this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2025
955 points (99.5% liked)

politics

22834 readers
3642 users here now

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

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Lawmakers from both parties expressed outrage after The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief revealed he was accidentally included in a Trump administration Signal chat discussing Yemen airstrikes.

Rep. Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.) and Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) called for investigations and firings, labeling it a serious security breach.

Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) criticized the use of non-secure systems, warning that adversaries like Russia and China could exploit it.

Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) condemned the administration's mishandling of classified information, saying it endangers national security.

(page 4) 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Cue schumer saying that we shouldn't be hasty and should focus on bipartisan bills instead.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 109 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (11 children)

Devil's Advocate Hot Take:

This is an expression of power. An intentional leak to show that "We get to break rules, and you cannot." We see it as incompetence and abject hypocrisy, but it could be a purposeful leak because they don't care about being seen as hypocrites, they are about showing us they can get away with it. It could also be a Trial Balloon about the kind of wars they intend to wage.

/takes off tinfoil hat

I really think they really are just this stupid, but I think its at least worthwhile to consider the alternative, because a lot of what conservatives do is about using hypocrisy as a weapon and expression of power over others. They want us getting angry about such things, so they can can be cool and collected and say that we're overreacting because they're so calm while chuckling and sneering at us.

"But her emails!" Yeah they don't actually give a shit, they may just want to show they can get away with it. Much like Trump rejecting using a government issued cell phone in his first term and Bush "losing" millions of emails.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] [email protected] 67 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Imagine that. You have unqualified amateurs in important government positions, and they don't know what they're doing.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 weeks ago

But they claim that they know better than the actual experts they displace

[–] [email protected] 34 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

The so-called experts on Trump over at the Atlantic wrote a long and boring article on my cellphone usage that is so incorrect I do not have time here to correct it. I only use Government Phones, and have only one seldom used government cell phone. Story is soooo wrong!

--@RealDonaldTrump

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

It’s hard to tell whether this is whether this is real or not… I’m going to lean “not” due to the low amount of misused capitals, and staying on topic.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 59 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Way too coherent to be real.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 weeks ago

Also, he refused to use a government phone in his first term.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

They only have themselves to blame. If you're actively destroying OPSEC you have no reason to fucking cry.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago
[–] [email protected] 305 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)
[–] [email protected] 72 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›