So what do we all think of Hegseth and senior cabinet member using Signal app

[-lowcountrydawg]

Belligerence? I thought I was pretty friendly

It appears my confidence was well-placed. Where's the classified information? Where did the F-18s launch from? How many were there? Who was the target? What was his "Known Location"? What are the earlier "Trigger Based" targets? That information was undoubtedly in the actual attack plan, which this obviously was not.

Goldberg being in the Chat is bad. But let’s recall that Goldberg initially claimed there was a “war plan” that contained “precise information about weapons packages, targets, and timing.”

That was a lie. What he’s actually released (something he could have shared from the start) is not a “war plan", which is why the Atlantic has quickly shifted to calling it an "Attack Plan". There are no names, no specific targets or locations, and no coordinates. It basically just says some F-18s will strike a terrorist somewhere today.

So, to repeat myself and remind you that what I said yesterday still stands:

Let’s not forget that he teased about an undercover CIA agent…..but his love for the country and strict adherence to national security as his highest virtue….prevented him from outing this American version of James Bond.

If anything the release of this after alluding to what was in it has hurt his credibility…..and weakened the political attack on the admin.

 

[TivoliDawg]

View embedded media

Maybe he was waiting to get more information. Here is the interview here. There is a 28 minute interview total. Discussing other things as well. What a concept. This is about what happened

Yeah I stopped listening when Watlz started blaming the journalist. Total cop out. And just not true - it’s not the journalist’s fault that Watlz and Hegseth and others effed up.

 

[willdup]

Let’s not forget that he teased about an undercover CIA agent…..but his love for the country and strict adherence to national security as his highest virtue….prevented him from outing this American version of James Bond.

If anything the release of this after alluding to what was in it has hurt his credibility…..and weakened the political attack on the admin.

No it hasn’t. They left Goldberg no choice after personally attacking him and claiming what he saw wasn’t what he saw.

What he did was to expose deep incompetence at the highest levels of our national security leadership and the lies or intentional misdirection and ignorance of the participants after getting caught.

Exact timing of launch and engagement plans and the weapons systems involved are clearly protected intelligence information. Hegseth even identified a target (top missle guy) that I’m sure the Houthis and every relevent intelligence service knows the actual identity of.

@Lava-Man attempting to parse words to downplay the issue itself or the perjury that took place yesterday in lying about it is embarrassing. You shouldn’t associate yourself with it.

 

[TivoliDawg]

Finally have something to focus on?

The economy is faltering. Turns out tariffs aren’t magical money machines.
War continues in Ukraine while Putin makes a mockery of our efforts to broker a deal.
War continues in Gaza.
Medical research is being gutted.
Foreign aid is already gutted.
We are openly threatening Canada and Denmark and have trashed our traditional foreign allies.
Trump is personally enriching himself by pumping his crypto coin from the Oval Office.

Dude, this absurd intelligence screwup is only the latest in a very long list of issues to “focus on”.

Edit: I was remiss to not include Trump’s efforts to end due process as he sends people, some of them here legally, to outsourced concentration camps in El Salvador.

Everything you posted above is true, and pathetic. That being said, you only listed the bad aspect of the admin., there are many positives.
Military recruitment higher than ever, Europe committing more to NATO than ever, European manufacturing is about to ramp up to support the MID, no more woke BS, lots of good too

 

[zingerdawg]

Yeah I stopped listening when Watlz started blaming the journalist. Total cop out. And just not true - it’s not the journalist’s fault that Watlz and Hegseth and others effed up.

You should have kept listening. I do agree. He should not have gone there. I think he just wanted it to be public knowledge about this guy’s reputation. Which is horrendous.

Later he admitted fault. Admitted that changes will be made. He literally says this to Trump and Trump guides him to say things will be different going forward.

More or less seeing people take questions from reporters. Taking the bullets. This wasn’t done the last four years. Like or hat Trump, you have to admit this is a refreshing change. Trump didn’t sidestep a damn thing either.

If you believe what Will posted is true tiv. I worry about you brother. There is no poster on this board who has been wrong more than him on things. Ironically, he believed Goldberg the first and second time around. And got burnt. One poster documented it. It was over 100 mistakes made with regards to Trump. It isn’t his fault. He just believes the lefty media. Buys it hook line and sinker every time. Tapper’s book about the lies should be fun. Coming from one of their own.

