Anonymous wrote:I love how Trump released a bunch of executive orders today to distract from this and nobody cares.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:if your're trying to take down a country, I'd think leaking intelligence is a good way to do that. We are all losers and suckers to be sold out by our new monarchy.
Barack tried so hard, didn’t he?
Anonymous wrote:if your're trying to take down a country, I'd think leaking intelligence is a good way to do that. We are all losers and suckers to be sold out by our new monarchy.
Anonymous wrote:Turns out the reporter wasn’t the only unauthorized person on the chat. The chat included an individual who is still waiting to be confirmed by the Senate.
[twitter]https://meidasnews.com/news/trump-admin-signal-group-chat-included-member-still-waiting-for-senate-confirmation[/twitter]
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Did anyone admit to actually adding Goldberg? Is it possible the chat was hacked?
This idea is laughable. Who the heck would hack in and add Goldberg??
A hacker, even from the media (as if they had a clue how to do that … ), would use a burner account. Not something as high-profile as the account of the Editor in Chief of The Atlantic.
The reason no one admitted actually adding Goldberg is because they, of course, do not want to take responsibility for their actions.
Odds are this administration will sweep the whole thing under the rug by the end of the week. “It’s just something that can happen.” Like Hillary’s emails.![]()
Anonymous wrote:Did anyone admit to actually adding Goldberg? Is it possible the chat was hacked?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:oh what will that do? They will just ignore it.
They'll say it's classified....
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Did anyone admit to actually adding Goldberg? Is it possible the chat was hacked?
If it was hacked, that’s not really better. It means anyone could’ve hacked in. That’s why you don’t use channels that aren’t approved