DonHenley said:

---

This was really stupid. If this Kamala and the last admin, people would be going nuts on this forum over this

---

I would bet $10,000 that this exact scenario and even worse DID happen during 8 years of Obama and 4 years of Biden.

but the leftist media would have sent a message stating "hey you need to take me off this chat!"

AgGrad99 said:

---

Why do you think those two things are mutually exclusive? Why cant both sides of acted inappropriately here? We dont have to 'pick a side', for every occurrence.

---

Did you forget where you are?

BMX Bandit said:

---

I don't know enough about how signal works or the exact details of this case to speak specifically here, but I will say generally that if you keep discussing classified information after you know that an unknown person has joined the conversation, then yes, you are an idiot

---

So, TBC, you think there is nothing wrong about using a commercial messaging app for a national security discussion and operation, correct?

BigRobSA said:

---

This is definitely something where a head(s) to need to roll.

---

I am open to that


but when Biden kept every single official who led the Afghanistan bug out which then resulted in 13 dead Marines and 43 wounded Marines and never reprimanded or fired anyone...

hard to get too upset about a Signal message saying "the attack should start"

2 hours before the attack started.

aggiehawg said:

---

On Halperin's show this morning, Halperin admitted he had been inadvertently added to chats before and that the second he knew he wasn't supposed to be there, he'd pull out letting the others know that. So it is apparently not unheard of for reporters being privy to things by accident.

Still a very bad look and a major oopsie that will hopefully be addressed immediately so it doesn't happen again.

---

Imagine that...recognizing a mistake and correcting it.

One mistake doesn't need to be two mistakes. But in this case, it was.

To be clear, you're putting words into my mouth and making things up

You would have to ask someone who knows about the regulations on classified information, etc. I don't have a relevant opinion either way because it's not something I know anything about. Way over my pay grade.

It appears some smart conservative people have posted above that it's not appropriate.

Waltz gets to keep dancing:

Trump doesn't plan to fire National Security Adviser Mike Waltz over breach | Fox News https://t.co/fyDWrGvi1n

— Brit Hume (@brithume) March 25, 2025

Lots to unpack.

• The left does this, but that's not the point. Bringing that up is a mere whataboutism and a cop out.
• Using Signal which has encryption? Ok but why are they using Signal to begin with?
• Why not have a private instance of Signal stood up which apparently is relatively easy to do? This would have prevented crap like this from happening.
• Why add the reporter to the group? It was a mistake. OK but WOW!
• Why didn't anyone in the group look at other members of the group and wonder, "who the eff is that?" I mean, I get added to group texts with family members and when I see a number I don't recognize, I ask who they are. Why didn't the leaders of the free world know to do this?

My gosh, Elon's dudes could have spun up a damn government Signal server to have kept this in house.

LOL. So sensitive and emotional.

I asked the question for clarification in an attempted to NOT put words into your mouth and make things up.

And nice deflection. LOL

AtticusMatlock said:

---

To his credit, the Atlantic author did not publish the story until today which was about a month after these discussions took place and did not publish anything that would have jeopardized troops. Apparently there was discussion of exact troop positions and timelines which he did not publish.

---

you post the OP and don't even read the actual article!

the meetings being discussed were on 15 March.

that would have been 9 days before Goldberg published the article.

NOT A MONTH as you claim.

I wonder how they feel about Silent Circle.

Remember their Blackphone from a few years ago? Definitely the coolest cell phone to use at the time. No more Blackphones today, but they do offer other products that, at least on the surface, appear like a step up from other services.

For what it's worth, I'd love to see banks get find for not using PGP in their e-mail and signing every e-mail with their PGP key.

National security information is exempt from FOIA. Why would they need to try to do something to hide something from FOIA that doesn't have to be produced under FOIA?

Quote:

---

Collective group of asshats that were bullied into position

---

what does this mean? Why do people just make stuff up.

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

TriAg2010 said:

---

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

Still can't believe that top government officials use Signal for these conversations.

In a lot of industries (not nearly as important as DOD), this is grounds for dismissal.

---

SEC fines a bank practically weekly for this kind of thing.

---

Yep. Banks got fined $500M a year ago for using Signal.

---

That has nothing to do with Signal per se and everything to do with not preserving records - important if and when SEC investigations occur at that bank - which actually makes Signal even more secure.

Has it been confirmed that it was Walz himself that added Goldberg?

I heard this morning that it might have been an aide of his rather than Walz himself.

Which, if true, then begs the question of was it really an accident.

Did Goldberg know that he was the ONLY unauthorized participant? And if not, did he not have a duty to inform the thread participants of the error? As for me, I have strong suspicions that a hostile reporter doesn't "accidentally" get added to a thread of senior officials... Especially by an aide. Sounds rather swampy, no?

And yes, I'm going to shoot the messenger some here as well. Apparently he was on the thread FOR DAYS without notifying anyone that he was an unauthorized participant.

Knowing Goldberg, if this was the prior administration, I have no doubt that we would know nothing about this event, as he would have turned sommersaults to protect the Biden administration - as incompetent as it was.

Logos Stick said:

---

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

TriAg2010 said:

---

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

Still can't believe that top government officials use Signal for these conversations.

In a lot of industries (not nearly as important as DOD), this is grounds for dismissal.

---

SEC fines a bank practically weekly for this kind of thing.

---

Yep. Banks got fined $500M a year ago for using Signal.