 

[TivoliDawg]

You should have kept listening. I do agree. He should not have gone there. I think he just wanted it to be public knowledge about this guy’s reputation. Which is horrendous.

Later he admitted fault. Admitted that changes will be made. He literally says this to Trump and Trump guides him to say things will be different going forward.

More or less seeing people take questions from reporters. Taking the bullets. This wasn’t done the last four years. Like or hat Trump, you have to admit this is a refreshing change. Trump didn’t sidestep a damn thing either.

I like that he is now taking questions, and I’m still glad I voted for him, but I just never thought I’d see a time when our top two choices are bird-brain Kamala and game show host Donald Trump.

 

[zingerdawg]

I like that he is now taking questions, and I’m still glad I voted for him, but I just never thought I’d see a time when our top two choices are bird-brain Kamala and game show host Donald Trump.

That we can agree on. Last three elections. Trump, trump. Trump. Biden. Kamala. Hillary. And we wonder why the country isn’t doing well.

 

[Lava-Man]

Exact timing of launch and attack plans and the weapons systems involved is clearly protected intelligence information. The even identified a target “top missle guy” that I’m sure the Houthis and every relevent intelligence service knows the actual identity of.

@Lava-Man attempting to parse words downplay the issue itself or the perjury that took place yesterday in lying about it is embarrassing. You shouldn’t associate yourself with it.

None of that makes it "classified", which is what the original claim was. Sensitive and not for public consumption isn't the same thing. You're even now engaging in words games by using "protected intelligence information". What's that? Is that now an official category?

This isn't parsing words...words matter, here. Especially because it determines whether it was allowed on Signal or not.

There is a reason by Goldberg began immediately walking back his claims across multiple interviews after being confronted by media-friendly outlets.

I said wait for 48 hrs...it took 24 to show this is not the huge controversy it was made out to be. Embarassing? Yes. Bad that Goldberg had access? Of course.

 

[-lowcountrydawg]

No it hasn’t. They left Goldberg no choice after personally attacking him and claiming what he saw wasn’t what he saw.

What he did was to expose deep incompetence at the highest levels of our national security leadership and the lies or intentional misdirection and ignorance of the participants after getting caught.

Exact timing of launch and engagement plans and the weapons systems involved are clearly protected intelligence information. Hegseth even identified a target (top missle guy) that I’m sure the Houthis and every relevent intelligence service knows the actual identity of.

@Lava-Man attempting to parse words to downplay the issue itself or the perjury that took place yesterday in lying about it is embarrassing. You shouldn’t associate yourself with it.

Ok. And the CiA undercover agent he was protecting?

You know it is possible that this was a total pluck up AND this Goldberg is also a hack of high proportions. He doesn’t all the sudden become Pulitzer worthy because someone added him to a text exchange.

 

[Lava-Man]

Let’s not forget that he teased about an undercover CIA agent…..but his love for the country and strict adherence to national security as his highest virtue….prevented him from outing this American version of James Bond.

If anything the release of this after alluding to what was in it has hurt his credibility…..and weakened the political attack on the admin.

Yeah, that turned out to be Radcliffe's Chief of Staff. Bravo.

The shifting narrative over the past 24 hours only highlights how dishonest Goldberg's original story was (par for the course)

 

[willdup]

Yeah, that turned out to be Radcliffe's Chief of Staff. Bravo.

The shifting narrative over the past 24 hours only highlights how dishonest Goldberg's original story was (par for the course)

Who’s nerrative has shifted more over the past 24 hours, Goldberg’s or Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz and Ratcliffe’s?

 

[Lava-Man]

No it hasn’t. They left Goldberg no choice after personally attacking him and claiming what he saw wasn’t what he saw.

They attacked his characterization of what he saw, which has been proven to be wholly inaccurate, as framed. Not understanding what he saw/read is no excuse for misframing it. Always an excuse with his later-to-be-proven-inaccurate-stories, right?

What he did was to expose deep incompetence at the highest levels of our national security leadership and the lies or intentional misdirection and ignorance of the participants after getting caught.

He exposed a single instance of a mistake that is both embarrassing and needs to be ensured it doesn't repeat itself. The rest of your statement is greatly exaggerated. The only ignorance is from those jumping to conclusions on a subject they don't understand.

 

[Lava-Man]

Who’s nerrative has shifted more over the past 24 hours, Goldberg’s or Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz and Ratcliffe’s?

