SecDef shares US war Plan in Group chat

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"But her emails."

On the plus side, these incompetents will let us all know about invasion plans in advance.

Let who know? China? Russia? This time they were dumb enough to add a journalist. Who knows who they add next (intentionally or not.). They’ve broken so many laws and Republicans in Congress who were so concerned about Hillary’s email are waiting for Trump to tell them what to say because they’ve long lost their consciences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So who was the “Goldberg” they intended to add to the group? Is there another Jeff Goldberg in this administration?

The wrestler. Trump was at the national wrestling championship recently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Surprised the journalist isn't charged with treason

That's why he left the chat - because if he stayed longer then they probably would.

Why did he take screenshots and not delete it

He did not take screenshots of military information per se. Are you saying he should have kept the entire thing to himself?

The journalist was doing his job.

Unlike the others who are supposed to be following the law and protecting our nation.

+1. Thank goodness there are still journalists still willing to hold the executive branch accountable to the law. Lord knows Congress has abdicated that responsibility

[Anonymous]

Still no one thinking about why or how Jeffrey Goldberg was added to the conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Signal use is intentional, to avoid FOIA or discovery or archival laws. Adding the journalist was incompetence.

How many other communications are happening on illegal channels with no national records being kept? This is a crime.

Yes!!!

No one in the government is holding our leaders (aka our employees ) to abiding by Federal laws!!!

Elect a lawless man and get an absolutely lawless administration.

I am so sick of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Realize she’s almost certainly talking about prosecuting the journalist. And not the guys who actually planned a bombing via signal in violation of the law and added the journalist by mistake.

That's how I'm reading it, too. She was on that Signal chat with the rest of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Must be over the target, thanks to Doge.

Gonna be kinda embarrassing when they find out Sec Def was the leak, via an unsecured chat app.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a little sample in Twitter form. What a bunch of dumbasses!

On top of the outrageous breach of security, which is unfathomable tbh, this is just so embarrassing. Emojis??? Really? Civilians died. Many of them.

I can't believe Susie Wiles is all "good job, guys" after more than 50 people die. Wtf? These people are psychopaths.

Especially since (I believe) Vance said its purpose was solely messaging.

Quite a price to pay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Still no one thinking about why or how Jeffrey Goldberg was added to the conversation.

Part of me wonders if Walz knew what he was doing. And did it to cause this, because he has the common sense to know how dangerous this let’s plan a war via Signal mentality is. Maybe I’m just holding out hope some at the top of US National Security has some sense.

[Anonymous]

Why is the decision to make a military strike not even worthy of an in person meeting?

Putting our service members and civilians at risk, based upon a few texts of debate?

Sick…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still no one thinking about why or how Jeffrey Goldberg was added to the conversation.

Part of me wonders if Walz knew what he was doing. And did it to cause this, because he has the common sense to know how dangerous this let’s plan a war via Signal mentality is. Maybe I’m just holding out hope some at the top of US National Security has some sense.

No way. He was probably trying to add another J name (Jared Kushner? The chat was about Saudi oil interests and Jared is all over that) and just was incompetent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is the decision to make a military strike not even worthy of an in person meeting?

Putting our service members and civilians at risk, based upon a few texts of debate?

Sick…

It seems like in past administrations, the Principals Committee gathered in person when there was a situation to make a decision and monitor it in real time. There was even a special room in the White House for this. What was it called again? Of course, Trump was teleworking during the bombing, but do-President Musk could have been there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is the decision to make a military strike not even worthy of an in person meeting?

Putting our service members and civilians at risk, based upon a few texts of debate?

Sick…

It seems like in past administrations, the Principals Committee gathered in person when there was a situation to make a decision and monitor it in real time. There was even a special room in the White House for this. What was it called again? Of course, Trump was teleworking during the bombing, but do-President Musk could have been there.

They seem to attach no importance to operational security. Maybe because they think we're friends with all our enemies now?

Or maybe they're just incompetent and stupid.

[Anonymous]

This is just the tip of the iceberg. This admin doesn’t believe in following laws on national security or ethics or conflict of interest or on sovereignty of national borders. What could possibly go wrong?

[Anonymous]

It’s sad that Vance in his follow up statements was more worried about seeming “not in alignment” with President Trump’s views than he was about breaking umpteen laws by planning a war on a commercial platform.