What the hell?

[Marvin the Martian]

I didn't hear about Hilary's being over time. She turned over her server when she was being investigated and cooperated with being cleared. She didn't fight the investigation, try to get followers to think the FBI did an improper raid on her house nor have a 2nd server that she tried to hide and claim didn't exist. Having a hard time thinking her scandal was closer to Trump's.

I don't think she had 60 Top Secret messages emailed to her simultaneously. So it had to be over time.

Now she said, and it is true, other people sent them and that isn't on her. That is true, to an extent. Once she noticed people were sending TS on that platform, she should have shut it down. Escaping the FOIA isn't worth that cost.

 

[UncleMark]

I didn't hear about Hilary's being over time once she was caught She turned over her server when she was being investigated and cooperated through being cleared. She didn't fight the investigation, try to get followers to think the FBI did an improper raid on her house nor have a 2nd server that she tried to hide and claim didn't exist. Having a hard time thinking her scandal was closer to Trump's but sure somewhere between Biden and Trump

Bleachbit coming in 3, 2, 1.....

 

[HurryingHoosiers]

I don't think she had 60 Top Secret messages emailed to her simultaneously. So it had to be over time.

Now she said, and it is true, other people sent them and that isn't on her. That is true, to an extent. Once she noticed people were sending TS on that platform, she should have shut it down. Escaping the FOIA isn't worth that cost.

The emails happened over time but now sure how that changes much. The differences between the cases are how they behaved once the investigation started.

That would be kind of like saying Biden's classified docs happened over time because they were in his garage for a while.

 

[Baller23Boogie]

When our politicians can't admit they ****ed up, we're doomed as a country.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

But Trump should hold someone accountable. It’s likely that federal law was broken in this incident. At the absolute very least, these officials conducted themselves extraordinarily foolishly and in a manner that is unbecoming of their offices. They have lost the credibility to criticize the past, present, and future mishandling of sensitive American national-security information (such as Hillary Clinton’s home-brew email server, and Joe Biden and Donald Trump’s stashing of documents in their garages and bathrooms).​

​

In my view, the most egregious behavior was Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s. (The stupidest was National Security Adviser Mike Waltz’s adding of Goldberg to the conversation in the first place.)​

​

​

Pete Hegseth — the top civilian in the Department of the Defense and a man who has command authority over U.S. military operations worldwide — texted information, over an unsecured channel, that “contained operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing.” That’s shocking, egregious, and totally outrageous.​

​

President Trump should demand Pete Hegseth’s resignation. Today.​

​

A question now hangs over this administration: Will there be accountability under Trump — or does the buck stop nowhere, as it did for the previous four years?​

​

​

​

Trump Should Fire Pete Hegseth​

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/trump-should-fire-pete-hegseth/amp/

While I'm certainly not going to defend any of them, considering the reckless choice to use a public network for this conversation that any one of them could've and should've questioned, I find it interesting that Hegseth is the one taking most of the heat (at least from NRO)...given that Waltz was the one who added Goldberg to the thread.

I mean, Vance was on there too. So, if you're aiming at the highest ranking official on it, wouldn't that be Vance?

 

[Mark Milton]

I don't think she had 60 Top Secret messages emailed to her simultaneously. So it had to be over time.

Now she said, and it is true, other people sent them and that isn't on her. That is true, to an extent. Once she noticed people were sending TS on that platform, she should have shut it down. Escaping the FOIA isn't worth that cost.

Hilary was being Hilary--she should have never had a private server--she knew better. I don't care if she had 14,000 emails about "cankle suppression therapy" (which she needed), it should have never happened. No exceptions to this crap is the only way it works.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

The emails happened over time but now sure how that changes much. The differences between the cases are how they behaved once the investigation started.

That would be kind of like saying Biden's classified docs happened over time because they were in his garage for a while.

There is an argument that someone like Biden or Pence could rush from one meeting to another and accidentally not return a TS document. They find the document, they call, they return it, they answer questions, and we let bygones be bygones. If they routinely forget to return documents, it is a much bigger problem.

