disgruntledemployee Posted March 26 Author Posted March 26 (edited) 2 hours ago, McJay Pilot said: So, now we get to play “is she really that dumb” or “was she toeing the party line”. Neither are great options. 😬 To be clear, not in any way a spear at you, just furthering discussion! 🍻 All the American public do is go off the video and based on that and reading the Signal screen shots, she's playing stupid, thus if so facto, she is stupid. Reminds me of Tom Brady's press conference on Deflategate. Duhhh, I just throw da football... Edited March 26 by disgruntledemployee Brady
StrikeOut312 Posted March 26 Posted March 26 (edited) 11 minutes ago, disgruntledemployee said: Do they deserve to remain in office? No. They should get fired or they should resign. A little accountability would be a huge breath of fresh air. I keep trying to wrap my head around a reason why they used signal and included a reporter, and all I can come up with is occam’s razor—they’re doofuses. Most of us on here know better, and we’d all get canned if we did the same thing. extra thought—is this some kind of misdirection? Lots of attention on this one huge SNAFU…what’s going on unnoticed? Edited March 26 by StrikeOut312 Extra thought 2
ClearedHot Posted March 26 Posted March 26 2 hours ago, Day Man said: we get it..."lock her up". do it, doubt anyone here gives a shit (including me). would love to see the same disdain for the complete willful disregard of OPSEC here as you have for Hillary Do you even read what others write or just throw $hit at the wall? I have not defended anything that has happened and if you scroll up or go back I CLEARLY said hold them accountable. 2 hours ago, Day Man said: American military lives are literally being further risked due to the sloppy, apathetic, and general DGAF attitude of this admin Do you think lives were at risk when Hillary put 33,000 emails including SAR/SAP material on a private server?
Day Man Posted March 26 Posted March 26 13 minutes ago, ClearedHot said: Do you even read what others write or just throw $hit at the wall? I have not defended anything that has happened and if you scroll up or go back I CLEARLY said hold them accountable. did i say you defended anything? you have 42 43 posts mentioning Hillary, and simply say "ungood" about this...the inconsistency is obvious Quote Do you think lives were at risk when Hillary put 33,000 emails including SAR/SAP material on a private server? dunno, she didn't send them to a reporter so I don't know what they say 🤷♂️ maybe DOGE can figure it out instead of cutting VA resources? 1
SHFP Posted March 26 Posted March 26 How soon we selectively, based on our politics, forget about the Benghazi and Afghanistan fiascos. And don’t get me started again about Vietnam.
Banzai Posted March 26 Posted March 26 21 hours ago, HeloDude said: Simple question, do you believe Tulsi wrt her quote below: “I can attest to the fact that there were not classified or intelligence equities that were included in that chat group at any time.” https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna197954 I think it’s safe to say I don’t believe that. 1
tac airlifter Posted March 26 Posted March 26 1 hour ago, disgruntledemployee said: So now you got to see the texts. What do you think Trump should do? Hesgeth? He should fire Pete, that text was stupid and his subordinates would be fired for sending it. Easy kill. Waltz should likely resign, although I'm still murky on details so am uncertain.
tac airlifter Posted March 26 Posted March 26 4 hours ago, BashiChuni said: Agreed. “Check out this cool shit” type of talk. Completely unnecessary and the players in that chat had zero need to know. Yea super immature. Can't imagine anyone in that chat needed that info. Curious what happens. Democrats will clearly demand firing, but they didn't when last SECDEF botched AFG and was literally AWOL for days so R's will focus on the hypocrisy. So maybe those positions are beyond accountability but I hope Pete gets fired. If he had owned it I might have a different opinion but he also lied when questioned by the press so credibility shot. 1 3
herkbier Posted March 26 Posted March 26 Immature and amateur. Trump, Harris, Biden, Clinton.. our “choices” for the last couple election cycles have been awful. We live in the world of Southpark, a Giant Douche or a Turd Sandwich 2
contraildash Posted March 27 Posted March 27 https://imgur.com/a/breaking-below-is-entire-transcript-of-messages-from-signal-group-chat-just-released-by-jeffrey-goldberg-atlantic-hkD7CdmThe message where SECDEF is posting times/assets/ect is cut off. Note the squared bottom of the text block and lack of a time stamp. There was more to that message that was not posted in the link above.Just pointing that out. Update: saw on another platform, the cut off part says:LoL
SurelySerious Posted March 27 Posted March 27 Immature and amateur. Trump, Harris, Biden, Clinton.. our “choices” for the last couple election cycles have been awful. We live in the world of Southpark, a Giant Douche or a Turd Sandwich 1 1
hindsight2020 Posted March 27 Posted March 27 (edited) Of course, always with the punching down threats to the little guy saying the quiet part out loud. *yawn* It also doesn't surprise me we got the memo last week to usaf_All reminding us all serfs of article 88, 92 and 133, 134. Like clockwork. No better way to boost cohesion than threaten me with the gag order, already implicit to this all-volunteer so-called service. Wait until I get 7305 points. Substack and youtube here I come. 🤣 How the heck does Gabbard get to command a battallion while appointed to such a definitionally partisan appointment? In light of such glaring violation of all manners of opsec, this is rules for thee not for me run amok. Edited March 27 by hindsight2020 1
icohftb Posted March 27 Posted March 27 8 hours ago, waveshaper said: My guess is that the blow-by-blow info on this Operation was originally being transmitted to the SECDEF by the COCOM CC via a SCIF/Secure Network and was in fact appropriately marked/designated "Highly Classified/TS/SCI/etc): It sounds like the SEFDEF might have officially screwed the pooch. I wonder - was he in a secure facility when receiving and relaying the updates thru his phone?