On this subject? Are you serious? The latter three have been consistent. No classified was discussed.

Please provide any example from those three that have changed from yesterday until today.

 

[willdup]

Ok. And the CiA undercover agent he was protecting?

You know it is possible that this was a total pluck up AND this Goldberg is also a hack of high proportions. He doesn’t all the sudden become Pulitzer worthy because someone added him to a text exchange.

The Chief of Staff of the Director of the CIA is typically not publicly disclosed. The COS is a high-ranking position and is often a senior intelligence official. The CIA has a culture of secrecy, and they generally protect identities unless there is a specific reason not to or a role that requires public appearances.

 

[willdup]

They attacked his characterization of what he saw, which has been proven to be wholly inaccurate, as framed. Not understanding what he saw/read is no excuse for misframing it. Always an excuse with his later-to-be-proven-inaccurate-stories, right?



He exposed a single instance of a mistake that is both embarrassing and needs to be ensured it doesn't repeat itself. The rest of your statement is greatly exaggerated. The only ignorance is from those jumping to conclusions on a subject they don't understand.

Your first sentence is just objectively wrong, but I'll pass on continuing to engage in a word-parsing exercise on a topic this clear.

 

[Lava-Man]

Your first sentence is just objectively wrong, but I'll pass on continuing to engage in a word-parsing exercise on a topic this clear.

Actually, you're right. They attacked what he saw and also attacked him because they knew what he saw, knew he was mischaracterizing it and were calling him out on it.

Yes, people called him mean names.

 

[jlstone412]

I bet if we changed the following wed have different tunes being sung by some on here...

Swap Hegseth for Lloyd Austin
Swap Goldberg for Hunter Biden

 

[Lava-Man]

Exact timing of launch and engagement plans and the weapons systems involved are clearly protected intelligence information.

 

[Lava-Man]

I bet if we changed the following wed have different tunes being sung by some on here...

Swap Hegseth for Lloyd Austin
Swap Goldberg for Hunter Biden

You mean like when Hunter Biden (who had no security clearance) was allowed to sit in on high-level WH meetings, on purpose? I'm not sure you're making the point you want to.

 

[willdup]

On this subject? Are you serious? The latter three have been consistent. No classified was discussed.

Please provide any example from those three that have changed from yesterday until today.

Yesterday, she stated definitively that there was no classified material as part of the Signal thread.



Today, she didn't remember that attack timing and weapons systems were topics included in the Signal thread.

 

[Lava-Man]

I bet if we changed the following wed have different tunes being sung by some on here...

Swap Hegseth for Lloyd Austin
Swap Goldberg for Hunter Biden

Plus, the entire point I've been saying is that Signal is allowed for these types of communication. Since the Biden White House allowed it too, you are again not making the point you want to. I'm sure Austin (when he wasn't AWOL) did the same.

 

[Lava-Man]

Yesterday, she stated definitively that there was no classified material as part of the Signal thread.

View embedded media

Today, she didn't remember that attack timing and weapons systems were topics included in the Signal thread.

View embedded media

How is that a narrative shift? Not remembering details (from a chat that automatically disappeared before the controversy came to light) is not the same as shifting a narrative. But, remembering nothing was classified is indicative she remembered that chat was "ok".

Your example further strengthens that point because she knew Goldberg had the full text and she still said "no classified".

 

[jlstone412]

You mean like when Hunter Biden (who had no security clearance) was allowed to sit in on high-level WH meetings, on purpose? I'm not sure you're making the point you want to.

You're actually helping make my point that it doesn't make it any better, and in some cases perceived as worse, if you change 2 participants in the story.

Take Goldbergs article and change Hegseth to Austin and assume it's H Biden caught on the chain and tell me you and republicans wouldn't be reacting differently.

Some of this is politics...but the bigger issue is the complete lack of competence by high level officials. And it's documented. In writing.

 

[Lava-Man]

You're actually helping make my point that it doesn't make it any better, and in some cases perceived as worse, if you change 2 participants in the story.

Take Goldbergs article and change Hegseth to Austin and assume it's H Biden caught on the chain and tell me you and republicans wouldn't be reacting differently.

Some of this is politics...but the bigger issue is the complete lack of competence by high level officials. And it's documented. In writing.

