this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2025
400 points (99.3% liked)

politics

23087 readers
3767 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
 

Hegseth has denied the information he shared was classified, but it was given to him on a system for sensitive and classified information, sources told NBC News.

Minutes before U.S. fighter jets took off to begin strikes against Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen last month, Army Gen. Michael Erik Kurilla, who leads U.S. Central Command, used a secure U.S. government system to send detailed information about the operation to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

The material Kurilla sent included details about when U.S. fighters would take off and when they would hit their targets — details that could, if they fell into the wrong hands, put the pilots of those fighters in grave danger. But he was doing exactly what he was supposed to: providing Hegseth, his superior, with information he needed to know and using a system specifically designed to safely transmit sensitive and classified information.

But then Hegseth used his personal phone to send some of the same information Kurilla had given him to at least two group text chats on the Signal messaging app, three U.S. officials with direct knowledge of the exchanges told NBC News.

all 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world 118 points 23 hours ago (4 children)

Imagine if this was democrats, with a democrat presidency.

Just fucking imagine.

Conservatives are the epitome of hypocrisy.

[–] WaxiestSteam69@lemm.ee 44 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

My father in laws head would explode. Instead he and my mother in law twist themselves into knots to justify this crap.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 2 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Did they try to justify this specifically?

[–] WaxiestSteam69@lemm.ee 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

No just generally defending right wing positions. The last stuff was my MIL posting about how tariffs are misunderstood.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago

Gotcha. Was just curious what defense they gave if so.

[–] A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 20 points 23 hours ago (3 children)

Epitomized by Hillary responding "you've got to be kidding me" 😂 idgaf who you are, that shits hilarious

[–] oppy1984@lemm.ee 7 points 21 hours ago

Yeah I have no love for Hillary, but that was a perfect response.

[–] neidu3@sh.itjust.works 6 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Hillaryus*

I'll show myself out...

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 15 hours ago

Butterymales!

[–] iamjackflack@lemm.ee 10 points 23 hours ago

They would be chanting in unison death to Biden or Obama

[–] malloc@lemmy.world 6 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Hypocrisy is the platform of the modern GOP.

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 5 points 22 hours ago

and the one of pre-modern times, too

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 34 points 21 hours ago

I sent the first news story about the signal chats to my parents ands in-laws in a big group that said "I had better never fucking hear another one of you dumbasses say a word about 'HeR eEeEeEmAiLs' ever again"

Not a single one replied, both parents have (according to my wife) started taking Facebook posts they've made in the past down, and my in-laws have not said a political word in over a week. It's been refreshing.

They clearly aren't ready to accept they may have been totally wrong all along, but it's nice to see they might be self-aware enough to recognize when they might be potentially maybe SOMETIMES be less than correct about specific things.

You need a microscope to see it, but i consider it a step up.

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 44 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

“There’s no dysfunction.”

Definitely the kind of quote you get from a functioning administration at the annual Easter egg hunt.

[–] A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 5 points 23 hours ago

😂😂😂

[–] neidu3@sh.itjust.works 14 points 21 hours ago
[–] bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

The thing I don't get is why did he send it to a group chat with his wife and brother? Was it an accident when he meant to share it to the Houthi PC Small Group, or was he testing out the formatting? I don't really understand what they'd even do with that information?

[–] cuteness@sh.itjust.works 4 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Either bragging or laundering information to enemies of the US through close family and legal relationships so they are less likely to turn on him.

That’s it. There is no other reason it could be.

[–] bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 13 hours ago

Ohh hmm maybe that's why it was wife and his brother/lawyer, so they can't testify against him?

[–] Gregg@lemm.ee 10 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

” There’s no dysfunction.”

Ron Howard: There is.

[–] zephorah@lemm.ee 9 points 23 hours ago

But, Hillary’s emails! Remember those?

[–] UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works 5 points 22 hours ago

But was he wearing a tan suit?

[–] rhvg@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago

He will be replaced with loomer