Sua Sponte Posted March 27 Posted March 27 5 hours ago, tac airlifter said: Yea super immature. Can't imagine anyone in that chat needed that info. Curious what happens. Democrats will clearly demand firing, but they didn't when last SECDEF botched AFG and was literally AWOL for days so R's will focus on the hypocrisy. So maybe those positions are beyond accountability but I hope Pete gets fired. If he had owned it I might have a different opinion but he also lied when questioned by the press so credibility shot. Absolutely nothing will happen.
ClearedHot Posted March 27 Posted March 27 6 hours ago, Day Man said: did i say you defended anything? you have 42 43 posts mentioning Hillary, and simply say "ungood" about this...the inconsistency is obvious Try again... On 3/25/2025 at 6:31 AM, ClearedHot said: I am guessing Hegseth used Signal as part of his former gig at Foxnews which would explain the links to journalists. Also, Signal very popular in the SOF community...there is a whole Signal subculture. Sending it to the wrong person is not the issue, sending classified plans on a non-approved network is the issue. And if he did it he should be punished. Legally Comey help set the precedent that it not a big deal when we all know it is. It took intent from both Hegseth and Clinton to put that material on an unclassified network. 33,000 Hillary Emails had to be transferred off a classified network and copied onto an unclassified server, I never understood how Comey didn't see that as deliberate and with intent. I am very curious how Hegseth's deal plays out...again if the details are correct (to include weapons loads), then it was a deliberate effort to take material off and unclass network (pictures or digitally copied), and put it on Signal...or did he type a note with the details...either way UNSAT, no excuses, time to be held accountable. 1 1
SurelySerious Posted March 27 Posted March 27 Also something for discussion is the conduct of official business on a message chain set to automatically delete after a week. Doesn’t seem congruent with requirements for record keeping. Tough to FOIA a disappearing Signal message. 1
brickhistory Posted March 27 Posted March 27 Lost in all the signal noise is the reason for the group chat. Trump directed a whoopin' on Houthis, not just a whack-a-mole on the launchers. Would be really interesting to know the actual BDA. Then there's: https://www.msn.com/en-us/crime/general/top-ms-13-gang-suspect-arrested-in-northern-virginia-doj/ar-AA1BLYCG?ocid=BingNewsSerp https://www.thecentersquare.com/texas/article_625f4088-93b5-4850-a36d-32940244c113.html among just many others wins. So a big kerfuffle over a classified fcuk up (own it, admit it, move on) vs. doing things that the country wanted. LFG!!
brickhistory Posted March 27 Posted March 27 (edited) From Jan 20, 2021 - Jan 20-2025, 189 pages in this thread while Biden was President, but we still don't know (cough, Obama, cough) who was making decisions. From Jan 20, 2025 - present, 96 pages in this thread. Just shy of 50% of the pages for an entire presidency in 2+ months. Interesting on what some find acceptable. Edited March 27 by brickhistory typo 1
disgruntledemployee Posted March 27 Author Posted March 27 WIRED et al reporting Waltz had his Venmo public until they reported on it. Guess who is in it? Goldberg, Fox Newers, CNNers, and other media types. Maybe he's the leaker on Elon's war plans briefing, which they probably did over Signal after it was cancelled. https://www.wired.com/story/michael-waltz-left-his-venmo-public/ https://prospect.org/politics/2025-03-26-michael-waltz-venmo-public-full-of-journalists/
jrizzell Posted March 27 Posted March 27 The sole individual responsible for launching a nuclear attack for the past 4 years, was a dementia patient who didn’t have control of his mental facilities. Was this a up, sure. But let’s relax with the pearl clutching; we still don’t know who was running the country during Biden’s presidency. For a party that nominated a candidate who had her own email server while Secretary of State, now they suddenly really care about OPSEC. Someone will fall on this grenade, and we’ll move on.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 1
uhhello Posted March 27 Posted March 27 1 minute ago, jrizzell said: The sole individual responsible for launching a nuclear attack for the past 4 years, was a dementia patient who didn’t have control of his mental facilities. Was this a up, sure. But let’s relax with the pearl clutching; we still don’t know who was running the country during Biden’s presidency. For a party that nominated a candidate who had her own email server while Secretary of State, now they suddenly really care about OPSEC. Someone will fall on this grenade, and we’ll move on. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk The what about-ism's gotta stop for the republican party. Admit your fuckup, fire/don't fire and move on. Republicans aren't going to 'win' over mainstream media regardless. They will lose some voters who came over for a change. I love the policies (mostly) so far. This is a massive own goal. Move on. As someone said up higher, we could have told the Houthi's everything and it would have had zero effect on their response. 1 6
Sua Sponte Posted March 27 Posted March 27 4 minutes ago, jrizzell said: The sole individual responsible for launching a nuclear attack for the past 4 years, was a dementia patient who didn’t have control of his mental facilities. Was this a up, sure. But let’s relax with the pearl clutching; we still don’t know who was running the country during Biden’s presidency. For a party that nominated a candidate who had her own email server while Secretary of State, now they suddenly really care about OPSEC. Someone will fall on this grenade, and we’ll move on. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk If you would’ve done what they did with that type of information, would you’ve been punished either via UCMJ or having your clearance suspended or revoked? It’s a yes or no question. 1
jrizzell Posted March 27 Posted March 27 If you would’ve done what they did with that type of information, would you’ve been punished either via UCMJ or having your clearance suspended or revoked? It’s a yes or no question. Someone thinks that the rules used against low level members apply to the leadership, how cute. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sua Sponte Posted March 27 Posted March 27 58 minutes ago, jrizzell said: Someone thinks that the rules used against low level members apply to the leadership, how cute. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Can't answer the question?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now