I think everyone has been consistent in saying that Goldberg being on the Chat is a big screwup. I haven't seen anybody excuse that mistake. Outside of that, what happened is normal, it's not classified and has been allowed for two administrations.

My point was that the previous administration allowed someone without a clearance into definite classified meetings.

 

[zingerdawg]

I think everyone has been consistent in saying that Goldberg being on the Chat is a big screwup. I haven't seen anybody excuse that mistake. Outside of that, what happened is normal, it's not classified and has been allowed for two administrations.

My point was that the previous administration allowed someone without a clearance into definite classified meetings.

And allowed him to drive with two Asian hookers in a corvette with classified docs in the glove box. But who cares. Biden owns a corvette. He wants you to know that. 😂

 

[Lava-Man]

And allowed him to drive with two Asian hookers in a corvette with classified docs in the glove box. But who cares. Biden owns a corvette. He wants you to know that. 😂

I truly hope that Radcliffe turning over his phone for analysis can prove how Goldberg was added:

1. Radcliffe screwed up. Good, really stupid mistake but no ill-intent. Hopefully forces standards to confirm everyone in it is is authorized to be there (should have already been a rule, if it wasn't already).

2. Something else happened by a bad actor. This would upset me, even if it vindicates those supposed to be in the Chat. I was hoping we were past these "insider threats".

Heavy money is on the first, obviously. But, I want the analysis so any conspiracy theories can be put to bed (or proven 🤣) one way or the other.

 

[KidneyStoned]

View embedded media

Maybe he was waiting to get more information. Here is the interview here. There is a 28 minute interview total. Discussing other things as well. What a concept. This is about what happened

I think your frequent references to his willingness to answer questions from the press is misguided.

How hard is it to answer questions when you are in no way constrained by telling the truth?

 

[zingerdawg]

I think your frequent references to his willingness to answer questions from the press is misguided.

How hard is it to answer questions when you are in no way constrained by telling the truth?

I reference this because we just came from four years of the president not talking to reporters. Ever. Unless it was scripted. I get if you don’t like Trump. But it is disingenuous not to see an enormous difference here. The day after he learned of the scandal he did a thirty minute question and answer with the press. With freaking waltz in the room. Kidney. Come on. It isn’t misguided at all. It is spot on. People call him a fascist dictator. To me a dictator is someone who doesn’t answer to the people about his actions. That is what Biden did. He governed for 1/3 of the country’s best interest. And it got the Dems ass beat by a felon. You didn’t have to ask when is Trump going to say something. He did. Had no restrictions on any questions. It is a pleasant change. No statement with a prompter. Written by someone else.

He gives his reasons for what he does. Yes. He takes shots at people. He will sidestep a land mine or two. It is your choice whether you buy what he says. The people damn sure didn’t buy what the media or the teleprompter was selling them.

 

[poochpup]

to plan for war against the Houthis… and accidentally copying in a reporter from The Atlantic?

If you don’t know what Signal is, it’s a completely insecure chatting app that is absolutely not made for US war plans.

You are wrong. It is absolutely one of the most secure apps for messaging. Better than Telegram, WA, even Apple iMessage – all of them. Their privacy policy, encryption algorhythms on device; do not keep data from conversations; etc... is one of the best.

NOW ... it should NOT be used for Top Secret communication; certainly not for military operation top secret stuff. But I will tell you, our military has been using it for years - a lot! When you are in remote locations, can't just simply meet in the "Situation Room". But here are the main problems in this scenario. 1) somebody effed up badly by including a reporter in the group chat; 2) should not have been conducting LIVE military operations using this app; 3) hacking is very possible with ANY app; 4) what kind of phones were those in the chat using? Their private phones or government issued phones?; 5) were the chat participants running their devices through a very secure VPN? 6) what other devices were involved? Signal is also available for the desktop. You connect the mobile app to the desktop app. Desktop PCs can be hacked. My main question is this: what GOVERNMENT communication app is more secure? I dare-say NONE! I don't trust the the government at all. So there is a whole lot of finger pointing at the app - when it was probably more about how and what was used for these communications.

 

[LrgK9]

At least 1 goat needs to be sacrificed.

 

[LrgK9]

You are wrong. It is absolutely one of the most secure apps for messaging. Better than Telegram, WA, even Apple iMessage – all of them. Their privacy policy, encryption algorhythms on device; do not keep data from conversations; etc... is one of the best.

