Fire Pete Hegseth NOW - Hegseth shared attack details in second Signal chat

[SectionC3]

21 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

The haters in this case jump to conclusions based on initial reporting from anonymous sources, create a backstory based on circular reporting, and typically don’t want to engage in whataboutism because it reveals their own hypocrisy.  They don’t want to talk about it. 
 

The questions in this case for me:

 

1.  Can anonymous reports from liberal-leaning news sources be trusted? 

 

But can anonymous reports from right wing news be trusted?  And can the White House be trusted?
 

In response to your question, I would say…No, I would prefer to wait for additional details to come out before arriving at any conclusion as to what may/may not have happened.  
 

2.  Assuming the report is true, is there a comparable incident(s) from past admins, and in those cases, what was the administrative outcome? 

 

Who cares?  More whataboutism.  If this is true, and it's acceptable to this administration, then that's the way it goes.  I demand accountability.  These guys play golf, and go to UFC events, and pick on people.  And also ignore inflation.  And raise taxes.  But that's what you want!

 

 

[wnyguy]

Looks like another incident of WINNING to me. If the libs here are gnashing their teeth again it means something was done right.

[4th&long]

19 minutes ago, wnyguy said:

Looks like another incident of WINNING to me. If the libs here are gnashing their teeth again it means something was done right.

[All_Pro_Bills]

29 minutes ago, Albwan said:

 

"People familiar with the matter".

The administration needs to assign an independent investigator to determine if a security violation has been made and then take the appropriate action. If the Secretary did indeed set up a second chat group on a non-secure phone he should be fired or resign. Such poor judgment disqualifies him from the position. 

 

But if the allegations prove to be false the journalists filing the story should be pursued for investigation and potential criminal charges. At the least questioned about their sources. And if there are real people providing false information to the news outlets they should be arrested too.

 

Its one or the other here.

[Albwan]

2 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

The administration needs to assign an independent investigator to determine if a security violation has been made and then take the appropriate action. If the Secretary did indeed set up a second chat group on a non-secure phone he should be fired or resign. Such poor judgment disqualifies him from the position. 

 

But if the allegations prove to be false the journalists filing the story should be pursued for investigation and potential criminal charges. At the least questioned about their sources. And if there are real people providing false information to the news outlets they should be arrested too.

 

Its one or the other here.

So now accidentally inviting someone into a chat has morphed into a spooky setting up a second chat on an unsecure phone..

c'mon now. 

I don't believe anything anymore. Democrats rats and their crony fake "news" reporting has created that.

News is 100% political agenda now. So we have to read between the lines to figure out what's going on.

[4th&long]

2 hours ago, Albwan said:

So now accidentally inviting someone into a chat has morphed into a spooky setting up a second chat on an unsecure phone..

c'mon now. 

I don't believe anything anymore. Democrats rats and their crony fake "news" reporting has created that.

News is 100% political agenda now. So we have to read between the lines to figure out what's going on.

 

And yet you believe everything hey say that supports your views. 

Edited 14 hours ago by 4th&long

[Doc]

22 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

The administration needs to assign an independent investigator to determine if a security violation has been made and then take the appropriate action. If the Secretary did indeed set up a second chat group on a non-secure phone he should be fired or resign. Such poor judgment disqualifies him from the position. 

 

But if the allegations prove to be false the journalists filing the story should be pursued for investigation and potential criminal charges. At the least questioned about their sources. And if there are real people providing false information to the news outlets they should be arrested too.

 

Its one or the other here.

Call it “spillage,” make sure it doesn’t happen (again) and move on. 

[muppy]

1 hour ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

The haters in this case jump to conclusions based on initial reporting from anonymous sources, create a backstory based on circular reporting, and typically don’t want to engage in whataboutism because it reveals their own hypocrisy.  They don’t want to talk about it.

 

1.  Can anonymous reports from liberal-leaning news sources be trusted? 
 

, I’d say if the reports are true, it’s sloppy.  However, this is govt work, and sloppy seems pretty common there. 

greetings

 

I would say your view of mainstream media is as  staunch as any belief I have read you have.  DISTRUST. will that ever change?

 

Sloppy is the NICEST thing I can say about our government lately.

 

I know you are not a believer but please send positive thoughts for a test Im having Wednesday. Thanks leo . m

Edited 17 hours ago by muppy

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, SectionC3 said:

 

 

But can anonymous reports from right wing news be trusted?  And can the White House be trusted?
 

 

 

Who cares?  More whataboutism.  If this is true, and it's acceptable to this administration, then that's the way it goes.  I demand accountability.  These guys play golf, and go to UFC events, and pick on people.  And also ignore inflation.  And raise taxes.  But that's what you want!

 

I would think we could agree that blind trust in any institution is foolish--right wing media, left wing media, any WH admin. 

 

As to your second point, I care, that's why I said it ya big dummy.  

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

47 minutes ago, muppy said:

greetings

 

I would say your view of mainstream media is as  staunch as any belief I have read you have.  DISTRUST. will that ever change?

 

Sloppy is the NICEST thing I can say about our government lately.

