Anonymous wrote:These guys are screwed the next time they testify to Congress. They just walked into a perjury trap, as this clearly was not their first Signal group chat. What else was discussed in previous “small group” discussions?

Anonymous wrote:Wanna bet he'll be out of Friday? Or earlier?

Anonymous wrote:Hm, so many media outlets are picking this up, FoxNews may not be able to ignore it. I am sure they are working on their "angle" for why this platform is fine and actually better!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe one of the most bizarre stories of the Trump 2.0 eta

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/03/trump-administration-accidentally-texted-me-its-war-plans/682151/

And I am old enough to remember "but her emails" and Obama being forces to surrender his Blackberry.

A fascinating question is who included Goldberg? It had to have been a deliberate leak. So, which one of all those involved wanted to draw attention to the shocking and chilling incompetence of those in charge of state secrets

Waltz, the NSA added the reporter. Not very secure. But also, did no one look at the group chat list and say— hey- who is this guy?

He was listed as "JG" - there's a thought he meant to add Jamieson Greer, the US Trade Representative

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe one of the most bizarre stories of the Trump 2.0 eta

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/03/trump-administration-accidentally-texted-me-its-war-plans/682151/

And I am old enough to remember "but her emails" and Obama being forces to surrender his Blackberry.

A fascinating question is who included Goldberg? It had to have been a deliberate leak. So, which one of all those involved wanted to draw attention to the shocking and chilling incompetence of those in charge of state secrets

Waltz, the NSA added the reporter. Not very secure. But also, did no one look at the group chat list and say— hey- who is this guy?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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?

No, they don't.

Trump read the Supreme Court case as a green light, and he has green lighted everyone in his administration to be lawless. They're really upset with the courts that keep giving them losses. The Supreme Court said they could break laws with impunity! These lower courts need to get with the program!

And it's only March 2025.

Anonymous wrote:

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 wrote:

Anonymous wrote:deflection attempt

https://bsky.app/profile/acyn.bsky.social/post/3ll5v2s4uq22j

Reporter: Can you share how your information about war plans was shared with a journalist?

Hegseth: So you are talking about a deceitful and highly discredited so-called journalist who has made a profession of peddling hoaxes




Deflection fail, but thanks for confirming the report, dude.

He comes across pretty unhinged there. He knows it's an indefensible bad look.

Anonymous wrote:"But her emails" folks are so quiet in here. The silence is palpable. You know they are reading it though.