Wow, is this thread still a thing?

Equinox said:

---

Wow, is this thread still a thing?

---

Because it's a relevant political topic with many unanswered questions.

Equinox said:

---

Wow, is this thread still a thing?

---

Hey, this is TexAgs. We will beat things to death.

Quote:

---

Let the person who has never hit "reply all" by accident on an email forward, cast the first stone.

---

Oh Lordy, no joke.

Reminds me of something that happened when I worked at Ernst & Young. My coworker was quite the mischievous guy and he had pulled a little HR prank on me joking about sexual harassment, long story, but the way I got him back was we had a phone system back then (mid-90s) where you could leave a message on someone's voicemail or you could punch in these codes for certain groups that would send a message to let's say the partners or the principles or the senior managers so it would just be a certain group of people.

A little bit before this there was a girl in the San Francisco office that had left a message that she thought was going to one other coworker, but it literally went to the entire E&Y over the entire United States or at least the west division I can't remember but thousands of people and she had gone on and on about how drunk she was the night before and made some comments about people and we had all gotten it so that's why we had heard it. It was pretty embarrassing for her, but it's not like she let out any big secrets.

Well, my coworker had left a message directly to me teasing me about this HR incident that never happened and it was funny and mischievous, and quite the salty language. I convinced him that he had actually sent it to the entire management consulting division, which was about 400 people instead of sending it just to me. I played it so well like I was really freaked out (I was the head of the graphic/communications department) and he believed me for about five minutes. And because that other call had just happened, he really thought he had. I got a few of the senior managers to go in on it with me and they came in going "Mark, What did you do?"

That was a way more primitive technology system than what is going on here, but just shows you how easily people can do the wrong thing.

Gosh, I hadn't thought about that in years that was so funny. He and I were good friends though. Got him good.

This was the top 'National Security' guy in the United States (Waltz) accidentally adding a guy to a very exclusive group chat discussing a planned attack on another country, with the chat stream mentioning classified information including the name of an undercover CIA operative.

The fact that Waltz didn't know/verify everybody who was on a chat group like that is kind of mind boggling.

It was a level of Reply All' mistake that often gets somebody fired or at least severely flogged. And that is about internal leadership as much as external politics. The rest of the organization, in this case all staffers and the U.S. military as a whole, needs to know you take this kind of mistake seriously, are holding people accountable, assuring that it won't happen again.

If you are a Navy pilot about to do a strike mission or an undercover CIA operative, there is zero percent chance you are amused about the chance that somebody might get pre-warned you are coming or find out you are an undercover because the 'suits' are not paying attention. Zero chance. So even putting the politics aside….you have an OpSEC screwup here that has to be addressed in adequate fashion.

Equinox said:

---

Wow, is this thread still a thing?

---

One resident leftist and a bunch who swarmed in from other parts of the forum just keep it going.

It is just like the threads from 2017-2020 such as Trump being "wheels off" and "Russia, Russia Russia" which went on for weeks and months because a certain person wouldn't let it drop.

Save your drama. This is done.

annie88 said:

---

eric76 said:

---

annie88 said:

---

rgvag11 said:

---

The scandal involving Secretary Clinton's use of a personal e-mail server during her time as Secretary of State went on for years.

---

And nothing happened to her did it? In fact, she doesn't even acknowledge it, shrugged it off just like she did four dead in Benghazi.

At least the Trump administration took responsibility for this mistake.

---

They did? When?

It looks to me like they are trying to shed all responsibility. Like they always do.

---

I've already put this on here three times. I'm not sure what more this man could've said to appease you.

over.

National security advisor Michael Waltz assumed "full responsibility" for a leaked Signal group chat of senior Trump officials that discussed plans for a forthcoming strike on the Houthis in Yemen.

"I take full responsibility. I built the group,"Waltz said on "The Ingraham Angle" Tuesday. "It's embarrassing. We're going to get to the bottom of it."

Some of you guys are unbelievable. The cat is already out of the bag. There's nothing they can do to make it not have happened so they are going forward with it. They have apologized, they have said they are embarrassed. They are looking to rectify the situation.

It was a big mistake and they have addressed that they are also open to ridicule and criticism, but y'all are just going on and on and on. There's no such thing it's time travel they cannot go back and erase it.

We've already been told there was no classified information. You guys just wanna hate on Trump and his appointee to hate on them.

And honestly, the fact that you guys are not having problems with the editor says a lot. That guy could've kept his mouth shut notified the White House that he was on there and not said a damn thing in the interest of American, but he didn't, did he.

He made it political.