Clinton had a systemic problem. It wasn't a one or two off. She had every opportunity after one time, two times, three times, four times, five times, etc, to reevaluate the need to skirt FOIA laws with her own server. It appears she never did. That is a far bigger problem than Pence or Biden.

Aloha said it best in 2016, neither Clinton nor Trump would ever get TS clearance in normal circumstances.

Obviously what Trump did in actively thwarting the return of documents is a critical error. Anyone saying otherwise is selling something. But Clinton's actions aren't excusable. Once she saw it was happening she had a responsibility to put an end to it.

 

[twenty02]

While I'm certainly not going to defend any of them, considering the reckless choice to use a public network for this conversation that any one of them could've and should've questioned, I find it interesting that Hegseth is the one taking most of the heat (at least from NRO)...given that Waltz was the one who added Goldberg to the thread.

I mean, Vance was on there too. So, if you're aiming at the highest ranking official on it, wouldn't that be Vance?

Seems like Hegseth was the one that shared the most sensitive details, including the stuff the Atlantic wouldn't even publish.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Seems like Hegseth was the one that shared the most sensitive details, including the stuff the Atlantic wouldn't even publish.

Duh. Hegseth was the one in charge of details.

Three thing are true

1. Goldberg should not have been added to the chat.

2. Calling the messages war plans is a huge overstatement

3. Trump-haters pounce.

 

[HurryingHoosiers]

There is an argument that someone like Biden or Pence could rush from one meeting to another and accidentally not return a TS document. They find the document, they call, they return it, they answer questions, and we let bygones be bygones. If they routinely forget to return documents, it is a much bigger problem.

Clinton had a systemic problem. It wasn't a one or two off. She had every opportunity after one time, two times, three times, four times, five times, etc, to reevaluate the need to skirt FOIA laws with her own server. It appears she never did. That is a far bigger problem than Pence or Biden.

Aloha said it best in 2016, neither Clinton nor Trump would ever get TS clearance in normal circumstances.

Obviously what Trump did in actively thwarting the return of documents is a critical error. Anyone saying otherwise is selling something. But Clinton's actions aren't excusable. Once she saw it was happening she had a responsibility to put an end to it.

Not arguing that Clinton wasn't being an idiot. no need to help danc derail the thread further.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Duh. Hegseth was the one in charge of details.

Three thing are true

1. Goldberg should not have been added to the chat.

2. Calling the messages war plans is a huge overstatement

3. Trump-haters pounce.

I would LOVE to have seen your reaction if this had happened under Biden.

 

[HurryingHoosiers]

Duh. Hegseth was the one in charge of details.

Three thing are true

1. Goldberg should not have been added to the chat.

2. Calling the messages war plans is a huge overstatement

3. Trump-haters pounce.

you mean

1) Trump admin does something wrong

2) Trump sheep defend/deflect

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

Seems like Hegseth was the one that shared the most sensitive details, including the stuff the Atlantic wouldn't even publish.

Well, he's the SecDef. Who else would? It's not as if he deliberately shared the sensitive details with Goldberg. If that was the case, I'd be joining that particular pile-on.

Again, I'm entirely down with the notion that the failing here wasn't so much adding Goldberg to the thread, but choosing a public platform to have the conversation. But in that case, everybody on it bears equal responsibility.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

Duh. Hegseth was the one in charge of details.

Three thing are true

1. Goldberg should not have been added to the chat.

2. Calling the messages war plans is a huge overstatement

3. Trump-haters pounce.

Wouldn't you agree that using a publicly accessible platform to have this conversation was negligent and reckless?

Again, accidentally adding somebody who isn't intended to be in a digital conversation is something that can and does happen all the time. I've done it myself...and I've been unwittingly added to conversations that weren't intended for me.

I have to imagine they have access to a fully private, fully isolated network to do these sorts of things. And why would they choose to use something else?

 

[twenty02]

Well, he's the SecDef. Who else would? It's not as if he deliberately shared the sensitive details with Goldberg. If that was the case, I'd be joining that particular pile-on.