 

I know you are not a believer but please send positive thoughts for a test Im having Wednesday. Thanks leo . m

Hi Mup, of course I'll send positive thoughts and prayers your way!  I believe we may have disagreed about the way we view faith, but if you read me as an atheist you may be confusing me with someone else.  Molly Hatchet, perhaps.  I'd do the same for just about anyone, even some of the crankiest and dare I say cowardly mo'fos on this board.  

 

As for implicitly trusting mainstream, legacy media outlets, no, that's unlikely to change. 

 

I understand your concerns about the status of our government, and all that can follow is 'whataboutism', which some people believe is a bridge too far in political conversations.  Unless, of course, they are doing it.  

 

 

 

 

[muppy]

Just now, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Hi Mup, of course I'll send positive thoughts and prayers your way!  I believe we may have disagreed about the way we view faith, but if you read me as an atheist you may be confusing me with someone else.  Molly Hatchet, perhaps.  I'd do the same for just about anyone, even some of the crankiest and dare I say cowardly mo'fos on this board.  

 

As for implicitly trusting mainstream, legacy media outlets, no, that's unlikely to change. 

 

I understand your concerns about the status of our government, and all that can follow is 'whataboutism', which some people believe is a bridge too far in political conversations.  Unless, of course, they are doing it.  

 

 

 

 

Thanks man xo

[Doc]

1 hour ago, muppy said:

greetings

 

I would say your view of mainstream media is as  staunch as any belief I have read you have.  DISTRUST. will that ever change?

 

Sloppy is the NICEST thing I can say about our government lately.

 

I know you are not a believer but please send positive thoughts for a test Im having Wednesday. Thanks leo . m

 

I'm not a believer.  But best of luck on Wednesday.

[SectionC3]

1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Hi Mup, of course I'll send positive thoughts and prayers your way!  I believe we may have disagreed about the way we view faith, but if you read me as an atheist you may be confusing me with someone else.  Molly Hatchet, perhaps.  I'd do the same for just about anyone, even some of the crankiest and dare I say cowardly mo'fos on this board.  

 

As for implicitly trusting mainstream, legacy media outlets, no, that's unlikely to change. 

 

I understand your concerns about the status of our government, and all that can follow is 'whataboutism', which some people believe is a bridge too far in political conversations.  Unless, of course, they are doing it.  

 

 

 

 

But Trump tells the truth.  Or Alex jones.  Or Lara Loomer.  You just believe what you want to believe.  That’s it. 

[Doc]

4 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

But Trump tells the truth.  Or Alex jones.  Or Lara Loomer.  You just believe what you want to believe.  That’s it. 

 

How about...they all lie when it fits their agenda?

[muppy]

11 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Hi Mup, of course I'll send positive thoughts and prayers your way!  I believe we may have disagreed about the way we view faith, but if you read me as an atheist you may be confusing me with someone else.  Molly Hatchet, perhaps.  I'd do the same for just about anyone, even some of the crankiest and dare I say cowardly mo'fos on this board.  

 

As for implicitly trusting mainstream, legacy media outlets, no, that's unlikely to change. 

 

I understand your concerns about the status of our government, and all that can follow is 'whataboutism', which some people believe is a bridge too far in political conversations.  Unless, of course, they are doing it.  

 

 

 

 

I will keep you posted and the end result will be a welcome answer either way, ya know?

 

Otherwise as far as PPP is concerned . What else can a sane person do besides wait an see what the future brings. We changed our financials to bonds well before this because of having fears of what might happen. and here we are

 

Lord Have Mercy.

 

I thought you were a non believer my bad. I appreciate it.

 

m  

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

12 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

But Trump tells the truth.  Or Alex jones.  Or Lara Loomer.  You just believe what you want to believe.  That’s it. 

Trump tells the truth at times, at others he doesn't.  I have never listened to Alex Jones, and have no idea who Lara Loomer is.  Maybe you have to pause, take a deep breath and reset, Karen.  

[The Frankish Reich]

1 hour ago, muppy said:

greetings

 

I would say your view of mainstream media is as  staunch as any belief I have read you have.  DISTRUST. will that ever change?

 

Sloppy is the NICEST thing I can say about our government lately.

 

I know you are not a believer but please send positive thoughts for a test Im having Wednesday. Thanks leo . m

Positive thoughts, and prayers too. 

[Taro T]

39 minutes ago, muppy said:

I will keep you posted and the end result will be a welcome answer either way, ya know?

 

Otherwise as far as PPP is concerned . What else can a sane person do besides wait an see what the future brings. We changed our financials to bonds well before this because of having fears of what might happen. and here we are

 

Lord Have Mercy.

 

I thought you were a non believer my bad. I appreciate it.

 

m  

Good luck w/ it.

[Homelander]

Blaming everyone but himself for starting a Signal chat on his personal phone like the leak just magically happened on its own.

 

 

[B-Man]

17 minutes ago, Homelander said:

Blaming everyone but himself for starting a Signal chat on his personal phone like the leak just magically happened on its own.

 

 

 

 

Well that went right over Homey's head.