---

I think you are being a little selective here. Hegseth's initial response was that the reporter lied and couldn't be trusted in an interview AFTER it was confirmed to be accurate by the administration. Then there were reports of a scapegoat junior staffer who was really responsible. Then there were claims that none of the content was classified so it was no big deal . Then the rest of the info leaked which pretty much proved it was classified. So in the second hearing Gabbard claimed she didn't remember but if it were classified it was really Hegseth's fault. Not a model of accountability. That's not even mentioning baseless conspiracy theory that it was a plant swirling that would paint the parties as incompetent instead of just making an honest mistake.

Rockdoc said:

---

Save your drama. This is done.

---

Done with page 27 of this thread ?

Rockdoc said:

---

Save your drama. This is done.

---

How is it 'done''? There are now lawsuits in play:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/pete-hegseth-sued-over-signal-212507620.html

And probably some investigation still to play out. Not convinced yet it is 'done' yet where everyone gets out of this unscathed.

Not reading 27 pages. Did they fire the guy responsible or not?

Burnsey said:

---

Not reading 27 pages. Did they fire the guy responsible or not?

---

Hahahahahahahahaha

We're two days from this all being blamed on Jewish space lasers

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

Save your drama. This is done.

---

How is it 'done''? There are now lawsuits in play:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/pete-hegseth-sued-over-signal-212507620.html

And probably some investigation still to play out. Not convinced yet it is 'done' yet where everyone gets out of this unscathed.

---

I think you meant to say "lawfare" and the general public is SOOOO tired of this lawfare bull**** but I bet braindead liberals think it's a great idea.

I mean I guess it's better than biological men in women's sports, wide open borders, and no Voter ID but it's still comes off as lame, especially when the mission was a success.

All the Dems have is ironically what got the United Healthcare CEO murdered by their hero, Luigi: delay, deny and depose courtesy of their hyper partisan judge Boasberg. Again, this is the party to lecture us on ethics. Get real.

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

Save your drama. This is done.

---

How is it 'done''? There are now lawsuits in play:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/pete-hegseth-sued-over-signal-212507620.html

And probably some investigation still to play out. Not convinced yet it is 'done' yet where everyone gets out of this unscathed.

---

Stonewall everything. Do not cooperate or speak about it. Give everyone the double rods.

Quote:

---

Trump should tell them dems to piss up a rope and not fire a soul. What can the dems do? Nothing.

---

100% Another piece to this is not setting the precedent you will fire an appointed admin because the dems and media are in a frenzy. Unless further investigation reveals something more nefarious, damaging, etc. there is no reason to cost yourself anymore time on the matter other than what is required to prevent something like this from happening.

rootube said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

Save your drama. This is done.

---

Done with page 27 of this thread ?

---

Oh no. I'm sure you libs will be taking about it for years.

We fixed the keg said:

---

Quote:

---

Trump should tell them dems to piss up a rope and not fire a soul. What can the dems do? Nothing.

---

100% Another piece to this is not setting the precedent you will fire an appointed admin because the dems and media are in a frenzy. Unless further investigation reveals something more nefarious, damaging, etc. there is no reason to cost yourself anymore time on the matter other than what is required to prevent something like this from happening.

---

This is the way.

Burnsey said:

---

Not reading 27 pages. Did they fire the guy responsible or not?

---

Only bluesky smooth brains care

Note You are arguing with somebody who doesn't care if somebody is fired or not from this. Won't affect my life either way. I don't have sides here.

I am opining, particularly that I won't be surprised if somebody ultimately gets fired because of this. I'm not convinced the standard Fake News, Whataboutism, Deflection, Minimize, Attack The Messenger political playbook (that both political sides use) will entirely cleanup this mistake.

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Note You are arguing with somebody who doesn't care if somebody is fired or not from this. Won't affect my life either way. I don't have sides here.

I am opining, particularly that I still won't be surprised if somebody gets fired because of this. I'm not convinced the standard Fake News, Whataboutism, Deflection, Minimize, Attack The Messenger political playbook (that both political sides use) will entirely cleanup this mistake.

---

Who will force Trump to fire someone and how?

This thread is just further proof that the republic is done for.

People are doing their best to defend this idiocy.

Some are saying they don't care that it happened.

The people defending or not caring would have been lambasting the Biden admin. Some would be calling them treasonous.

We have people attacking the Trump admin that would have defended or not cared under Biden.

I used to think that some sort of crisis would eventually bring us back together. But, the Covid crisis (manufactured or not) only drove us further apart.

Sad.

Tom Fox said:

---

We fixed the keg said:

---

Quote:

---

Trump should tell them dems to piss up a rope and not fire a soul. What can the dems do? Nothing.

---

100% Another piece to this is not setting the precedent you will fire an appointed admin because the dems and media are in a frenzy. Unless further investigation reveals something more nefarious, damaging, etc. there is no reason to cost yourself anymore time on the matter other than what is required to prevent something like this from happening.