NOW ... it should NOT be used for Top Secret communication; certainly not for military operation top secret stuff. But I will tell you, our military has been using it for years - a lot! When you are in remote locations, can't just simply meet in the "Situation Room". But here are the main problems in this scenario. 1) somebody effed up badly by including a reporter in the group chat; 2) should not have been conducting LIVE military operations using this app; 3) hacking is very possible with ANY app; 4) what kind of phones were those in the chat using? Their private phones or government issued phones?; 5) were the chat participants running their devices through a very secure VPN? 6) what other devices were involved? Signal is also available for the desktop. You connect the mobile app to the desktop app. Desktop PCs can be hacked. My main question is this: what GOVERNMENT communication app is more secure? I dare-say NONE! I don't trust the the government at all. So there is a whole lot of finger pointing at the app - when it was probably more about how and what was used for these communications.

You sir, are full of the truth!

 

[atlanta cock#]

I think your frequent references to his willingness to answer questions from the press is misguided.

How hard is it to answer questions when you are in no way constrained by telling the truth?

LOL. Kidney, you're losing it.

 

[TivoliDawg]

You are wrong. It is absolutely one of the most secure apps for messaging. Better than Telegram, WA, even Apple iMessage – all of them. Their privacy policy, encryption algorhythms on device; do not keep data from conversations; etc... is one of the best.

NOW ... it should NOT be used for Top Secret communication; certainly not for military operation top secret stuff. But I will tell you, our military has been using it for years - a lot! When you are in remote locations, can't just simply meet in the "Situation Room". But here are the main problems in this scenario. 1) somebody effed up badly by including a reporter in the group chat; 2) should not have been conducting LIVE military operations using this app; 3) hacking is very possible with ANY app; 4) what kind of phones were those in the chat using? Their private phones or government issued phones?; 5) were the chat participants running their devices through a very secure VPN? 6) what other devices were involved? Signal is also available for the desktop. You connect the mobile app to the desktop app. Desktop PCs can be hacked. My main question is this: what GOVERNMENT communication app is more secure? I dare-say NONE! I don't trust the the government at all. So there is a whole lot of finger pointing at the app - when it was probably more about how and what was used for these communications.

Yeah I said completely insecure and I should have said completely insecure for what they were using it for. This is absolutely disallowed to coordinate military strikes via Signal. There is a reason cabinet members “did not recall” anything and Gabbard “I will defer t OC thr NSC”, etc. because they got caught and are trying super hard not to commit perjury.

 

[willdup]

LOL. Kidney, you're losing it.

View embedded media

Leavitt’s efforts to respond by parsing words is a total failure. Hegseth shared operational details of a forthcoming military operation via Signal. That’s a violation of operational security, which is extremely serious.

You are wrong. It is absolutely one of the most secure apps for messaging. Better than Telegram, WA, even Apple iMessage – all of them. Their privacy policy, encryption algorhythms on device; do not keep data from conversations; etc... is one of the best.

NOW ... it should NOT be used for Top Secret communication; certainly not for military operation top secret stuff. But I will tell you, our military has been using it for years - a lot! When you are in remote locations, can't just simply meet in the "Situation Room". But here are the main problems in this scenario. 1) somebody effed up badly by including a reporter in the group chat; 2) should not have been conducting LIVE military operations using this app; 3) hacking is very possible with ANY app; 4) what kind of phones were those in the chat using? Their private phones or government issued phones?; 5) were the chat participants running their devices through a very secure VPN? 6) what other devices were involved? Signal is also available for the desktop. You connect the mobile app to the desktop app. Desktop PCs can be hacked. My main question is this: what GOVERNMENT communication app is more secure? I dare-say NONE! I don't trust the the government at all. So there is a whole lot of finger pointing at the app - when it was probably more about how and what was used for these communications.

A question that I haven’t heard asked much about this mess is, why did Hegseth feel compelled to share those specific operational details to that group of people, via Signal or any other channel?

For examples, there is no scenario where the Treasury Secretary needs that information. I would argue a US diplomat who happens to be in Moscow negotiating a peace deal on an unrelated conflict doesn’t need to know weapons systems, when planes are launching, bombs are dropping or who we are targeting.

I think Hegseth was flexing just to flex, which is perfectly indicative of the fact that he is an amateur who has no business in that job. One of several (Patel, Gabbard) unqualified and unserious cabinet members in the Trump administration.

