Did You Notice What Vanished From The Atlantic's Narrative About the Hegseth Signal Story?

why should she have? some retard reporter asking for comment isn't gonna get squat for a reply, this wasn't a congressional hearing.



who says it didn't happen on Biden's watch? unless it was a FOX reporter accidentally included the media at large would have covered it up and you'd never know it happened.



you did see the part that Biden's admin endorsed using signal yeah?





defending a nothingburger


why not? Biden's admin used it. once again boys and girls .. signal was not hacked. i find it amusing many are posting all these Pentagon warning stuff. yet Biden Admin used it for four years.






lol trying to throw Hegseth under the bus is laughable unless it was him that invited the wrong person. it wasn't.


the Atlantic intentionally sensationalized the material they accidentally got access to.





who did inappropriate sharing? Hegseth? no he didn't share anything actually top secret.


if Waltz now claims he was responsible for the invite list then even if there had been any top secret material shared by Hegseth since it was not his task to build the invite list it wouldn't be his fault


i'm so glad no one in this forum ever fucked up a meeting invite list ever! we are prefect .. yeah?


BAHHAAAA


NOTHINGBURGER Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Duck. Weave. Deny. So. Tell us, exactly what is SOP for such events when the SigInt of DIA, C4I, ONI interact with what NSA and CIA tell the boys on the Hill?

To use an open source app that is nowhere near the hardened communication channels that are de rigueur for us in such situations? You are so wearing out that little piece of dance floor you refuse to move from.

Wrong as usual. This has been shown to be the Atlantic, and one reporter, lying again. But the usual suspects instantly grab onto it as gospel. Another swing and miss. Originally Posted by Lantern2814

What lie? From up yonder in the lofty heights of the WH it is confirmed. No one in the room has denied the transcript.

... Too right, mate -- it IS the Atlantic's doing.
And THEY cannot keep their-own story straight.

Just one more reason that the American people
DO see this as a swing and miss...

### Salty Originally Posted by Salty Again

How can you not keep a story straight if it is not retracted?
Especially when everyone in the room has not disputed the transcript.

Tulsi G. did testify before Congress. Senator Mark Warner is chairman of the intelligence committee. It was Sen Warner that asked her if the information that Hegseth shared on the Signal Group chat was not classified then share it with Congress. Senator Warner is not some reporter.

Signal is okay to use but not for attack plans. You didn't hear Trump tell the Press that Waltz will not have to apologize and he won't be using Signal anymore. You did not hear Waltz reply "Yes Sir"?

If it was such a nothing burger why is Elon Musk helping out in a investigation to make sure something like this "Never Ever Happens Again". That comes straight from the mouth of our 27 year old press Secretary. Originally Posted by adav8s28

*THAT* is what the maggies refuse to believe.
There are various levels of communication security to use depending on what is to be relayed. I see alot of these maggies falling on their swords trying to defend what happened.

It's called Manning-TF-Up. It's something leaders do. Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

That is a completely foreign term to the melange one and his little minions. Barely a single vertebrae to share amongst them.

Even former pilots have said that Hegseth committed a security breach with the attack plans he put into Signal group chat.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...c/82702567007/ Originally Posted by adav8s28

Various military people of breadth and depth agree.
Let's not even mention the intelligence community.

More like a distraction, misdirection, look there not here, smoke coming out of the mirror, from the legality of President Auto-Pen signing stuff under specious auspices. Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Ah. See you practicing what you preach. If pete didn't fuck up and it was later found out what was happening (which is easy to do with a non-secure squawk channel he used) y'all maggies would be screaming persecution for so long. Y'all don't handle getting caught dead cold to rights.

You will never admit fault. And spekku before apologizing.

lol you keep harping on signal. claiming it isn't secure is false. it was secure enough for the Biden admin to encourage its use.

signal isn't the issue. it wasn't hacked. Waltz made the mistake of inviting someone who shouldn't have been invited.

the intel presented was worthless without more details. no dates. no location.


nothingburger Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Signal is the issue if you are discussing military operations. Waltz and Hegseth both have a black phone and a red phone on their desk. If you are going to discuss military operations like the info Hegseth put into the Signal Group chat, he should have used the Red phone not Signal or the black phone.