Again, I'm entirely down with the notion that the failing here wasn't so much adding Goldberg to the thread, but choosing a public platform to have the conversation. But in that case, everybody on it bears equal responsibility.

Well having this kind of general discussion on the topic is one thing, still very wildly inappropriate but this is next level:

​

At 11:44 a.m., the account labeled “Pete Hegseth” posted in Signal a “TEAM UPDATE.” I will not quote from this update, or from certain other subsequent texts. The information contained in them, if they had been read by an adversary of the United States, could conceivably have been used to harm American military and intelligence personnel, particularly in the broader Middle East, Central Command’s area of responsibility. What I will say, in order to illustrate the shocking recklessness of this Signal conversation, is that the Hegseth post contained operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing.

 

[HurryingHoosiers]

Wouldn't you agree that using a publicly accessible platform to have this conversation was negligent and reckless?

Again, accidentally adding somebody who isn't intended to be in a digital conversation is something that can and does happen all the time. I've done it myself...and I've been unwittingly added to conversations that weren't intended for me.

I have to imagine they have access to a fully private, fully isolated network to do these sorts of things. And why would they choose to use something else?

probably to have complete control/ownership of the communication. So that when their time is up, they don't have to leave evidence of what they talked about.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

probably to have complete control/ownership of the communication. So that when their time is up, they don't have to leave evidence of what they talked about.

This seems like a reasonable guess. That was the charge lobbed at HRC, too.

However, given the nature of this particular chat, there's nothing in here that seems like the sort of thing they'd want hidden from any scrutiny.

So....what other chats are they using Signal for?

 

[Mark Milton]

Duh. Hegseth was the one in charge of details.

Three thing are true

1. Goldberg should not have been added to the chat.

2. Calling the messages war plans is a huge overstatement

3. Trump-haters pounce.

Then you didn't read the article

The things that were discussed in the text that Goldberg referenced that he did not want to repeat was that the text chat described:

1. Who the they were going after (individuals);
2. The location of the strikes;
3. The time of the strikes;
4. What was going to be used;
5. The time of the strikes.

That seems like a war plan to me if you are striking with missiles.

This isn't trump hating--this is stupidity hating.

 

[Baller23Boogie]

 

[HurryingHoosiers]

This seems like a reasonable guess. That was the charge lobbed at HRC, too.

However, given the nature of this particular chat, there's nothing in here that seems like the sort of thing they'd want hidden from any scrutiny.

So....what other chats are they using Signal for?

Doesn't necessarily mean they had this specific chat in mind when the decision was made. Probably just have all chats on signal app regardless of necessity. Many people also don't want to mess with using multiple messaging apps.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Then you didn't read the article

The things that were discussed in the text that Goldberg referenced that he did not want to repeat was that the text chat described:

1. Who the they were going after (individuals);
2. The location of the strikes;
3. The time of the strikes;
4. What was going to be used;
5. The time of the strikes.

That seems like a war plan to me if you are striking with missiles.

This isn't trump hating--this is stupidity hating.

I did read it. I thought it was a good article given Goldber’s history of writing crap. Yeah the chat disclosed confidential stuff. I wouldn’t know a war plan from a recipe, but I’ve read three posts from people who do know, and they said it wasn’t a war plan.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

I did read it. I thought it was a good article given Goldber’s history of writing crap. Yeah the chat disclosed confidential stuff. I wouldn’t know a war plan from a recipe, but I’ve read three posts from people who do know, and they said it wasn’t a war plan.

Semantics. Suppose you had a legal brief, I took very important sections out of it and posted it and people called it a brief. You would point out that it wasn't your brief as you know a brief and it wasn't formatted as any legal brief would be. That is all just semantics, the important parts were there even if not formatted as a war plan.

 

[Baller23Boogie]

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

How many times have they used Signal to discuss operational plans before this one was exposed? Everything discussed on Signal has to be considered compromised. Every device used by participants and every server the chats passed through have to be considered compromised. The Atlantic's servers have to be considered compromised. This is a mess. Should never have happened.

