During Tuesday’s hearing, Gabbard told Warner that the Signal thread didn’t share any classified information but refused to share its contents, or even admit that she was on the chain.

“If it’s not classified, share the texts now,” Warner told Gabbard. “Share it with the committee. You can’t have it both ways. These are important jobs. This is our national security.”

Bitch, we can smell the bullshit 500 miles away.

172 points

IANAL, but because this was done on a third party encrypted chat app, doesn’t it also violate the federal records act or something? If this was any other administration they would have been launched out of a cannon for that alone, not just the breach in security.

permalink
report
reply
110 points

Absolutely. Not to mention that organizing a fucking battle plan on a non-government communications system is fucking insane.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

That’s why they’re using Signal. If this while thing collapses on them, they don’t want written records of their criminal conspiracies.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

I anal too, but I think as long as they do submit the conversion to the record which they now still can if it didn’t self delete, then they’re covered. They can also declassify all of it and say “see?” like Trump did with the classified documents he stole for Mar a Lago.

Signal isn’t on an approved list, but the federal records act really just said there will be a council headed by an administrator or whatever to make rules and collect the records. So the current administrator, which could be a vacant seat or a MAGA Hat for all I know right now, would be in charge of this, and probably just hand it over to congress.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

The messages were set to auto-delete after a week, which imo reduces the likelihood that the messages will be recorded.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Good thing there are screenshots by the reporter.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

But the guy in the chat with them immediately informed them that he’d been in there, which gave them time to act

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

No, not for top secret stuff. That needs to be taken to official, secure channels.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Whoa whoa. You’re not a lawyer, or you anal. CONFESS!

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

I’m not personally into the idea of ANAL, but I like how its simultaneously not classified info, and also they’ve forbidden the journalist from sharing it further …because its classified info.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

I also ANAL. Those boys done fucked up but likely won’t see consequences.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

“those boys done fucked up but”

Yes, this is ANAL

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Yes. Unless they forwarded them in a secure way immediately. Which there’s like zero chance was the plan.

permalink
report
parent
reply
102 points

Resign? They should be in jail. They used signal to get around FOIA laws.

permalink
report
reply
13 points

Right! Resigning is not enough! If a regular person leaked secrets they would face more damning consequences.

permalink
report
parent
reply
76 points

“It’s classified” is a nice catch-all excuse to use when you just don’t want to answer for your actions.

Trump literally just got finished broadcasting and tweeting about flights that were deporting Venezuelans, topping it off with an “Oopise” taunt. But when he’s brought in front of a judge and is expected to answer for that…Sorry, classified. State secrets.

Trump’s team talks about bombing the shit out of Yemen, then goes and bombs the shit out of Yemen. And is now trying to say they didn’t talk about anything classified while talking about bombing the shit out of Yemen during a signal chat without even a hint of realization that the entire conversation was classified. Talking about impending war plans IS FUCKING CLASSIFIED BY DEFAULT YOU FUCKING CHODES

permalink
report
reply
20 points

The Committee can always ask The Atlantic for the transcripts. I have no doubts they will hand them over.

permalink
report
reply
19 points

Every politician in that chat should be impeached. I know it won’t remove them from office because the fucking Republicans lose even the pretext of ethics when one of their own is in trouble, but it should still be pushed to a vote.

permalink
report
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 17K

    Monthly active users

  • 21K

    Posts

  • 562K

    Comments