Why do think Trump said that Waltz does not have to apologize and he should not use Signal anymore?

You say nothingburger, our combat pilots disagree with you. Originally Posted by adav8s28

Ask Sleepy Joe and his CISA group who recommended it. Seems you were pretty hippy-dippy with them way back around December 18, 2024. Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Duck. Weave. Deny. So. Tell us, exactly what is SOP for such events when the SigInt of DIA, C4I, ONI interact with what NSA and CIA tell the boys on the Hill?


what is it? you don't know anymore than i do.


nothingburger



To use an open source app that is nowhere near the hardened communication channels that are de rigueur for us in such situations? You are so wearing out that little piece of dance floor you refuse to move from.

nonsense the signal app is secure. and the more you flap around about signal which was not hacked or compromised means you beat a dead horse over this nothingburger

What lie? From up yonder in the lofty heights of the WH it is confirmed. No one in the room has denied the transcript.

why should they? nothing critical or useful was disclosed to that The Atlantic asshole.


the real question is .. is Alex Wong a Demonrat mole? his wife is a Demonrat operative.



why is Waltz covering for him?


How can you not keep a story straight if it is not retracted?
Especially when everyone in the room has not disputed the transcript.

nothing is redacted. i poste4d what The Atlantic claims is "secret intel"



*THAT* is what the maggies refuse to believe.
There are various levels of communication security to use depending on what is to be relayed. I see alot of these maggies falling on their swords trying to defend what happened.

what you refuse to believe is that this is a nothingburger that there was no issue with signal, which the Biden admin approved to use for government use .. was not hacked.



That is a completely foreign term to the melange one and his little minions. Barely a single vertebrae to share amongst them.

if you say so

Various military people of breadth and depth agree.
Let's not even mention the intelligence community.

various military couldn't make any operational use of what was in the chat if their assholes depended on it


prove that wrong


Ah. See you practicing what you preach. If pete didn't fuck up and it was later found out what was happening (which is easy to do with a non-secure squawk channel he used) y'all maggies would be screaming persecution for so long. Y'all don't handle getting caught dead cold to rights.

You will never admit fault. And spekku before apologizing. Originally Posted by Precious_b

he didn't. someone else did. the "goat" is whoever invited that asshole from The Atlantic ... and WHY?

he didn't. someone else did. the "goat" is whoever invited that asshole from The Atlantic ... and WHY? Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Waco, you fail to acknowledge the underlying problem. I’m sure signal is a good solution for encrypting text communications. I’m sure it was even recommended by plenty of people and other agencies for that specific purpose.

That doesn’t mean that it should be used to communicate operational military information or intelligence.

Pete Hegseth and most of the people in the chat group should have known better.

Waco, you fail to acknowledge the underlying problem. I’m sure signal is a good solution for encrypting text communications. I’m sure it was even recommended by plenty of people and other agencies for that specific purpose.

That doesn’t mean that it should be used to communicate operational military information or intelligence.

Pete Hegseth and most of the people in the chat group should have known better. Originally Posted by txdot-guy

what a contradiction of facts. if it was recommended how is Hegseth at fault for using it? he's not. there's only one "goat" here .. the one that assidentally invited a known hostile far left radical to the conversation.



was it Waltz? Alex Wong (the sleeper agent of the Demonrats)? someone's going to GITMO and it won't be Hegseth.



so who goes to GITMO over this?

what a contradiction of facts. if it was recommended how is Hegseth at fault for using it? he's not. there's only one "goat" here .. the one that assidentally invited a known hostile far left radical to the conversation.

was it Waltz? Alex Wong (the sleeper agent of the Demonrats)? someone's going to GITMO and it won't be Hegseth.

so who goes to GITMO over this? Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

So you’re saying that it is prudent, legal and common sense for anyone in the military chain of command to communicate military operational information over the signal app using commercial grade technology, software, and communication equipment.

That’s just ridiculous.