Hegseth is reckless and the Secretary most likely to embarrass the administration, and he has. Will this be the last time? However, will Waltz going to take the fall? Will the President fire anyone over this?

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/24/mike-waltz-signal-chat-resign-00246541

Why did Waltz have Goldberg's number?

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

Semantics. Suppose you had a legal brief, I took very important sections out of it and posted it and people called it a brief. You would point out that it wasn't your brief as you know a brief and it wasn't formatted as any legal brief would be. That is all just semantics, the important parts were there even if not formatted as a war plan.

Yep. I doubt that "WAR PLAN" was printed at the top of the shared information. It had operational details that are ALWAYS protected (OPSEC). This is a significant breach of security protocols and someone or several someones need to be held accountable. Then they need to send the experts in to determine the damage done by this compromise and any other time they've used Signal inappropriately to discuss operations.

 

[larsIU]

You can tell they don't really have anything when they pivot to Biden. The real pathetic ones try to drag Obama into the mix.

 

[HurryingHoosiers]

Found video of them going to the meeting to come up with a war plan

 

[BradStevens]

Honestly, some cannot admit a single clear mistake. Everything is "defend at all costs, scorched earth". Hegseth screwed up, easy to say. Anything else is obviously a partisan lie

It’s not easy to say when people are calling for impeachment, resignations, firings.

But yes, it should be said.

 

[BradStevens]

View embedded media

When our politicians can't admit they ****ed up, we're doomed as a country.

When was this golden age when our politicians admitted they screwed up?

 

[Mark Milton]

When was this golden age when our politicians admitted they screwed up?

Top of my head:

1. Kennedy on Bay of Pigs
2. Reagan said something like "serious mistakes were made" in the iran contra affair.
3. Obama two weeks into office said "I screwed up"
4. Robert McNamara in his book said the US was "terribly wrong" going into Vietnam and keeping that war gone (albeit he did so only 1995)
5. Gary Hart resigned because he couldn't control his nether regions.

There might be others that I can't recall or remember, but few and far between

 

[mcmurtry66]

That analogy works for Biden. They found six pages at his home and they reported it. Hundreds of documents were at Trump's home, and he kept trying to hide them. The two cases aren't close to the same. A shoplifer with a $100 item and submits to arrest when caught vs a bank robber who fights the police trying to arrest him.

Clinton is closer to Trump. They found 60ish top secret documents. That was over time. She could/should have shut down the server after one, certainly after two. She was willing to let it keep happening. That is very problematic.

I get why they go more leniently on people who discover a document and call it in. That is the behavior they want, they don't want them burying the document in the backyard to stay out of prison. It is why Biden's case is so very different than Trump's. The bigwigs who have been caught and punished were actively covering up. That's the behavior they REALLY want to stop.

Create a group that does not report to the president. They monitor documents. After a meeting, no one, not even the president, leaves the room if 10 documents were handed out and 9 were returned. No documents in the private areas of the White House or US Naval Observatory. Documents cannot leave secure areas of House/Senate. The elected have to leave their offices and go to the documents. I know that will cut down on the time they have to call to gladhand for money, but that's just an extra benefit. The problem doesn't seem to be the people who can get fired for losing documents, it is the people who largely won't get fired.

Why are these people all so stupid. Not using personal devices should be a no brainer

 

[BradStevens]

View embedded media

So did Goldberg wait until after the strike to report this? Did he contact the White House first and give them the heads up?

This doesn’t bear on the magnitude of the mistake by the admin, but I think this could be a fascinating case study for journalism classes. What should Goldberg have done? Many in the press might have rushed to publish this pre-bombing to heighten the shock value, maybe nix the strike, etc. How much should a member of the press assist the govt in its aims? Interesting issues.

 

[BradStevens]

Why are these people all so stupid. Not using personal devices should be a no brainer

Takes a lot of effort to switch devices when you’re scrolling that new hottie’s recently uploaded bikini pics on Insta to some dumb work alerts about whatever (bomb them wherever. Below my pay grade. Damn look at that red two piece!)

