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

[Andy1]

8 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

would you want this dolt running your family sporting goods business much less the department of defense?  c'mon, the guys a womanizing trump with an average IQ.  We can do so much better.

Trump has a history of promoting inexperienced, unqualified people to high level positions because he knows they will be loyal to him. They don’t have the wisdom gained by age or experience to form principles of integrity. He knows he can manipulate them to do things other more experienced people wouldn’t do. 

[Niagara Bill]

39 minutes ago, Andy1 said:

Trump has a history of promoting inexperienced, unqualified people to high level positions because he knows they will be loyal to him. They don’t have the wisdom gained by age or experience to form principles of integrity. He knows he can manipulate them to do things other more experienced people wouldn’t do. 

Yes, I know the secret handshake...I get the job.

[Doc]

53 minutes ago, Andy1 said:

Trump has a history of promoting inexperienced, unqualified people to high level positions because he knows they will be loyal to him. They don’t have the wisdom gained by age or experience to form principles of integrity. He knows he can manipulate them to do things other more experienced people wouldn’t do. 

 

And the last Admin didn't?  You think Mayor Pete was qualified to be Secretary of Transportation?

[All_Pro_Bills]

1 hour ago, Andy1 said:

Trump has a history of promoting inexperienced, unqualified people to high level positions because he knows they will be loyal to him. They don’t have the wisdom gained by age or experience to form principles of integrity. He knows he can manipulate them to do things other more experienced people wouldn’t do. 

Trump trusted those experienced people under his first term and all they did was undermine the policies and objectives of the administration. Officials like good  friend of Robert Mueller Barr, warmonger Bolton, Samantha Powers. All deep-staters and neocons. Pushing the agenda of the administrative state. All with experience, of the wrong kind.

So some people under the 2nd term have little experience. But they appear to all be on the same page and not deceitful and back stabbing saboteurs like the cast from term one. 

What I will never understand is why Trump trusted those people in the 1st term because anyone paying attention knew exactly what they were all about.

 

Edited Tuesday at 01:02 PM by All_Pro_Bills

[Wacka]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

And the last Admin didn't?  You think Mayor Pete was qualified to be Secretary of Transportation?

Well, he did have a Lionel set in his basement and an Engineer's hat.

[Joe Ferguson forever]

2 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Trump trusted those experienced people under his first term and all they did was undermine the policies and objectives of the administration. Officials like good  friend of Robert Mueller Barr, warmonger Bolton, Samantha Powers. All deep-staters and neocons. Pushing the agenda of the administrative state. All with experience, of the wrong kind.

So some people under the 2nd term have little experience. But they appear to all be on the same page and not deceitful and back stabbing saboteurs like the cast from term one. 

What I will never understand is why Trump trusted those people in the 1st term because anyone paying attention knew exactly what they were all about.

 

yeah, they were about following the law.  and protecting bedrock institutions - guardrails to reign in madness and unchecked power.  now we have a despot and the ass kissers applaud him.  bravo.

Edited Tuesday at 02:46 PM by Joe Ferguson forever

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

*

 

 

 

.

[stevestojan]

3 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

 

 

*

 

 

 

.

So now we’re listening to Kevin ***** Sorbo (star of such great films as The Girl who Believed in Miracles and Bernie the Dolphin - Part 2!) over the New York Times? 
 

Im fine doubting he did it (not sure why it’s so hard to believe since we know he did it once), I suppose. But what does this tweet do to add to the convo? 
 

Oh, I almost missed he was also in Tommy the Cool Mule. That gives him some credibility. 

[B-Man]

5 minutes ago, stevestojan said:

So now we’re listening to Kevin ***** Sorbo (star of such great films as The Girl who Believed in Miracles and Bernie the Dolphin - Part 2!) over the New York Times? 
 

Im fine doubting he did it (not sure why it’s so hard to believe since we know he did it once), I suppose. But what does this tweet do to add to the convo? 
 

Oh, I almost missed he was also in Tommy the Cool Mule. That gives him some credibility. 

 

 

LOL.

See the *  in my original post..

 

That was a private bet to myself that the first response would be about Kevin Sorbo rather than the point about anonymous sources.

 

You halfheartedly went there in your second sentence Steve, but you just could not help yourself.

 

 

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 03:03 PM by B-Man

[Joe Ferguson forever]

9 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

LOL.

See the *  in my original post..

 

That was a private bet to myself that the first response would be about Kevin Sorbo rather than the point about anonymous sources.

 

You halfheartedly went there in your second sentence Steve, but you just could not help yourself.

 

 

 

 

why should he "help himself".  Your sources are Joe Schmoes who have been inexplicably elevated to expert status by a bunch of stupid maga's...kinda like many of trump's cabinet picks.

[B-Man]

 

I hope Senator Cotton is a good enough source  🤞🏼

 

 

[The Frankish Reich]

49 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

LOL.

See the *  in my original post..

 

That was a private bet to myself that the first response would be about Kevin Sorbo rather than the point about anonymous sources.

 

You halfheartedly went there in your second sentence Steve, but you just could not help yourself.

 

 

 

 

What nonsense. The NYT has the names of the precise people included on the latest Signal chat. 
And if Hegseth is saying that disgruntled former employees “leaked” this, well, doesn’t that presuppose that it was a leak of an actual thing rather than a made-up story?