So you’re saying that it is prudent, legal and common sense for anyone in the military chain of command to communicate military operational information over the signal app using commercial grade technology, software, and communication equipment.

That’s just ridiculous. Originally Posted by txdot-guy

what's ridiculous is you and others fixating on signal. it was never the issue. the issue is two fold .. first nothing in the text exchange was useful to anyone and second who invited that asshole from The Atlantic?


that's the issue. signal has nothing to do with it

the issue is two fold .. first nothing in the text exchange was useful to anyone and second who invited that asshole from The Atlantic?


that's the issue. signal has nothing to do with it Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Military operations should not be discussed on a messaging app like signal. The Red phone or a SCIF room should have been used.

Waltz still doesn't know how the reporter who did not ask to be on the call, got invited. Or he doesn't know why he did not catch the mistake one of his staffers made.

I have never made a mistake with a Microsoft Outlook distribution list. I have never invited someone who did not work for the company.

You just don't want to admit the obvious that a Security Breech was committed by Waltz and Hegseth.

Trump said Waltz does not have to apologize. Trump also said that Waltz should not use Signal anymore.

CIA Director Radcliffe said in a congressional hearing that the conversation should have been conducted through "classified channels".


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...al/ar-AA1BEbwR

he didn't. someone else did. the "goat" is whoever invited that asshole from The Atlantic ... and WHY? Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Before going further, you are going to have to get your hypocracy (sp) straight.

In the past, you have condemned a person who only broadcast a piece of news that they did not investigate or do the leg work on. I.e. it was someone else fault for not vetting. But you held no blame for that person. But the guy did his moralistic duty that his job required, he stepped down.

Now, we have a guy that allowed such loose security protocols to allow secret stuff be available to those who should not have ears on it and you say he is teflon.

Former was Dan Rather. Guy who did the big thing and is still a pillar of journalistic integrity (anything you say to the contrary will fall on deaf ears since your metric for *news* is subscribership from anyone as long as it isn't near centered, highly factual.)

Latter is Hegseth.

So, can you straighten out which side of hypocrisy you are on?

Waco, you fail to acknowledge the underlying problem. I’m sure signal is a good solution for encrypting text communications. I’m sure it was even recommended by plenty of people and other agencies for that specific purpose.

That doesn’t mean that it should be used to communicate operational military information or intelligence.

Pete Hegseth and most of the people in the chat group should have known better. Originally Posted by txdot-guy

TxDot, he can't comprehend anything if it entails keeping your mouth shut when you are suppose to. Being around people who have been trusted to keep this country secure in the intelligence community, he displays no knowledge what that is about.

...but i'll dumb it down for him.

Before going further, you are going to have to get your hypocracy (sp) straight.

In the past, you have condemned a person who only broadcast a piece of news that they did not investigate or do the leg work on. I.e. it was someone else fault for not vetting. But you held no blame for that person. But the guy did his moralistic duty that his job required, he stepped down.

Now, we have a guy that allowed such loose security protocols to allow secret stuff be available to those who should not have ears on it and you say he is teflon.

Former was Dan Rather. Guy who did the big thing and is still a pillar of journalistic integrity (anything you say to the contrary will fall on deaf ears since your metric for *news* is subscribership from anyone as long as it isn't near centered, highly factual.)

Latter is Hegseth.

So, can you straighten out which side of hypocrisy you are on?




TxDot, he can't comprehend anything if it entails keeping your mouth shut when you are suppose to. Being around people who have been trusted to keep this country secure in the intelligence community, he displays no knowledge what that is about.

...but i'll dumb it down for him. Originally Posted by Precious_b

if you sykes so


bahahahhahaaa

if you sykes so


bahahahhahaaa Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

I like the sykes.
Don't tacko the wakcos

I like the sykes.
Don't tacko the wakcos Originally Posted by Precious_b

if you say so

if you say so Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

No. A person who was in the intelligence field said so.

And you have amply demonstrated you have no knowledge who such people do their job.

You only acknowledge the actions of a person who is well out of his field of expertise (if he has that in any aspect of his life) after they french to prostate of the melange one.