---

This is the way.

---

Correct that at minimum you have to say and do things making it very clear that this mistake won't happen again.

Even if you give Waltz and Hegseth a mulligan.

Now if later Waltz then accidentally adds some rabid left wing journalist like Jim Acosta to a 'secure' chat group on Signal…well you already used up your mulligan!

I'd like to think that from now on Waltz, Hegseth, etc. Are going to be a lot more paranoid about who is on their chat groups.

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

We fixed the keg said:

---

Quote:

---

Trump should tell them dems to piss up a rope and not fire a soul. What can the dems do? Nothing.

---

100% Another piece to this is not setting the precedent you will fire an appointed admin because the dems and media are in a frenzy. Unless further investigation reveals something more nefarious, damaging, etc. there is no reason to cost yourself anymore time on the matter other than what is required to prevent something like this from happening.

---

This is the way.

---

Correct that at minimum you have to say and do things making it very clear that this mistake won't happen again.

Even if you give Waltz and Hegseth a mulligan.

Now if later Waltz then accidentally adds some rabid left wing journalist like Jim Acosta to a 'secure' chat group on Signal…well you already used up your mulligan!

I'd like to think that from now on Waltz, Hegseth, etc. Are going to be a lot more paranoid about who is on their chat groups.

---

I am perfectly fine with internal corrective action but nothing should be made public.

Based on the Trump hating Goldberg being added to the chat, could this be the start of a new iteration of the first Trump Administration, illegal spying and judicial court tie ups in order to sabotage this Trump term ?

oysterbayAG said:

---

Based on the Trump hating Goldberg being added to the chat, could this be the start of a new iteration of the first Trump Administration, illegal spying and judicial court tie ups in order to sabotage this Trump term ?

---

They tried to kill him twice. Do you think there's anything beneath them?

I will say - the fact that this happened is troubling and very worrisome. Everyone (regardless of party affiliation) should realize that this was a major F up, and people should, and hopefully will, be fired over this. Particularly since national security is such a huge concern at this point in time.

It's OK to point out when our team screws up - acting like it's OK when things go amiss is when questions arise.

oysterbayAG said:

---

Based on the Trump hating Goldberg being added to the chat, could this be the start of a new iteration of the first Trump Administration, illegal spying and judicial court tie ups in order to sabotage this Trump term ?

---

Well if Bondi could ever get off Fox News for a day maybe she could start ringing some of the little deep state twerps
Up for sedition.

Fdsa said:

---

titan said:

---

Pumpkinhead said:

---

I don't think everyone is safe on this yet, and if it continues to suck up oxygen in the room that Trump may still ultimately conclude it's best to fire somebody to move on from this (Waltz being most likely).

---

Oh, agree. Because it's not clear could not do much better. But it's going to depend on if some of the posts and links here indicating to some degree artificially engineered to take advantage of a weakness; pan out. Because that changes the narrative.

---

the thing about this is, Trump did nothing wrong - fire Pete and this passes in a day. Do you know how many Trump loving 44 yo male military guys have more experience than Pete? I would guess at least 1,500…and they all hate DEI. They might be missing the Fox News credentials.

---

I think we all understand that the ultimate goal of this story was to get at least one of Trump's appointees fired.

The media did that numerous times the last time he was in office.

There were a number of people that ****ed up. But, I don't think any of them committed fireable offenses.

If anything, WALZ is the one that would need to go, since it appears he was the one who added Goldberg.

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

I will say - the fact that this happened is troubling and very worrisome. Everyone (regardless of party affiliation) should realize that this was a major F up, and people should, and hopefully will, be fired over this. Particularly since national security is such a huge concern at this point in time.

It's OK to point out when our team screws up - acting like it's OK when things go amiss is when questions arise.

---

Nah, **** em

Ag with kids said:

---

Fdsa said:

---

titan said:

---

Pumpkinhead said:

---

I don't think everyone is safe on this yet, and if it continues to suck up oxygen in the room that Trump may still ultimately conclude it's best to fire somebody to move on from this (Waltz being most likely).

---

Oh, agree. Because it's not clear could not do much better. But it's going to depend on if some of the posts and links here indicating to some degree artificially engineered to take advantage of a weakness; pan out. Because that changes the narrative.

---

the thing about this is, Trump did nothing wrong - fire Pete and this passes in a day. Do you know how many Trump loving 44 yo male military guys have more experience than Pete? I would guess at least 1,500…and they all hate DEI. They might be missing the Fox News credentials.

---

I think we all understand that the ultimate goal of this story was to get at least one of Trump's appointees fired.

The media did that numerous times the last time he was in office.