 

[Savannah_Dawg]

Leavitt’s efforts to respond by parsing words is a total failure. Hegseth shared operational details of a forthcoming military operation via Signal. That’s a violation of operational security, which is extremely serious.


A question that I haven’t heard asked much about this mess is, why did Hegseth feel compelled to share those specific operational details to that group of people, via Signal or any other channel?

For examples, there is no scenario where the Treasury Secretary needs that information. I would argue a US diplomat who happens to be in Moscow negotiating a peace deal on an unrelated conflict doesn’t need to know weapons systems, when planes are launching, bombs are dropping or who we are targeting.

I think Hegseth was flexing just to flex, which is perfectly indicative of the fact that he is an amateur who has no business in that job. One of several (Patel, Gabbard) unqualified and unserious cabinet members in the Trump administration.

Yeah we need professionals like you Democrats back in charge…..

 

[atlanta cock#]

Leavitt’s efforts to respond by parsing words is a total failure. Hegseth shared operational details of a forthcoming military operation via Signal. That’s a violation of operational security, which is extremely serious.


A question that I haven’t heard asked much about this mess is, why did Hegseth feel compelled to share those specific operational details to that group of people, via Signal or any other channel?

For examples, there is no scenario where the Treasury Secretary needs that information. I would argue a US diplomat who happens to be in Moscow negotiating a peace deal on an unrelated conflict doesn’t need to know weapons systems, when planes are launching, bombs are dropping or who we are targeting.

I think Hegseth was flexing just to flex, which is perfectly indicative of the fact that he is an amateur who has no business in that job. One of several (Patel, Gabbard) unqualified and unserious cabinet members in the Trump administration.

Hahahaha.

In part bc Biden Admin did too.

 

[TivoliDawg]

Leavitt’s efforts to respond by parsing words is a total failure. Hegseth shared operational details of a forthcoming military operation via Signal. That’s a violation of operational security, which is extremely serious.


A question that I haven’t heard asked much about this mess is, why did Hegseth feel compelled to share those specific operational details to that group of people, via Signal or any other channel?

For examples, there is no scenario where the Treasury Secretary needs that information. I would argue a US diplomat who happens to be in Moscow negotiating a peace deal on an unrelated conflict doesn’t need to know weapons systems, when planes are launching, bombs are dropping or who we are targeting.

I think Hegseth was flexing just to flex, which is perfectly indicative of the fact that he is an amateur who has no business in that job. One of several (Patel, Gabbard) unqualified and unserious cabinet members in the Trump administration.

Exactly. Why is he sharing this info. at all? The strike on the Houthis is not even a large military operation statistically. Why share it?

It appears to me he’s bragging or somehow letting his ego get in the way.

Also, why are Vance and Trump not on the same page?

Who thing is a debacle. But according to some on this board, it’s actually the reporter’s fault that Watlz added him. Lolol.

Or no wait, this is “fake news”! Except it isn’t.

Or wait, this reporter has already been “discredited”, except it’s Pete Hegseth who has been discredited.

 

[TivoliDawg]

Yeah we need professionals like you Democrats back in charge…..

View embedded media

The correct answer is ‘all should have been terminated’, not ‘none should get terminated’.

Our country is continually lowering the bar to protect our own politicians.

 

[Savannah_Dawg]

Exactly. Why is he sharing this info. at all? The strike on the Houthis is not even a large military operation statistically. Why share it?

It appears to me he’s bragging or somehow letting his ego get in the way.

Also, why are Vance and Trump not on the same page?

Who thing is a debacle. But according to some on this board, it’s actually the reporter’s fault that Watlz added him. Lolol.

Or no wait, this is “fake news”! Except it isn’t.

Or wait, this reporter has already been “discredited”, except it’s Pete Hegseth who has been discredited.

You Democrats are hilarious. It’s like y'all live in some alternate reality. You make a huge story out of nothing yet ignore HUGE blunders that cost a bunch of people their lives and us tax payers 100s of billions of dollars like Bidens Afghanistan withdrawal. Such hypocrites

 

[Savannah_Dawg]

The correct answer is ‘all should have been terminated’, not ‘none should get terminated’.

Our country is continually lowering the bar to protect our own politicians.

Easy for you to say that in hindsight. Can you point me to your posts saying this when it actually might have mattered?