 

[Spartans9312]

How many times have they used Signal to discuss operational plans before this one was exposed? Everything discussed on Signal has to be considered compromised. Every device used by participants and every server the chats passed through have to be considered compromised. The Atlantic's servers have to be considered compromised. This is a mess. Should never have happened.

Hegseth is reckless and the Secretary most likely to embarrass the administration, and he has. Will this be the last time? However, will Waltz going to take the fall? Will the President fire anyone over this?

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/24/mike-waltz-signal-chat-resign-00246541

Why did Waltz have Goldberg's number?

Trump not planning to fire Waltz after national security text chain leak

National security advisor Mike Waltz's job is not in jeopardy after The Atlantic's reported a security breach on a Signal text chain with Cabinet officials.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Marvin the Martian]

It’s not easy to say when people are calling for impeachment, resignations, firings.

But yes, it should be said.

Has anyone here said impeachment?

Firing, I suggested above that would never happen but it would happen to a generic person.

 

[mcmurtry66]

Takes a lot of effort to switch devices when you’re scrolling that new hottie’s recently uploaded bikini pics on Insta to some dumb work alerts about whatever (bomb them wherever. Below my pay grade. Damn look at that red two piece!)

Yeah this is actually right. I wouldn’t have made it a day

Hey. I guess you saw I’m sect of defense. Do you want me to attack??? 🤣🤣🤣. Just kidding. But do send pics. I’m at a stupid conf with foreigners. No idea what they’re on about. Bored

Oh fck I think I sent a journalist turd war plans

 

[HurryingHoosiers]

So did Goldberg wait until after the strike to report this? Did he contact the White House first and give them the heads up?

This doesn’t bear on the magnitude of the mistake by the admin, but I think this could be a fascinating case study for journalism classes. What should Goldberg have done? Many in the press might have rushed to publish this pre-bombing to heighten the shock value, maybe nix the strike, etc. How much should a member of the press assist the govt in its aims? Interesting issues.

Probably won't ever find out if he reported it to the administration beforehand. Last thing anyone would want (outside of the bad guys) is for it to become a story prior to the strike.

 

[BradStevens]

Has anyone here said impeachment?

Firing, I suggested above that would never happen but it would happen to a generic person.

Yes, post #29. Liked by four people.
I’m sure it’s being discussed in Washington, too, as it probably should.

 

[BradStevens]

Yeah this is actually right. I wouldn’t have made it a day

Hey. I guess you saw I’m sect of defense. Do you want me to attack??? 🤣🤣🤣. Just kidding. But do send pics. I’m at a stupid conf with foreigners. No idea what they’re on about. Bored

Oh fck I think I sent a journalist turd war plans

It would be great if we find out that on the same phone, Hegseth is texting a couple of chat groups of college buddies, military buddies, etc. daily, busting balls and joking about stuff inappropriately.

 

[Mark Milton]

So did Goldberg wait until after the strike to report this? Did he contact the White House first and give them the heads up?

This doesn’t bear on the magnitude of the mistake by the admin, but I think this could be a fascinating case study for journalism classes. What should Goldberg have done? Many in the press might have rushed to publish this pre-bombing to heighten the shock value, maybe nix the strike, etc. How much should a member of the press assist the govt in its aims? Interesting issues.

Good question. Goldberg repeatedly questions whether this is actually real because he has no idea why he would be included on it. He also writes:

"At 11:44 a.m., the account labeled “Pete Hegseth” posted in Signal a “TEAM UPDATE.” I will not quote from this update, or from certain other subsequent texts. The information contained in them, if they had been read by an adversary of the United States, could conceivably have been used to harm American military and intelligence personnel, particularly in the broader Middle East, Central Command’s area of responsibility. What I will say, in order to illustrate the shocking recklessness of this Signal conversation, is that the Hegseth post contained operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing."

I'm guessing at that point he's probably saying "oh shit". Goldberg probably did what he felt was best--not compromising anything by disclosing it.