There were a number of people that ****ed up. But, I don't think any of them committed fireable offenses.

If anything, WALZ is the one that would need to go, since it appears he was the one who added Goldberg.

---

Maybe…It needed to be brought up, maybe not in a news article, but someone with some authority needed to know the SECDEF is making mistakes like a guy out of basic. I've actually never seen anyone be this stupid with classified information, so no disrespect to all the new boot camp grads.

Fdsa said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Fdsa said:

---

titan said:

---

Pumpkinhead said:

---

I don't think everyone is safe on this yet, and if it continues to suck up oxygen in the room that Trump may still ultimately conclude it's best to fire somebody to move on from this (Waltz being most likely).

---

Oh, agree. Because it's not clear could not do much better. But it's going to depend on if some of the posts and links here indicating to some degree artificially engineered to take advantage of a weakness; pan out. Because that changes the narrative.

---

the thing about this is, Trump did nothing wrong - fire Pete and this passes in a day. Do you know how many Trump loving 44 yo male military guys have more experience than Pete? I would guess at least 1,500…and they all hate DEI. They might be missing the Fox News credentials.

---

I think we all understand that the ultimate goal of this story was to get at least one of Trump's appointees fired.

The media did that numerous times the last time he was in office.

There were a number of people that ****ed up. But, I don't think any of them committed fireable offenses.

If anything, WALZ is the one that would need to go, since it appears he was the one who added Goldberg.

---

Maybe…It needed to be brought up, maybe not in a news article, but someone with some authority needed to know the SECDEF is making mistakes like a guy out of basic. I've actually never seen anyone be this stupid with classified information, so no disrespect to all the new boot camp grads.

---

I was a fed Leo for 16 years and had a TS/SCI and people were very lax when handling classified information and routinely did business on personal devices.

This is a nothingburger.

The moderates are VERY concerned….

Who?mikejones! said:

---

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

I will say - the fact that this happened is troubling and very worrisome. Everyone (regardless of party affiliation) should realize that this was a major F up, and people should, and hopefully will, be fired over this. Particularly since national security is such a huge concern at this point in time.

It's OK to point out when our team screws up - acting like it's OK when things go amiss is when questions arise.

---

Nah, **** em

---

In general I would agree with that sentiment, but it's also OK to say that this was a major f*** up

Tom Fox said:

---

Fdsa said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Fdsa said:

---

titan said:

---

Pumpkinhead said:

---

I don't think everyone is safe on this yet, and if it continues to suck up oxygen in the room that Trump may still ultimately conclude it's best to fire somebody to move on from this (Waltz being most likely).

---

Oh, agree. Because it's not clear could not do much better. But it's going to depend on if some of the posts and links here indicating to some degree artificially engineered to take advantage of a weakness; pan out. Because that changes the narrative.

---

the thing about this is, Trump did nothing wrong - fire Pete and this passes in a day. Do you know how many Trump loving 44 yo male military guys have more experience than Pete? I would guess at least 1,500…and they all hate DEI. They might be missing the Fox News credentials.

---

I think we all understand that the ultimate goal of this story was to get at least one of Trump's appointees fired.

The media did that numerous times the last time he was in office.

There were a number of people that ****ed up. But, I don't think any of them committed fireable offenses.

If anything, WALZ is the one that would need to go, since it appears he was the one who added Goldberg.

---

Maybe…It needed to be brought up, maybe not in a news article, but someone with some authority needed to know the SECDEF is making mistakes like a guy out of basic. I've actually never seen anyone be this stupid with classified information, so no disrespect to all the new boot camp grads.

---

I was a fed Leo for 16 years and had a TS/SCI and people were very lax when handling classified information and routinely did business on personal devices.

This is a nothingburger.

---

yes, people are lax often…but they usually make take the effort to create the classified on unclass…that takes a lot of effort and time. And it's usually not the guy in charge of the whole deal.

We fixed the keg said:

---

Quote:

---

Trump should tell them dems to piss up a rope and not fire a soul. What can the dems do? Nothing.

---

100% Another piece to this is not setting the precedent you will fire an appointed admin because the dems and media are in a frenzy. Unless further investigation reveals something more nefarious, damaging, etc. there is no reason to cost yourself anymore time on the matter other than what is required to prevent something like this from happening.

---

Agree with that. Don't let a Sessions moment be set over something that may not even be much of what it looks like. Once again, most of those in the public sphere and talking heads feigning outrage and concern have proven security never entered their prior politics.

Key is your italics.

But do learn from this and don't engage in a bunch of indistinct ducking or splitting hairs. When you don't have all the facts yet, just stand stubbornly on that so you don't appear a fool or worse, a liar. Fear a bit of that happened here.