Democrats seek criminal probe over group chat on Houthi strike

[JoeB131]

It was not a "mistake." Jeffery Goldberg was intentionally and purposely added to the Signal chat by some unknown deep state operative embedded within the Trump administration. This was done in order to embarrass President Trump and his cabinet members.

You can bet that that Jeffrey Goldberg has now been deleted from the contacts of everyone in the Executive branch.

Wow, you are not seeing the point, are you?

The problem wasn't Goldberg (who was kind of an odd choice for Waltz to have a connection with) it was that they were talking about really classified stuff on a public application. The only way this could possibly be worse is if they used WeChat.

 

[JoeB131]

The fact that an enemy, anti-American journalist at the Atlantic got a hold of the conversation is definitely a criminal act, probably on the part of a low-level civil service stooge. Finding out who the leaker is important, but fortunately, the military adventure turned out fine.

Except he's not the enemy, he's an American.

He didn't get ahold of it, he was invited by one of Trump's stooges.

 

[Polishprince]

Wow, you are not seeing the point, are you?

The problem wasn't Goldberg

Actually it was exactly that.

Having an enemy journalist on a group chat is a real problem, regardless of how secure the cone of silence is. When FDR had meetings during the 1940's, he didn't let reporters from Der Sturmer eavesdrop.

 

[Polishprince]

Except he's not the enemy, he's an American.

He didn't get ahold of it, he was invited by one of Trump's stooges.

He's an anti-American seeking to bring down our country.

He may have a US passport, but his goal is to try and throttle the idea of making America great.

 

[JoeB131]

Actually it was exactly that.

Having an enemy journalist on a group chat is a real problem, regardless of how secure the cone of silence is. When FDR had meetings during the 1940's, he didn't let reporters from Der Sturmer eavesdrop.

How is he an "enemy" journalist? Because he wrote articles on Trump that Trump didn't like?

He is an American working for an American publication.

And obviously, he had a good working relationship with Hegseth or Waltz or whoever invited him to the chat.

 

[Polishprince]

And obviously, he had a good working relationship with Hegseth or Waltz or whoever invited him to the chat.

My guess is he had a good relationship with an underling acting as a mole.

Get this fool in front of investigators and get him to spill the name of the spy who let him listen in.

 

[DGS49]

If this had gone to a real, objective journalist, none of us would be aware of the security breach. S/he would have called someone high up at DoD and advised them that there was a fuck-up, and that would be the end of it.

CERTAINLY, a serious investigation should be done to see how the hell this happened. The fact that it is the Democrats in Congress who are calling for it tells you all you need to know. They are not a law enforcement body. Never have been.

Someone, somewhere made this happen on purpose. It was not an inadvertent error. The country needs to know who that is.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Are the Houthis Islamic Terrorists members of the Democrat Party's coalition of hate?

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Sorry, but I can't get worked up over Democrat outrage in this matter after the Hillary e-mail controversy.

 

[evenflow1969]

‘Democratic lawmakers called for criminal investigations Wednesday into the conduct surrounding a sensitive group chat in which high-ranking Trump officials discussed military action against the Houthis.

Senate and House Democrats underscored the Espionage Act in letters to the Trump administration as they called for either Attorney General Pamela Bondi or a special counsel to review the activity of the Signal group chat, which has set off a firestorm on Capitol Hill.

The existence of the group chat was revealed by The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, who reported he was accidentally added to the chat. On Wednesday, The Atlantic published the chat that included information about the attacks ahead of “the scheduled start of the bombing of Houthi positions.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, argued in a letter Wednesday that conduct in the group chat was “likely” a violation of the Espionage Act. “This situation is perhaps one of the most humiliating and dangerous national security breaches in modern American history,” Raskin said in the letter to Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel, adding that the episode put the lives of American servicemembers at risk.’

Democrats seek criminal probe over group chat on Houthi strike - Roll Call

Democratic lawmakers called for criminal investigations Wednesday into the conduct surrounding a Signal chat discussing military action.

rollcall.com

Very good.

The incompetence and reckless disregard for security protocols is in fact criminal.

Multiple Republicans signed on to the probe yesterday.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I think it's more of a matter of double standards.

We heard the Republicans disingenously complain about Hillary's emails for years, even though the supposedly "Top Secret" information on threads were reports in the NYT about programs we denied were happening.

tit for tat joe....

 

[JoeB131]

Sorry, but I can't get worked up over Democrat outrage in this matter after the Hillary e-mail controversy.

This seems to be a lot worse, in every way.