---

That has nothing to do with Signal per se and everything to do with not preserving records - important if and when SEC investigations occur at that bank - which actually makes Signal even more secure.

---

The people we are talking about have to preserve records too.

.@CIADirector: "I haven't participated in any Signal group messaging that relates to any classified information at all."@DNIGabbard: "I have not participated in any Signal group chat or any other chat on another app that contained any classified information." pic.twitter.com/kJkvyqnz9E

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) March 25, 2025

rgvag11 said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

TriAg2010 said:

---

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

Still can't believe that top government officials use Signal for these conversations.

In a lot of industries (not nearly as important as DOD), this is grounds for dismissal.

---

SEC fines a bank practically weekly for this kind of thing.

---

Yep. Banks got fined $500M a year ago for using Signal.

---

That has nothing to do with Signal per se and everything to do with not preserving records - important if and when SEC investigations occur at that bank - which actually makes Signal even more secure.

---

The people we are talking about have to preserve records too.

---

The implication is that Signal is inherently bad and not secure which is complete bull**** and being spouted by libs who don't know what the hell they are talking about. I was adding some much needed context. If Banks used Teams instead and deleted the chats with no recoverable backup, they would also be fined in the same manner.

For those saying the reporter had a "duty" or had a requirement to report spillage - I think this is just not correct. Laws about classified information apply to individuals who have access to it, and they are bound by legal obligations / duty to protect it.

Now if John Q Public knowingly possesses or distributes unauthorized classified information, they could have a criminal liability for that action. But they still don't have a duty to report.

Also as my buddy said if he really had balls he would have started posting memes. Then the headline could have been "My dank wartime memes got a fire reaction from the VP and SecDef", which is really the headline this country needs AND deserves.

AgGrad99 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

On Halperin's show this morning, Halperin admitted he had been inadvertently added to chats before and that the second he knew he wasn't supposed to be there, he'd pull out letting the others know that. So it is apparently not unheard of for reporters being privy to things by accident.

Still a very bad look and a major oopsie that will hopefully be addressed immediately so it doesn't happen again.

---

Imagine that...recognizing a mistake and correcting it.

One mistake doesn't need to be two mistakes. But in this case, it was.

---

Correcting it? As in allowing it to continue happening in the future? How is that "correcting" anything? The only way people will change the way they do things is if they are held accountable. It's better to pay the piper now vs if this were to be swept away and something actually terrible happen when the wrong person gets accidentally added in the future.

TheRealJacob said:

---

jrdaustin said:

---

Apparently he was on the thread FOR DAYS without notifying anyone that he was an unauthorized participant.

---

He doesn't have to notify anyone that he was an unauthorized participant.

This wouldn't have happened in the first place if the proper government communication channels were used in the first place.

An investigation needs to be launched on what happened, and the Espionage Act should be used. This is no small matter.

I would say this regardless of which party is in power: if there is a leak in national security from a person not following government policy, the person responsible should be tried for Espionage.

---

While I think it is bad that it happened, and needs to be looked into...

But I posted above that Biden administration approved it as a valid form of communication.

Try the US v. New York Times, I'm just saying that the Pentagon Papers were posted even though they were classified and the courts agreed that that was covered by the freedom of press so those laws would not nessasarly apply to the press.

Tulsi Gabbard: “There was no classified material that was shared in that Signal chat.”

Sen. Mark Warner: “So then if there was no classified material, share it with the committee.”

pic.twitter.com/LHybOpWH6S

— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) March 25, 2025

Again, all congress is good for is naming post offices, going on junkets, and calling hearings in hopes of a 'gram worthy soundbite.

They've ceded all of their power to the executive and judicial branches. All they good for is feeding tax dollars into the machine and grandstanding.

Stands to reason that 70% are compromised by the executive branch in one way or another.

.@CIADirector: "One of the first things that happened when I was confirmed as CIA director was Signal was loaded onto my computer ... One of the things that I was briefed on very early was ... the use of Signal as a permissible work use — it is." pic.twitter.com/INE94qxikL

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) March 25, 2025

Quote:

---

Correcting it? As in allowing it to continue happening in the future? How is that "correcting" anything? The only way people will change the way they do things is if they are held accountable. It's better to pay the piper now vs if this were to be swept away and something actually terrible happen when the wrong person gets accidentally added in the future.

---

The very definition of a mistake, is something that you didnt mean to do..

Allowing it? The reporter didnt 'allow' anything. Why do you think people will stop making mistakes, because this reporter went public? And why the insinuation that him doing so is the only possible consequence, or means of correction?

I have facilitated Human Factors training for a facility in the past. The one think that's true...you certainly adhere to appropriate consequences, but no matter how severe the consequences, mistakes will still happen.

It wasn't the reporter's intent to make this world a better place; or if it was, he is making another mistake.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Tulsi Gabbard: “There was no classified material that was shared in that Signal chat.”

Sen. Mark Warner: “So then if there was no classified material, share it with the committee.”

pic.twitter.com/LHybOpWH6S

— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) March 25, 2025

Again, all congress is good for is naming post offices, going on junkets, and calling hearings in hopes of a 'gram worthy soundbite.

They've ceded all of their power to the executive and judicial branches. All they good for is feeding tax dollars into the machine and grandstanding.

Stands to reason that 70% are compromised by the executive branch in one way or another.

---

So Goldberg could have shared the name of CIA official, who is an active intelligence officer, provided by John Ratcliffe to be included in the group.