Second ('Third') Trump Presidency Thread
- Thread starter thethe
- Start date
Whereas the Trump Admin absolutely wants the information they discuss on Signal instead of secure government apps to be preserved for the public record?
Again, I wouldn’t be wasting my time on ad hominem attacks of the guy Waltz apparently deemed necessary to the decision making tree for bombing the Houthis.
Thethe, this is pretty egregious example of ineptitude when it comes to national security. It isn't quite as big of a deal as some are making it out to be, but it isn't a nothing burger either. It's more of a "nothing bad happened, but it had the potential for something bad to happen" sort of situation.
If this happened under the Biden Admin, you would be calling for the heads of everyone involved.
I want Waltz fired and am pissed that Trump hasn't done it yet.
This is the original error and that Trump not firing him is the second error.
Adding him was no 'accident'.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
You want to play that game? When your idol Musk took "Kung Fu" lessons from Maxwell?
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
They talked about a future strike on Yemen.
There's a lot of Hills that I feel like are worthy on dying on. But this colossal ****up isn't one.
Running with more Reddit claims I see
The selective memory some people have when it comes to people who had some sort of connection to Epstein or Maxwell will be studied someday.
OMG - They talked about a 'strike'. Is that a war plan or is that a continuation of policy from the last 10+ years?
I'm aware you have to reach because you all fell for another hoax.
Discussing classified foreign policy (military actions no less) on a third party app doesn't seem like the most secure form of communication, regardless of who let who let in. And it gives the appearance that high ranking government officials don't want a paper trail of their conversations. Both are bad looks for everyone involved.
Last edited by a moderator:
When people meet in person and talk is there a proper trail of their conversations?
Does it matter? Are you in favor of transparency or not? Either you support the Freedom of Information Act or you don't.
No, but there’s record the 14 people or whatever had met. The problem with Signal and private servers and the like is it completely hides the actions of the government from public scrutiny and we have systems in place to record information for that purpose.
Why are we limiting methods of communication to when they are in person - Of course certain things will be discussed without public knowledge.
But it does matter because if you think this is wrong then any conversation any administration has is subject to review. How can anything get done?
Again, you’re providing the most impassioned defense of Clinton’s private server that I’ve heard in at least 8 years. What, we have a right to read what the Secretary of State is discussing just because it wasn’t in person?!