Hillary's "Top Secret" emails consisted of reposting NYT articles about drone strikes the US Government was denying they were doing in Pakistan and Yemen. Who were we keeping a secret from?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

‘Democratic lawmakers called for criminal investigations Wednesday into the conduct surrounding a sensitive group chat in which high-ranking Trump officials discussed military action against the Houthis.

Senate and House Democrats underscored the Espionage Act in letters to the Trump administration as they called for either Attorney General Pamela Bondi or a special counsel to review the activity of the Signal group chat, which has set off a firestorm on Capitol Hill.

The existence of the group chat was revealed by The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, who reported he was accidentally added to the chat. On Wednesday, The Atlantic published the chat that included information about the attacks ahead of “the scheduled start of the bombing of Houthi positions.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, argued in a letter Wednesday that conduct in the group chat was “likely” a violation of the Espionage Act. “This situation is perhaps one of the most humiliating and dangerous national security breaches in modern American history,” Raskin said in the letter to Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel, adding that the episode put the lives of American servicemembers at risk.’

Democrats seek criminal probe over group chat on Houthi strike - Roll Call

Democratic lawmakers called for criminal investigations Wednesday into the conduct surrounding a Signal chat discussing military action.

rollcall.com

Very good.

The incompetence and reckless disregard for security protocols is in fact criminal.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

This seems to be a lot worse, in every way.

Hillary's "Top Secret" emails consisted of reposting NYT articles about drone strikes the US Government was denying they were doing in Pakistan and Yemen. Who were we keeping a secret from?

Irrelevant. These guys made a mistake but Hilary's faux pas was deliberate.

But it doesn't matter, we could compare fuck-ups until Democrats decide to not be hypocrites (in other words, it would never end) but my point is that their outrage over this rings hollow given that they said and did virtually nothing about Hilary's fuck up.

If some kind of reprimand or punishment is called for here then I won't complain if they get it. But for fuck's sake, stop this goddamn, hypocritical whining and gnashing of teeth when one of your own fucked up just as bad. They look like two-faced douchebags with zero integrity.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Necessary? Yes. Because it revealed the lack of professionalism in Donald's cabinet. What Hillary did or did not do does not matter now.

We don't want anyone making these kinds of dumbass mistakes.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Necessary? Yes. Because it revealed the lack of professionalism in Donald's cabinet. What Hillary did or did not do does not matter now.

We don't want anyone making these kinds of dumbass mistakes.

It certainly mattered then, didn't it?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

It certainly mattered then, didn't it?

We are talking about now, which is far more important, yes?

 

[Orangecat]

‘Democratic lawmakers called for criminal investigations Wednesday into the conduct surrounding a sensitive group chat in which high-ranking Trump officials discussed military action against the Houthis.

Senate and House Democrats underscored the Espionage Act in letters to the Trump administration as they called for either Attorney General Pamela Bondi or a special counsel to review the activity of the Signal group chat, which has set off a firestorm on Capitol Hill.

The existence of the group chat was revealed by The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, who reported he was accidentally added to the chat. On Wednesday, The Atlantic published the chat that included information about the attacks ahead of “the scheduled start of the bombing of Houthi positions.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, argued in a letter Wednesday that conduct in the group chat was “likely” a violation of the Espionage Act. “This situation is perhaps one of the most humiliating and dangerous national security breaches in modern American history,” Raskin said in the letter to Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel, adding that the episode put the lives of American servicemembers at risk.’

Democrats seek criminal probe over group chat on Houthi strike - Roll Call

Democratic lawmakers called for criminal investigations Wednesday into the conduct surrounding a Signal chat discussing military action.

rollcall.com

Very good.

The incompetence and reckless disregard for security protocols is in fact criminal.

No classified information was discussed. Nothingburger.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

 

[JoeB131]

Irrelevant. These guys made a mistake but Hilary's faux pas was deliberate.

But it doesn't matter, we could compare fuck-ups until Democrats decide to not be hypocrites (in other words, it would never end) but my point is that their outrage over this rings hollow given that they said and did virtually nothing about Hilary's fuck up.

If some kind of reprimand or punishment is called for here then I won't complain if they get it. But for fuck's sake, stop this goddamn, hypocritical whining and gnashing of teeth when one of your own fucked up just as bad. They look like two-faced douchebags with zero integrity.

Um, no, you guys made a hysterical deal about emails that were only classified after the fact because our rules for classifying information are kind of outdated. (An article in the NYT is "Classified"? Really?)

This was giving out information on an unsecured service in real time, and I doubt this is the first time they used it. Probably because they don't trust the system the government has because of the "Deep State" or some such shit.