signs? government stays open and continues to operate. it is always very important. the government shutdown is counterproductive to everyone. that, i don't see any significant victory at all in this bill. with defense dollars being up as much as they ar

he says gsr obtained facebook data that prompted users to take a temperature va.ey, wsaid that the app captured profile users information as well as their friends and contacts data. >> cambridge reportedly got a huge financial boost. the breach allowed the company to exploit the private social media activity of a huge swath of americans and particularly the electorate developing techniques that help lay the groundwork for president trump's campaign in 016. >> amazing. >> so meanwhile, cambridge analytica founder knicks is following an alleged that he may have misled parliament over the data gathered from users and its contacts with russia. itn channel 4 news, nicks told the panel late last month that his company had a partnership with the group in 2014 claiminging that cambridge analytica did not use the data from gsr because it proved to be fruitless. but inews 4 got a memo that appears to contradict that claim. >> nicks said his company never worked with russia, but the times said nicks' business did have dealings with russia interests citing company documents a

and major all derivatives, backups were deleted. " can i be absolutely clear, we did not use any gsr data in the presidential election in 2016. " us.xplain that statement to that a is a term researcher who collected data from people, that is his company. said thatanalytica even though they have ties to gsr that it is not used with the trump campaign manager wanted to be super clear about that. >> are they giving himself more with a room with us statement versus other statements they made? >> i think they want to be clear that the certification they have is invalid. facebook is using the defense that they heard from cambridge nalytica that they deleted their servers. tony: the question is to whether they deleted the data? at the same time, cambridge and had a cambridge analytica whistleblower names christopher wiley who is in the u.k. right now. contractor, had no idea what he was talking about, try to use the information to start his own company and they gone after him because of the delegations. -- because of these allegations. >> facebook falls on the ropes dazed by intense backlas

came bridge analytical released a statement sailing no data from gsa are -- gsr was used as part of the services provided to the donald trump 2016 presidential campaign. according to "the new york times," they says they deleted the information when it learned about the problem. but facebook posting a statement which says several days ago we received a report that contrary to the certifications we were given not all data was deleted. we were moving aggressively to determine accuracy of the claims. if true, this is another unacceptable violation of trust and the commitments they made. and snowden saying facebook is not victim. they are a come plays. a the love finger pointing going on. we know the attorney general in massachusetts has launched an investigation and law makers say they are keeping a close eye out on the situation. >> i think another part is sometimes the companies grow so fast and get so much good press they get up high on themselves and they think perhaps they are above sort of the rules that apply to everybody else. so we will learn more about this in the days to come. bu

- presidential campaign we are undergoing an audit to show we did not use any gsr data.hatr is the firm alexander conan, that is his company. cambridge analytica is saying that even another our ties to gsr, that data was not used to anything related to the trump campaign and they want to be very clear about that. host: is there any wiggle room in this latest statement been in their previous statements? to betill think they want clear about that certification, that facebook is valid. they heard from cambridge analytica that there is no data left on their servers. is in cambridge analytica a hot seat, they are facing a lot of questions, particularly in the united kingdom where they are investigating this matter. a big question is whether they related -- deleted the data. i think cambridge analytica has been sharply critical of the whistleblower that has brought .ll of this to light christopher wylie is also testifying in the u.k. right now . he said he was a part-time contractor, and they said he had no idea what he was talking about. they have gone after him in response t

. >> a cop lost the gsr test.it and couldn't find it. >> reporter: and just plain got it wrong. once they concluded she was a murderer, he said, they distorted their evidence to fit their story. >> the bullet went about a 90 degree angle and hit the wall and deposited scalp matter on the trash can. >> reporter: you're saying it is physically impossible? >> yes, it is ludicrous. it violated the laws of physics. >> reporter: the dna on the gun was dave's supporting jane's contention that he had the gun and they struggled for it. one more thing, said bamieh, one more bit of evidence that the police missed, even though it was right under their noses. bruising under jane's left arm. >> if you look at the bruise closely, you'll see basically there's a little hand print. a hand shaped bruise that helps prove, said bamieh, this wasn't murder. it was self-defense. >> you're fighting for your life reasonably. i think you have to reasonably conclude if you're fighting for a gun, you have to use lethal force. >> reporter: now

cambridge analytic released a statement that said in part no data from gsr, was used as part of the serviceshey provided to the donald trump 2016 presidential campaign. cambridge analytica deleted the information when it learned about the problem, the facebook posted a statement which in part says several days ago we received reports that contrary to the certifications we were given, not all data was deleted. we are moving aggressively to determine the accuracy of these claims. if true this is another unacceptable violation of trust and commitment it made. politicians on both side of the aisle weighed in this morning. >> another part about it is sometimes these companies grow so fast and does so much good press that they start to think that perhaps they are above sort of the rules that apply to everybody else. we will learn more about this in the days to come. >> i know what we can about the mishap appropriation of the privacy, private information of tens of millions of americans. in this appropriate information used by this digital arm of the term campaign to manipulate american voters. >>

. >> so listen, here's what cambridge analytica says, there is no data from gsr was used by cambridgeed to the donald trump presidential campaign. so wiley's point is that if the trump campaign wasn't using the data, what happened to it? it was the foundation of what cambridge analytica did. did the trump campaign end up with that facebook data through cambridge analytica, matthew? >> i think we have to understand what cambridge analytica sought to do with the data. they were trying to build models to get a sense of individual voters. so this was the first large data set they had in which they could build the models. i'm sure they brought in other data sets along the way. we use this data, not that data misses the point. you're taking large amounts of data and building this analytical model and tools that you're going to use. and so to say well we didn't use this data is a -- seems awfully disingenuous when that is the start of how you built your tools that's what he said. overall, jewel yashgs i want to get your assessment before i ask you more specific questions. >> well, i thought

no data from gsr was used by cambridge analytica as part of the service provided to donald trump presidential if the trump campaign wasn't using the data, what happened to it because it was the foundation of what cambridge analytica did. i mean did the trump campaign end up with that facebook data through cambridge analytica, matthew? >> i think we have to understand what cambridge analytica sought to do with this data. they were trying to build models to get a sense of individual voters. so this was the first large data set they had on which they could build these models. i'm sure they brought in other data sets along the way. so to specify we used this data, not that data, kind of misses the point. so to say, well, we didn't use this data is a little -- seems awfully disingenuous when that was the start of how you built your tools. >> that's exactly what christopher wylie said. overall, what he said, juliette, i want to get your assessment of it before i ask you more specific questions. >> i thought overall he was credible. he's obviously superior yet abo -- was upset about the situation, h

cambridge and lit leticca said no data from gsr a third party firm was used as part of the services it provided to the donald trump 2016 presidential campaign. according to the new york sometimes they says they deleted the information when it learned about the problem. but facebook posted a statement saying several days ago we received reports that contrary to the certifications we were given, not all data was deleted. we are moving to determine the accuracy of the claims if true, this is another unacceptable violation of trust and the commitments they made. and edward snowden saying facebook is not victim, they are accomplices. a the love finger pointing going on. we know that the attorney general in massachusetts has launched an investigation and law makers say they are keeping a close eye on the situation. >> i think another part about it is sometimes the companies grow so fast and get so much good press they get up high on themselves and they start to think perhaps they are above sort of the rules that apply to everybody else. so we will learn more about this in the days to come. b

we did not use any gsr, global science research data in the work we did in the 2016 u.s.l election there. here now chris wilson, former director of research and analytics for the 2016 cruz for president campaign. he is also ceo of wilson perkins allen research. thanks for being here tonight. >> good to be here, martha. >> martha: this story has all of the potential drama that i think a lot of people are looking for. when you start to peel back actually what was in this data, whether or not it was actually used and whether or not it was actually effective, it appears that there is more to the story than meets the eye. your thoughts? >> well, it is. i think the cambridge analytica story has been tough because their marketing efforts are so overblown you have to separate from what they did from what they claim they did from what they claim they can do from what they actually can do. all of those things come together and create a very confusing story for anybody just listening to. this their acting ceo. the reason there is acting ceo, former ceo suspended for making outrageou

. >> cambridge analytica saying it bought data from an app developer, gsr, quote, in good faith sayingthey learned gsr had broken data protection information, it deleted all of the facebook information and derivatives in cooperation with facebook. despite the denials, a slew of lawmakers from the eu, u.k. to capitol hill are raising red flags and asking for investigations facebook is holding a last-minute internal meeting this morning in response to the news to answer employee question about the scandal so, becky, the saga seems to be just beginning. back over to you. >> julia, thank you very much. >>> when we come back, what happens when autonomous cars are confused and not sure what to do on the road. one company has the answers. we'll be right back with that. you know what they say about the early bird... he gets the best deal on the perfect hotel by using tripadvisor! that's because tripadvisor lets you start your trip on the right foot... by comparing prices from over 200 booking sites to find the right hotel for you at the lowest price. saving you up to 30%! you'll be bathing in

>> this is a researcher working for gsr, call him dr. k.p an app and collects user data of facebook. that he was supposed to keep himself. that's the agreement he signed with facebook. instead, he sells that to cambridge analytica. >> for what? >> running an app. the point of facebook is give data, build apps on top of it and not supposed to take everything they gather and they're not supposed to give it to other people. >> got it. >> so the story breaks in 2015 that all of this data has gone to cam binbridge analytica for campaign targeting and now we're learning is the story is coming back and seems like the data wasn't deleted and we have a whistle-blower explaining exactly how it was used. >> the hits keep coming it seems to me for facebook. did they not in 2015 do what they were supposed to do? >> they put a foot wrong allowing app developers to collect data of friends. they closed that door in 2014 shortly after the app was launched and grandfathered into the open policy. you can blame facebook for the original policies. you can blame