Last time he did this Jeff Goldberg called his bluff by releasing the actual screenshots. I suspect we’re heading that way again. 
Appoint an overgrown frat boy to head the nation’s most important and largest Department …

[Homelander]

4 hours ago, Doc said:

But with recruiting at 15 year highs

 

That's a nice talking point if you ignore the fact that most of the data only goes through December and that the uptick in recruiting began months before the election.

 

Army recruiting is up, but data show trend began before the election, former Army official says | Fox News

 

U.S. Army Breaks Recruiting Records – Biggest Surge in 15 Years - ClearanceJobs

The United States Army announced this week in a post on X, that it saw record-setting recruitment in December 2024. The final month of last year was the most productive the service had seen in 15 years, as it enlisted nearly 350 recruits daily.

[Niagara Bill]

Keep him, he is good comic relief and predictable

[K D]

 

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, The Frankish Reich said:

What nonsense. The NYT has the names of the precise people included on the latest Signal chat. 
And if Hegseth is saying that disgruntled former employees “leaked” this, well, doesn’t that presuppose that it was a leak of an actual thing rather than a made-up story?

Last time he did this Jeff Goldberg called his bluff by releasing the actual screenshots. I suspect we’re heading that way again. 
Appoint an overgrown frat boy to head the nation’s most important and largest Department …

I think this story/non-story falls into the category where a precious few (liberal extreme lefties) care a ton, some folks will pay passing attention and not much more, and it won’t register at all for most.  As you used to say, no one really cares.  
 

 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

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

I think this story/non-story falls into the category where a precious few (liberal extreme lefties) care a ton, some folks will pay passing attention and not much more, and it won’t register at all for most.  As you used to say, no one really cares.  
 

 

many people (nearly all R's) cared about hillary's emails.  That went on for many months.  so should this.

[wnyguy]

2 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

What nonsense. The NYT has the names of the precise people included on the latest Signal chat. 
And if Hegseth is saying that disgruntled former employees “leaked” this, well, doesn’t that presuppose that it was a leak of an actual thing rather than a made-up story?

Last time he did this Jeff Goldberg called his bluff by releasing the actual screenshots. I suspect we’re heading that way again. 
Appoint an overgrown frat boy to head the nation’s most important and largest Department …

And doing a fine job, you forgot to add.

[daz28]

16 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

No no no.  This can’t be possible.  In no way would outgoing officials (fired) ever try and sabotage the incoming administration.  
 

This has just never happens….

 

 

 

 

But behind the headlines is a bigger story: Hegseth is reportedly working alongside Tulsi Gabbard and J.D. Vance to block war with Iran. They’re pushing diplomacy over destruction—and that’s precisely what the war machine can’t tolerate.

 

 

So was POTUS from 2023-2025?

 

The auto pen?  
 

 

Go f yourselves we got a country to save 

All they did to quell this was say, "the information wasn't classified".  That's complete BS, and to steal a phrase from the donald, "and everybody knows it".  They should have just owned up to their mistake, instead of insulting the intelligence of every person on the planet, that's not in the cult. This is the equivalent of showing off your diamonds, and then when they get stolen, saying they were just glass anyways.  

16 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

would you want this dolt running your family sporting goods business much less the department of defense?  c'mon, the guys a womanizing trump with an average IQ.  We can do so much better.

I'm guilty of this to, but I think we add personal flaws to criticize too much, especially with appointed people in specific departments.  Sure, we should hold our high leaders and judges to high standards, but truth is I'm not perfect, nor is anyone else. If Pete could get the job done to A1 standards, and womanize, then that should be ok.  Unfortunately, Pete can't, but adding womanizer to reinforce that fact, is unecessary. 

7 hours ago, Doc said:

 

He wasn't my first choice.  But with recruiting at 15 year highs, the restoration of standards and his first successful mission despite the left getting vapors over a chat group, he's doing fine so far.  Much better than the last guy.

You don't know that bounce was due to Pete.  If recruitment had went down, the political play would have been, "give him some time".  

7 hours ago, Andy1 said:

Trump has a history of promoting inexperienced, unqualified people to high level positions because he knows they will be loyal to him. They don’t have the wisdom gained by age or experience to form principles of integrity. He knows he can manipulate them to do things other more experienced people wouldn’t do. 

They literally have stated that loyalty is a top priority, while bashing crony appointments as DEI.  Lot's of people are buying that nonsense, too.  They could sell a refrigerator to an Eskimo.  When determining who's the most qualified to do the job best, loyalty is not a top priority, especially in politics.  It's basically the foundation that cronyism was built on. 

4 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

 

 

*

 

 

 

.

You'd want to remain anonymous too, if you knew the administration you were exposing was hell bent on getting rid of whisteblower protections.  He'd be fired, slandered, and afraid of prosecution.  You have to pick your poison here, either you prefer coverups or anonymous sources.  Remember, the source can possibly be corroborated, while the coverup would NEVER reveal itself.  There's a reason the founding fathers were so big on free press. 

Edited Tuesday at 06:59 PM by daz28

[Doc]

2 hours ago, Homelander said:

 

That's a nice talking point if you ignore the fact that most of the data only goes through December and that the uptick in recruiting began months before the election.

 

Army recruiting is up, but data show trend began before the election, former Army official says | Fox News

 

U.S. Army Breaks Recruiting Records – Biggest Surge in 15 Years - ClearanceJobs

The United States Army announced this week in a post on X, that it saw record-setting recruitment in December 2024. The final month of last year was the most productive the service had seen in 15 years, as it enlisted nearly 350 recruits daily.

 

👇

 

1 hour ago, K D said: