One more to note, from last night, his THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Propaganda Pig."
Oh, look at the piggie liar. It's Karoline Leavitt. You feel sorry for her child and pray that the boy didn't inherit mom's looks. She really does look like a pig.
Speaking of ugly . . .
Bottle Blond Bimbo Bondi?
A tsk-tsk came via an e-mail. Should you really write that way?
Well, yes, this is my website so I will write however I want.
Also
true, she's a public servant. A fact that she's forgotten but it is
true. So consider this a work review from one of her many bosses.
I
also gave her more than enough time to get adjusted to the duties of
her job. She's not up to the job. She doesn't want to do the job.
Justice isn't her concern. She's out for vengeance in her petty mind so
she's going to write every minor slight of the last forty years.
Attorney
general Pam Bondi signaled that she was unlikely to open a criminal
investigation into a group chat by Donald Trump's officials on a
third-party platform to plan a military operation.
The
attorney general was asked at an unrelated news conference about
defense secretary Pete Hegseth disclosing details about a pending attack
on Houthi rebels in Yemen over the encrypted Signal app without knowing
a reporter had been added to the group by national security adviser,
but Bondi echoed comments made by White House press secretary Karoline
Leavitt.
“It was sensitive information, not classified,
and inadvertently released,” Bondi said. “If you want to talk about
classified information, talk about what was in Hillary Clinton’s home.
Talk about the classified documents in Joe Biden’s garage, that Hunter
Biden had access to.”
First,
the idea that precise operational details about a foreign military
operation were not “classified” is difficult to take seriously. As Ryan
Goodman, a New York University law professor and former special counsel
at the Pentagon, noted via Bluesky, “I worked at the Pentagon. If
information like this is not classified, nothing is.”
Second, it’s not the attorney general’s job to make public assessments on the efficacy of missile strikes.
Third,
there is ample reason to believe that the officials involved in
“Signalgate” did, in fact, cross legal lines — and there are no
exceptions to the law based on whether or not “we are very pleased with
the results” of an operation.
And fourth, while
Bondi seems eager to play the role of brazen political partisan — again
— the fact remains that the Clinton and Biden matters were (a) far less
serious than Team Trump’s debacle; and (b) thoroughly reviewed by
federal law enforcement.
She's
not qualified, she's not objective and she doesn't care how that looks
because she's not interested in serving the American people. We are her
boss, a fact she gladly ignores.
So, Bottle Blond Bimbo Bondi.
Wait!
No.
Let me correct that: Bottle Blond Bimbo Bitch Bondi.
Much, much more accurate.
Okay, community notes. Music fans know to follow Kat:
Poor Ruth. I feel for her. Here, I tend to cover the hideous -- Bondi now added to my list of awfuls that already included Lauren Boebert, little Junior Kennedy, etc. Sometimes I will do music here because I need a break from covering the disgusting politicians. Think about how much of a break Ruth must need -- she covers Donald Chump. She started that when he was out of the White House and had all the court cases. She's stuck with the topic now. Love Ruth and feel for her. Could not imagine realizing that, each week, I'd have to do five posts on Chump. So here's her most recent five:
What is Mike's beat? I should know this. We're a couple. We share a child. He's done "Idiot of the Week" since 2006 -- where he picks the big idiot of the week. He covered Doo-Doo DeSantis during the primaries. He covers Junior and Chump. I know he's writing about REACHER in his post tonight. That show's season three just wrapped up on AMAZON. Our daughter and he loved the season finale. Anyway, here's his most recent five post (again, one on REACHER should go up tonight -- he's typing next to me right now -- unless he holds it for tomorrow -- he sometimes does if he's not sure who to 'award' the idiot too -- if he's got two or three possibilities, he'll often sleep on it and post on Saturday):
Wally, Cedric, Isaiah, Betty, Ann and C.I. often do a joint-post. Wally started out his site to be a humor site. Cedric had a death that really wrecked him. A really great older man at his church passed away. It hit him hard, he was a great friend to Cedric and Cedric just didn't want to post anymore. So Wally offered that they could do humor posts together and that started the joint-posts. Over time, the others joined them. Actually, not true. Wally will tell you that C.I. has always been a part of it because he used her as a sounding board from the start.
Anyway, that covers the community sites. Beth noted in the gina & krista round-robin roundtable last night that community members were complaining that we weren't noting one another's sites. That's because we're tired and these aren't fun time with Convicted Felon Chump back in the White House. But I get the point, and I did last night, and I've noted everyone in this post as a result. Hope that helps.
Friday, March 28, 2025. Details continue to emerge about the security breach while outrage mounts. Donald Chump stupidly thinks he can ignore it and the Congressional idiot who was the face of 'uncommitted' remains uncommitted to the American people.
Let's start with Rachel Maddow last night on MSNBC.
Convicted Felon Donald Chump is cratering in the polls. And that's especially obvious when it comes to the security breach and his ineptitude in responding to it. Another segment from last night's THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW.
She cites the YOUGOV survey conducted on March 25th:
How serious of a problem is it that Trump officials shared military plans with a journalist in a chat app?
Very/somewhat serious 76%
Not very/not serious at all 13%
This is a very serious issue which is why we've covered it and two Congressional hearings on the topic.
Donald Chump doesn't get how serious this is and we'll be going into that in a moment.
But let's take a moment to note another idiot. She is a Socialist who spent years and years posing as a Democrat -- something all Justice "Democrats" have done. After she worked to tank Kamala Harris' presidential campaign, she had a fit that some people -- including us -- were talking about her being a Socialist. After endorsing a fellow Socialist for Mayor of NYC -- her business because NYC is in the hart of Michigan (that was sarcasm) -- ahe stopped the pretense and is finally out and proud.
Rashida Tlaib, congratulations on stepping out -- or being forced out of -- your political closet.
Rashida's attacked the security breach . . . Well attacked those people who take it seriously.
A national security breach that goes to how team Trump puts us at risk on any and every security matter wasn't an issue to her. She felt that was a distraction and we needed to be focused on who was killed in the bombings
Now she could explore that topic in a hearing of her own -- even a field hearing -- if it really mattered to her.
The bigger question though is why, time and again, when it comes to the American people, Rashida's not there.
She's (for now) a member of the US Congress. A member of the House of Representatives -- the American people's House. But she's not there for us.
She makes it clear on her government website where she ignores the security breach but does have a link on her page to Twitter and she's remained on Twitter and refused to go on BLUESKY. Shed rather give Alien Musk traffic -- at a time when people are fleeing that platform she continues to give her consent and approval to Musk and his Twitter.
The American people think this is a serious issue (and it is). But Rashida's only public comment on the issue has been to dismiss concerns over the breach and insist that we are focused on the wrong thing.
Few Republicans in Congress are being as craven as she is.
Something to think about over the weekend.
The security breach has already resulted in
questioning during two Congressional hearings -- the Senate Intelligence Committee and the House Intelligence Committee. Many are calling for
accountability. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is the name most
often cited when people discuss firing. Senator Tammy Duckworth told
Rachel Maddow on MSNBC Wednesday night that everyone of the government
officials in the Signat chat risked the safety of those Americans
carrying out the bombing mission that Donald Chump ordered and that
every official should be fired. Don't disagree with her on that.
Some
are of the opinion that despite Donald solidifying his trashy image via
a 'reality' show that required him to say "You're fired," he's too much
of a weak sister to actually fire someone when it's not part of a TV
show. But Hegseth shouldn't get too comfortable with that because he
and others are in the midst of another security scandal. Michael Luciano (MEDIAITE) reports:
Passwords
and private information belonging to top national security officials in
the Trump administration have been found online, according to the
German publication Der Spiegel.
In a stunning
report published on Wednesday, the paper said its journalists “used
commercial people search engines along with hacked customer data that
has been published on the web.” Those whose information was compromised
include Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Director of National
Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, and National Security Advisor Mike Waltz.
“Private
contact details of the most important security advisers to U.S.
President Donald Trump can be found on the internet,” the outlet wrote.
“DER SPIEGEL reporters were able to find mobile phone numbers, email
addresses and even some passwords belonging to the top officials.”
Again, these Intel nominees were never qualified for their jobs. And that just raises more questions.
Will we next learn that all three responded with their bank information to an e-mail reading:
Dear sir or ma'am,
I
am an exiled prince in Niger and my money is currently in limbo unless I
can get it out of this country. This is a dire emergency and you must
not breathe word of this to anyone for their are people in this country
working to harm me. If you please will give me your bank account
numbers, I will transfer $125,000 into your account and you keep may
$25,000 of that just for assisting me.
Trump
administration officials accidentally shared planning for combat action
with a reporter, and it's exactly the type of failure that military
leaders have long feared — one that comes from sloppy OPSEC and
smartphones.
Using Signal, a
popular secure messaging app that is encrypted though not impenetrable,
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, National Security Advisor Mike Waltz,
Vice President JD Vance, and other top officials discussed key details
related to pending US airstrikes against Houthi militants in Yemen,
including weather, assets involved, and timing.
What the group failed to recognize is that one chat member was actually the top editor of The Atlantic magazine.
"We
are currently clean on OPSEC," Hegseth wrote in the group chat just
below an operational timeline that identified the types of planes
involved and strike start times.
Two OPSEC violations are apparent from the chat.
Most
obviously, sensitive military topics were openly discussed with an
individual without a "need to know" and presumably without an
appropriate security clearance. Second, that operational information was
transmitted over an unsecured line, vulnerable to enemy hacking.
US House Rep Jim Himes is the Ranking Member on the House Intelligence Committee and, on Wednesday, he noted, "And they know that there's only one response to a mistake of this
magnitude: You apologize, you own it and you stop everything until you
can figure out what went wrong and how it might not ever happen again.
But that's not what happened. The Secretary of Defense responded with a
brutal attack on the reporter who did not ask to be on the Signal
chain. Yesterday, our former colleague Michael Waltz did the same in
the White House and then went on FOX to call Jeff Goldberg a loser. "
Instead of getting what we're owed, we continue to get lies and attacks from the administration. We The People continue to get lies and pointed fingers at others. Jennifer Bowers Bahney (RAW STORY) reports:
Secretary
of Defense Pete Hegseth, who's in the middle of the Signal messaging
app scandal that inadvertently revealed an impending military strike to a
journalist, made an angry post on social media Wednesday once again
denying that "war plans" were revealed.
"So, let’s me get this straight," Hegseth began on Wednesday.
"The
Atlantic released the so-called 'war plans' and those 'plans' include:
No names. No targets. No locations. No units. No routes. No sources. No
methods. And no classified information. Those are some really s----y war
plans."
We've got a serious problem here.
Is he drunk? Seriously, is he drunk?
If
not, he's either the worst liar or the dumbest person on the face of
the planet. You are texting the time that strike will occur, shortly
before it is carried out. That is top secret, that is considered
classified at that time. At the time, pay attention and put down the
shot glass, you texted, the mission hadn't been carried out yet. As
Tammy Duckworth explained to Rachel Maddow on Wednesday, that could have
led to American's flying the bombing mission getting targeted. The
details revealed also threaten whomever was the Intel asset on this.
Stream the video below.
This
is not minor though Hegseth continues to act as though it is. This
goes not just to the fact that he's not qualified for this position, it
also goes to the reality that he's not mature enough for the position.
On
the latter, that should have been obvious to all, when he was trying to
get confirmed and, in a desperate big like no one has ever tried
before, Little Petey enlisted his mother to fight his confirmation battle. From December 9th, Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Mama Hegseth"
Back in December, that was the clue to America but few wanted to grab it. When
you're a grown ass man of 44 years (45 in June) and you can't get
through your own confirmation hearing without sending Mommy on a media
blitz, you're not mature enough to hold the office. Little Petey
demonstrates his lack of immaturity right now by lying about what went
down, by attacking journalists Jeffrey Goldberg and by acting as though
this security breach is the fault of everyone else except for him.
Brian
and Penelope Hegseth, you failed in raising your son. And that would
be your own damn business and I wouldn't comment but your son is the
Secretary of Defense and your failure puts us all at risk.
The security breach is a very serious issue. Senator Martin Heinrich's office issued the following:
Heinrich slams Trump Administration intelligence officials for lying under oath: “Incredibly disappointing”
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich
(D-N.M.), member of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence,
appeared on MSNBC with Jen Psaki yesterday, where he reacted to Trump
Administration intelligence officials lying under oath to his question during Tuesday’s hearing on whether intelligence officials’ Signal group chat included precise information on weapons packages, targets, or timing.
Jen Psaki: Senator, I know you’ve been living this,
trying to get more information, trying to ask very valid legitimate
questions. But you hadn’t seen those text messages until this morning.
Senator Heinrich: Nope, just like everyone else.
Psaki: What did you think when you read them?
Heinrich: Well, I thought, how can you come and
testify in front of Congress, and not think, given everything that's
gone on, that the details would come out? When you have the Director of
the CIA, when you have the DNI, just brazenly lying to Congress, how
could they not think that this wasn't going to come out at some point,
or that we wouldn't get to the bottom of it? It is deeply disappointing.
On Trump Administration officials lying under oath to Heinrich’s question about contents of Signal chat:
Psaki: Secretary Hegseth also lied about this. They
[Directors Tulsi Gabbard and John Ratcliffe] weren't the only people
lying about it. They were sitting there under oath testifying in
Congress.
Heinrich: Yes.
Psaki: It was a text chain they were on. Hard to imagine they didn't remember those details. Did they lie to you?
Heinrich: Yeah, they did lie to us. It's hard to
imagine for me that they didn't all go over the text chain the night
before. Or in the run up to even the morning, knowing that this was in
the news already. So, it's incredibly disappointing to see how
cavalierly they misrepresented this. And obviously I hadn't seen those
parts of the text chain at that point. But I suspected, and what we
would normally really be concerned about showing up outside of what we
call the high side, the secure communications infrastructure that we
use. Are these operational details? Because that is what can put service
members at risk, and this is a case where real lives are on the line.
There were intelligence details in these exchanges that may well have
put peoples' lives at risk.
Psaki: Yeah, the General is making this point that
they're still at risk now. And this now gives the Houthis a better
understanding of how these communications happen.
Heinrich: That’s exactly right.
On an expedited Inspector General investigation into the situation:
Psaki: Let me ask you: Senator Roger Wicker said
today that the Senate Armed Services Committee is seeking an expedited
IG investigation. He's a Republican senator. We haven't heard that from a
lot of other Republican senators or any others that I'm aware of
publicly at this point, but you talk to them privately. Do you think
more could come out? Is there more who might call for that?
Heinrich: I hope. I really hope more [Republican
senators] do come out, because the private conversations are: People
know this was wrong. People know that it was reckless. No one wants to
defend this in the public. Even if you watch the Worldwide Annual Threat
Assessment hearing in its totality, you didn't hear Republicans coming
to the defense of this kind of recklessness. We'll just have to see. You
know, there's this palpable fear of saying anything critical of Team
Trump. And to his credit, I think Roger Wicker did what anyone would
normally do in this situation, which is just to say, “Let's get to the
bottom of it.”
Psaki: That's what IGs are supposed to do. Hence why
it's so problematic that a number of them were fired. Senator, thank
you so much, and thank you for continuing to press on this issue. I know
there's many, many more questions out there.
Heinrich: We're not done yet.
A recap of Tuesday’s hearing on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence can be found here.
###
Of course, not everyone is taking it seriously -- such as the White House -- such as the White House spokesperson. She's
not lying to save herself so who knows why she's lying but the porcine
spokesperson for the White House is stomping her hooves and digging in
with the lies.
White
House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt raged against The Wall Street
Journal on Wednesday, first in a social media post and then at an
afternoon press briefing.
In an editorial over the leaked Signal groupchat
in which senior Trump administration officials discussed plans for an
attack on Yemen’s Houthi rebels, the Journal took aim at peace envoy
Steve Witkoff.
“A real
security scandal is that the Signal chat apparently included Steve
Witkoff, Mr. Trump’s envoy to wars in the Middle East and Ukraine. Press
reports say Mr. Witkoff was receiving these messages on the commercial
app while in Moscow,” observed the Journal. “This is security
malpractice. Russian intelligence services must be listening to Mr.
Witkoff’s every eyebrow flutter. This adds to the building perception
that Mr. Witkoff, the President’s friend from New York, is out of his
depth in dealing with world crises.”
The
editorial also singled out Vice President JD Vance for criticism,
arguing that his position in the chat will lead American allies to
believe “hat officials at the top of the Trump Administration think the
U.S. relationship isn’t based on common interests or values,” but is
instead “closer to a protection racket.”
On Wednesday morning, Leavitt took to X to dispute the Journal‘s characterization of Witkoff’s actions.
Fat
Piggy then oinked-oinked that this was "fake news." Fake news?
Karoline, fake news is your reported weight. Maybe that spooked her?
The thought that they'd make her go on the record about her actual
weight? Something spooked the liar and she fled:
White
House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt unexpectedly ended a news
conference Wednesday after fielding tough questions about the government
Houthi attack plan leak for the first time.
Leavitt,
who gave a surprise glimpse into her family life, lost her temper and
snapped at CNN's Kaitlan Collins during a volatile press conference.
[. . .]
The
conference, which was the first held since the massive Signal war plans
scandal, lasted slightly under 25 minutes. She spoke for under 10
minutes before answering a handful of questions from reporters then
abruptly leaving.
A handful of viewers noticed her sudden departure on X.
"Karoline
Leavitt got scared and just ran off the stage after getting grilled by
reporters about the signal chat," one user wrote.
Another added: "Karoline Leavitt practically ran out of that press conference after getting hammered by reporters."
She
just fled, on a swinish tear, she just fled from the bright lights and
cameras. Remember, the media's part of the "sunlight [that] is said to
be the best of disinfectants" against government corruption as cited by
former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandies.
Next
question in the chamber for Karoline: Did she marry a man 32 years
older in the hopes that age would have blurred his vision and softened
her hoggish looks?
The
scandal continues and actually enlarges due to the administration's
refusal to address it. Had Chump, for example, announced two days ago,
"Hegseth has given me his resignation letter," the intensity of the
scandal might have faded. But the inaction just makes it continue to
grow. It was wrong and lies from the administration do not erase that.
In fact, the lies only inflame people because even someone with no
knowledge of classified or top secret grasps that you do not give out
the target and the time of a target for an impending strike in a
non-secure chat. Everyone grasps that.
In
the British Parliament, the Signal group chat controversy prompted a
hard question on Wednesday for the U.K. leader from opposition lawmaker
Ed Davey: Can Britain still trust America with its secrets?
"Will
the prime minister make it clear that he will order an urgent review
into the security of the intelligence that we share with the United
States?" Davey asked during a session in the House of Commons.
U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer pushed back.
"We
work with the United States on a daily basis," Starmer said. "Unpicking
our relations with the U.S. for defense and security is neither
responsible nor serious."
Newspaper and news website headlines across the continent, however, have not.
Chump looks like an idiot on the global stage because that's what he is.
The
security breach has not been addressed. All these days after it was
revealed. And remember it was revealed by Jeffrey Goldberg who was
brought in on the chat. If he hadn't revealed it, would the
administration know about it even now?
Probably not.
And day after day, no action has been taken.
When you hear the phrase "fiddling while Rome burns," this is what they're talking about.
Chump looks as ineffective and as indecisive as Emperor Nero.
He's made himself a joke.
The security breach took place March 13th,
March 14th and March 15th. Grasp that Jeffrey Goldberg was wrongly
included on all of those group texts and that the Intel people had no
clue.
Chump's
administration should have never let it happen. Having allowed it to
happen via gross negligence, they didn't realize it. Three days they
kept Goldberg 'in the loop,' so to speak, on conversations no one
outside the government should have been in on. And then they didn't
even realize it for days and days. March 24th, he published his account
in THE ATLANTIC. All these days later, it has still not been address.
This
was a breach of security. It was also an intelligence failure because
whatever you call the discussions -- top secret, classified, extra
butter on the pop corn -- the White House does not want to be having
conversations that they include the press on without the knowledge of
the administration.
This was an intelligence failure.
What if Goldberg hadn't written the story? Think about that. He might still be in the group chat and hearing who knows what.
This security breach and Intel failure is something that the administration should have discovered all on their own.
Yesterday, Senator Jack Reed's office issued the following:
WASHINGTON, DC -- Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-MS) and Ranking Member Jack Reed (D-RI) sent a letter to the Acting Inspector General of the Department of Defense
regarding their bipartisan concern and interest about the Signal group
chat involving senior members of the Trump Administration.
U.S. Department of Defense – Office of Inspector General
4800 Mark Center Drive
Alexandria, VA 22350-1500
Dear Mr. Stebbins,
On March 11, 2025, Jeffrey Goldberg, the Editor-in-chief of The
Atlantic, was reportedly included on a group chat on the commercially
available communications application called Signal, which included
members of the National Security Council. This chat was alleged to have
included classified information pertaining to sensitive military actions
in Yemen. If true, this reporting raises questions as to the use of
unclassified networks to discuss sensitive and classified information,
as well as the sharing of such information with those who do not have
proper clearance and need to know.
Accordingly, we ask that you conduct an inquiry into, and provide us with an assessment of, the following:
1. The facts and circumstances surrounding the above referenced
Signal chat incident, including an accounting of what was communicated
and any remedial actions taken as a result;
2. Department of Defense (DOD) policies and adherence to policies
relating to government officers and employees sharing sensitive and
classified information on non-government networks and electronic
applications;
3. An assessment of DOD classification and declassification
policies and processes and whether these policies and processes were
adhered to;
4. How the policies of the White House, Department of Defense,
the intelligence community, and other Departments and agencies
represented on the National Security Council on this subject differ, if
at all;
5. An assessment of whether any individuals transferred
classified information, including operational details, from classified
systems to unclassified systems, and if so, how;
6. Any recommendations to address potential issues identified.
Please include a classified annex to these responses as needed.
The Senate Armed Services Committee will work with you to schedule a
briefing immediately upon completion of your review.
We're back
to the Bleached Blond Bimbo Bondi. America's embarrassment Pam Bondi
continues to run and ruin the Dept. of Justice. Colby Hall (MEDIAITE) reports:
Attorney
General Pam Bondi defiantly defended the Trump administration when
asked whether the Department of Justice would investigate the alleged
security breach now known as Signalgate.
As
bipartisan pressure mounts over an apparent leak of classified
information that was inadvertently shared with The Atlantic‘s Jeffrey
Goldberg on an unsecured Signal app, attention has turned to whether the
irresponsible treatment of top-secret data merits a criminal
investigation. Senator Roger Wicker, who chairs the Senate Armed Forces
Committee, has already announced his intention to expedite the naming of
2an independent Inspector General to look into the matter.
At
the end of a Thursday morning press event to announce the arrest of an
MS-13 gang leader, the attorney general was asked, “Is DOJ involved at
this point? If so, why?, If not, why not?”
Bondi
defiantly defended the alleged breach, saying “Well, first, it was
sensitive information, not classified, and inadvertently released.” She
then immediately mimicked the very same White House talking points we’ve
heard from President Donald Trump, saying “And what we should be
talking about is it was a very successful mission. Our world is now
safer because of that mission. We’re not going to comment any further on
that.”
She then pivoted to a lamentation of older scandals that have long plagued Democrats.
“If
you want to talk about classified information, talk about what was at
Hillary Clinton’s home that she was trying to bleach bit. Talk about
that. that classified documents in Joe Biden’s garage that Hunter Biden
had access to,” said Bondi, rehashing two of the GOP’s favorite talking
points from the last few election cycles.
Do you get the many, many problems with that? That's why you don't put a bimbo in charge of the Justice Department.
Secondly,
you have no control over what Justice did before you were put in
charge. That shouldn't even be an issue. You are now in charge and you
should be doing your job which would be launching an investigation;
however, you don't know justice and you don't know the law and you
clearly don't even know how to buy a bra that actually fits.
Blond
Bimbo Bondi is an embarrassment and the all time worst Attorney General
the country has ever had. Do your job, Blond Bimbo, or quit. We're
not paying your salary for you to play Dumb Blond daily in public.
Thursday, March 27, 2025. Congress holds another hearing on the
Chump administration's security breach and Tulsi Gabbard has a new
excuse -- she was late to the chat. Senator Tammy Duckworth rightly
notes that all the officials in the chat should be fired immediately.
And much more.
Yesterday's snapshot covered the security breach that's
let Americans know just how unsafe things truly are. Without knowing
they had done so, many administration officials -- and the Vice
President -- did a group chat on the unsecure app Signal and discussed a
bombing that the US was about to carry out. All were at risk of being
exposed to unintended eyes since it is not a secure app but this was
especially an issue for Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard
and National Security Advisor Michael Walz because they were using the
unsecure app while outside of the US -- at a hearing we'll be covering
in a few paragraphs below, US House Rep Jim Himes sarcastically termed the breach "a madcap Signal about an attack on Yemen while inside Russia."
Journalist Jeffrey Goldberg was accidentally added in and was privy to
all the information leading up to the bombing and after.
This
is information that is top secret and it doesn't matter if Convicted
Felon Donald Chump wants to say it's not classified or not. It was top
secret. Had Goldberg gone on ABC NEWS immediately and started
announcing, "We're about to bomb another country," the government would
have moved to shut down the broadcast or to abort the mission. They would not have wanted those
details out.
Though the
always delusional Rashida Tlaib didn't get it and wants to whine that
we're not!!! just not!!! discussing whether the bombing was a proper
response!!! That's not the issue and we're are yet again at a point
where the American people just cannot afford her stupidity. It's really
time for her to consider a post-Congress career.
A)
Nothing is stopping her from holding her own hearing exploring the pros
and cons of the bombing. It might be a 'committee' hearing of one --
but she can do that and I attended many tiny 'committees' made up only
of Democrats prior to the 2006 mid-terms.
B)
That is not the issue. It is not the big and most important issue.
Just as her stupidity has condemned the Palestinian people to more
violence and left blood on the hands of Genocide Rashida as a result of
her work to put Chump back in the White House, she's missing the point
today.
Our national
intelligence is the topic. This goes to the fact that the people in
these posts do not know what they are doing. Prior to their
confirmation hearings, I noted here of Trashy Garbage (Trina's longterm
name for Tulsi Gabbard), Pete Hegseth and others that Chump's going to
be responsible if we have an attack on our soil like 9/11 again. He's
going to be responsible. His unqualified appointees are going to be
responsible and the senators who voted to confirm these idiots are going
to be responsible.
I don't want another 9/11 -- no, American does. But we are at risk when idiots are put into national security positions.
Now
we've just seen that these idiots don't know enough to carry out a
secure chat. That's alarming and it should really lead us all to once
again grasp the need for experience in these positions.
Heads
should roll on this. Not living in Rashida World where crazy runs
free, I know we'll be damn lucky for this administration to take enough
accountability to fire even one of the idiots responsible.
If
that happens, it is all the more important that whomever is nominated
to be a replacement is qualified. That means no FOX "NEWS"
personalities, Congressional freaks, etc. The person needs to be
qualified. I may not like them and that's fine. But it is not fine for
America to do with seventy-seventh best because Chump wants to reward
his cronies.
Again,
Rashida needs to shut her damn mouth. No one needs her. DSA might
raise money for her to run for re-election as an open Socialist but
Democrats really aren't feeling like helping her campaign after her 2024
decision to put Chump in the White House.
So
Tuesday, the Senate Intelligence Committee held a hearing. It was a
nightmare. As we noted, three of the five government officials
appearing before the Committee had "intelligence" in their job title yet
all sported stupidity.
Wednesday,
it was time for the House Intelligence Committee to see the witnesses. Director National
Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA DIRECTOR John Ratcliffe, FBI Director
Kash Patel, National Security Agency Director Tim Haugh and Defense
Intelligence Agency Director Jeff Kruse. Yes, the same five who
appeared before the Senate Intel Committee.
US House Rep Jim Himes is the Ranking Member on the Committee.
Now
we come to learn that people in the most dangerous and sensitive jobs
on the planet put extremely specific predecisional discussions about a
military attack on Signal which could be intercepted by the Russians and
the Chinese. Everyone here knows that the Russians or the Chinese
could have gotten all of that information and they could have passed it
on to the Houthis who easily could have repositioned weapons and
altered their plans to to knock down planes or sink ships. I think that
it's by the awesome grace of God that we are not mourning dead pilots
right now.
Let's all take a moment to absorb that.
Ranking Member Jim Himes: Now
we come to learn that people in the most dangerous and sensitive jobs
on the planet put extremely specific predecisional discussions about a
military attack on Signal which could be intercepted by the Russians and
the Chinese. Everyone here knows that the Russians or the Chinese
could have gotten all of that information and they could have passed it
on to the Houthis who easily could have repositioned weapons and altered
their plans to to knock down planes or sink ships. I think that it's
by the awesome grace of God that we are not mourning dead pilots right
now.
Do
you get it? I'm sure community members do and even most drive-bys.
But I'm not sure everyone gets it. Rashida Tlaib clearly does not get
it.
Gang
of Rashida can't ever shut up about "her people." I'm sorry, I thought
she was an American. Americans aren't "her people"? I see she can
slash that red lipstick across her butt ugly face and scream for
the cameras about Palestinians and about immigrants if they're
immigrants who protested Israel. Don't see her doing much else. "Her
people"? If that's the case, she needs to get out of OUR Congress. She
has belittled this security breach and made clear that she doesn't give a
damn about American lives. She also made that clear when she worked to
elect Donald Chump. Rashida and Gang of Rashida need to be watched very
closely because they will destroy us all given the chance and given
their short-sighted and narcissistic ways. Rashida, you don't like the
bombing. Guess what, you're a member of Congress. Take it to
the f**king floor and protect Americans. Otherwise shut your damn mouth
because we're focused on saving the United States, unlike you, we love
this country, unlike you. Go tend to "your people" but stop pretending
that you are a US Congress woman because you're just a seat filler
marking time.
It
took two months, but we finally have our first "gate" of the second
Trump administration: "Signalgate" — and it's a doozy. You are no doubt
aware by now that The Atlantic has published an article reporting that
the top national security officials known as the "Principals Committee"
were gathered together in a Signal group chat to discuss the impending
bombing campaign against the Houthi rebels in Yemen and accidentally
included the magazine's editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, in the chat
without realizing it.
In
the chat, they discussed policy concerns about the campaign, slagged
the European allies, shared what experts say are by definition
classified battle plans, which included "precise information about
weapons packages, targets, and timing" and even mentioned the name of a
covert CIA officer. Goldberg published an article about it on Monday,
complete with screenshots of the chat, although he did not publish the
classified information or the name of the CIA officer. On Wednesday, the
Atlantic published more from the group chat:
That
these high-level national security officials were all using a
commercial app on personal phones that could easily be breached by
state-level actors is bad enough. (One of the members on the call,
special envoy Steve Witkoff, was actually in Moscow at the time.) But
considering their previous outrage at Hillary Clinton's use of a
personal email server, you would have thought that it would have crossed
the mind of at least one of them that this was dangerous. There is no
other way to interpret any of that except to assume that they commonly
use Signal for such discussions in contravention of every security
protocol in the U.S. government.
When
you think about it, though, why wouldn't they? Their leader stubbornly
refused to give up his own personal phone and made a fetish of blabbing
national security secrets since his first term. Recall that right after
he fired FBI Director James Comey, he had the Russian foreign minister
and ambassador over to the Oval Office for a chat where he shared some
very closely held classified information (which later turned out to be
about Israel). After he was out of office, he stole boxes full of
classified documents, stored them in his toilet and refused to give them
back. He was indicted for that but the Justice Department dropped the
charges when he won the election.
It's
outrageous -- what happened is outrageous to those of us with a brain
-- and that's regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum. Isaac Schorr (MEDIAITE) notes:
National
Review executive editor Mark Wright called on President Donald Trump to
fire Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth over his divulgement of
“operational details” regarding the American strikes on Yemen’s Houthi
rebels over Signal earlier this month.
“The
whole story is a tale so clownish, so stunning, so outlandish that it
would seem to better fit into a gonzo satire of government ineptitude
such as Burn After Reading or Veep,” observed Wright regarding National
Security Adviser Mike Waltz’s adding of The Atlantic‘s Jeffrey Goldberg
to the Signal group chat in which top officials — including Hegseth,
Waltz, and Vice President JD Vance — were discussing the plan for the
strikes.
“It goes without saying that Trump
won’t fire everyone involved in this debacle, which would include most
of his senior national-security staff,” continued Wright before laying
out his case for giving Hegseth the axe:
In my
view, the most egregious behavior was Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s.
(The stupidest was National Security Adviser Mike Waltz’s adding of
Goldberg to the conversation in the first place.)
Pete
Hegseth — the top civilian in the Department of the Defense and a man
who has command authority over U.S. military operations worldwide —
texted information, over an unsecured channel, that “contained
operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including
information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and
attack sequencing.” That’s shocking, egregious, and totally outrageous.
President Trump should demand Pete Hegseth’s resignation. Today.
It really is that obvious. And that's why FOX "NEWS" has disappeared their own journalist Jennifer
Griffin. She's their expert on national security. And she's been
commenting on TWITTER but no air time for her on the 'news' network. Andrew Stanton (NEWSWEEK) observes, "The
Wall Street Journal wrote Wednesday in an Opinion column that Witkoff's
reported use of Signal while discussing sensitive topics such as the
conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine amounted to 'security
malpractice,' raising concerns about possible Russian surveillance." ABC NEWS adds, "Minority
Leader Chuck Schumer and top Senate Democrats from national security
committees wrote a letter to President Donald Trump seeking more
information about reports that members of his cabinet used the Signal
app to convene a group chat to 'coordinate and share classified
information about sensitive military planning operations' and mistakenly
included The Atlantic Editor-in-Chief Jeff Goldberg." Amanda Castro (NEWSWEEK) reports, "The
Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, Roger Wicker, is requesting
an expedited Inspector General probe of the Signal group chat leak. Republican
Wicker told reporters he was working with Democrat ranking member of
the committee, Sen. Jack Reed, to ask for the probe and to seek a
classified briefing on it."
Here's US Senator Adam Schiff speaking about the breach and the implications with Jen Psaki last night on MSNBC.
And here's Senator Tammy Duckworth speaking with Rachel Maddow last night.
As
Senator Tammy Duckworth notes, Hegseth doesn't know how to handle
classified information -- and Rachel outlines his earlier mishandling of
information. He is Secretary of Defense and, as Tammy Duckworth
notes, "he put those pilots in danger."
Back to yesterday's House Intelligence Committee hearing.
Ranking Member Jim Himes: It
took two months, but we finally have our first "gate" of the second
Trump administration: "Signalgate" — and it's a doozy. You are no doubt
aware by now that THE ATLANTIC has published an article reporting that
the top national security officials known as the "Principals Committee"
were gathered together in a Signal group chat to discuss the impending
bombing campaign against the Houthi rebels in Yemen and accidentally
included the magazine's editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, in the chat
without realizing it. The two general officers sitting at
the table and the people who work for them know that if
they had set up and participated in the Signal chat, they would be
gone. And they know that there's only one response to a mistake of this
magnitude: You apologize, you own it and you stop everything until you
can figure out what went wrong and how it might not ever happen again.
But that's not what happened. The Secretary of Defense responded with a
brutal attack on the reporter who did not ask to be on the Signal
chain. Yesterday, our former colleague Michael Waltz did the same in
the White House and then went on FOX to call Jeff Goldberg a loser.
What do you think the people who work for you are seeing and learning
from that? Now, except for the last part, almost all of the Mayhem
slowly eroding our safety, our standing and our security in the world
has largely happened outside the IC. If you had a part in that -- and I
suspect you did: Thank you. I'll say it again and every time we see
each other over the next couple of years. You must protect the
thousands of patriots
Let's note a round of questioning.
Ranking
Member Jim Himes: If there's something I care as much about as the
national security of the United States, it's the power and prerogatives
of this Congress and its oversight duties. So I want to spend a minute
or so on yesterday's testimony in front of the Senate and direct these
questions in particular to Director Patel and Director Gabbard.
Yesterday, Senator Heinrich asked did this conversation -- referring to
the chat -- include information on weapons, packages, targets or
timing? Director Patel you said, "Not that I'm aware of." Director
Gabbard, you said the same in your answer. This morning, we learned
that the Signal chat included the following update -- forward looking
update -- from the Secretary of Defense:
“TIME NOW (1144): Weather is FAVORABLE. Just CONFIRMED w/CENTCOM we are a GO for mission launch.”
“1215et: F-18s LAUNCH (1st strike package)”
1345:
‘Trigger Based’ F-18 1st Strike Window Starts (Target Terrorist is @
his Known Location so SHOULD BE ON TIME – also, Strike Drones Launch
(MQ-9s)”
“1410: More F-18s LAUNCH (2nd strike package)”
Ranking
Member Jim Himes: Do either of the directors want to reflect on their
testimony from yesterday in the context of what I just read?
FBI
Director Kash Patel: (One) I was not on that Signal chat. (Two) I
have not reviewed it. Uh (Three), as you just indicated, that was made
public this morning.
Ranking Member Jim Himes: But, Director, you didn't, prior to yesterday -- you were on the Signal chat, weren't you?
FBI Director Kash Patel: No.
Ranking Member Jim Himes: Did you review the material on the Signal chat?
FBI Director Kash Patel: No.
Ranking Member Jim Himes: Director Gabbard?
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard: Yes,
Ranking Member, my answer yesterday was based on my recollection or the
lack of thereof on the details that were posted there. I, uh, was not
and the-the -- What was shared today reflects the fact that I was not
directly involved with that part of the Signal chat and replied at the
end reflecting the effects -- the very brief effects of -- that the
National Security Advisor had shared.
Ranking Member Jim Himes: So
it's your testimony that less than two weeks ago you were on a Signal
chat that had all this information on F18s and MQ9 Reapers and Targets
on strike and you, in that two week period, simply forgot that that was
there? That's you testimony?
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard: My testimony is I did not recall the exact details of what was included there.
Ranking
Member Jim Himes: That was not your testimony. Your testimony was that
you were not aware of anything related to weapons, packages, targets
and timing.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard: Uh,
as the testimony yesterday continued on, there were further, uh,
questions related to that where I acknowledged that there was, uh, a
conversation about weapons and, uh, uuuuhhhh, I don't remember the exact
wording that I used but I did not recall the specific details that were
included.
Ranking Member Jim Himes: Director
Gabbard, we've -- you've reasserted that there was no classified
information. I think we can all agree that that information shouldn't
have been out there. But let me ask you this, are you familiar with the
ODNI's classification guidance.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard: I'm familiar.
Ranking
Member Jim Himes: I've actually got a copy right here. If I read you a
part of that guidance, I wonder if you could tell me the level of
classification indicated is? I'm reading from your classification
guidance. "The criteria is information providing indication or advance
warning that the US or its allies are preparing an attack." Do you
recall what your own guidance would suggest that be classified?
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard: Uh,
I don't have the specifics in front of me but it would point to, uh,
what was shared would fall under the DoDs classification system and the
Secretary of Defense's --
Ranking
Member Jim Himes: Let me -- let me help you because there's a very
clear answer. I guess you don't have it but "Information providing" --
this is the ODNI guidance "Information providing indication or advance
warning that the US or its allies are preparing an attack should be
classified as top secret." Do you disagree with that?
Director
of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard: I don't disagree with that. I
just point out that the DoD classification guidance is separate from the
ODNI's classification guidance --
Ranking Member Jim Himes: Do you think it would be materially different?
Director
of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard: Ultimately the Secretary of
Defense holds the authority to classify or declassify
Ranking Member Jim Himes: Do you think it's likely that DoD guidance is different from what I just read?
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard: I haven't reviewed the DoD guidance so I can't comment.
Ranking
Member Jim Himes: Director Gabbard, a lot of this suggests a lack of
sobriety. When there's punch emojis [in the Signat conversation
thread], fire emojis, it's a lack of sobriety. I don't mean that
literally. But I have one last question for you because I think people
really listen to what you have to say. You, on March 15th, as DNI
reTweeted a post from Ian Miles Cheong who is listed on RT --
that's RUSSIA TODAY's website as "a political and cultural commentator"
who has contributed content to RT since at least 2022. Director
Gabbard, do you think that it's responsible for you as head of the
intelligence community and the principal presidential intelligence
advisor to reTweet posts from individuals affiliated with Russia state
media?
Director
of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard: That reTweet came from my
personal account and I would have to go back to look at the substance of
the Tweet.
Ranking
Member Jim Himes: Can I -- Just so that we don't have a lack of
confusion amongst our allies and, enemies and us-- can I ask perhaps
that you not say one thing on your personal account than you say
officially?
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard: Uh, I maintain my First Amendment right to
There is so much wrong with the above.
First,
free speech isn't you reTweeting a propaganda outlet -- especially when
you're the Director of National Intelligence. There should not be a
centimeter of space between what she says as DNI and what she Tweets "as
a private person." You're not a private person, you idiot. You're the
head of intelligence for the US government. That she doesn't grasp
that may be the scariest thing about her statements.
Second,
most of us have been in meetings, right? I don't care whether it's
face-to-face or via some app or a conference call, if I'm in meeting, I
make sure I know who everyone in the meeting is. Tulsi appers to want
to push it off on Pete Hegseth. He clearly is responsible as is Waltz.
But everyone of the government participants are responsible.
Tulsi seems to believe she can get an excuse and a do-over by claiming she joined the chat late.
I've
walked in late to many a meeting and scanned the room as I sat down to
make sure I knew everyone and to immediately ask someone I didn't know
who they were.
She joined late so that's her excuse?
No.
She came in a group chat and it was her responsibility before saying a
word to see who the participants were on that chat. That comes with her
job.
What she seems to be arguing is, "I didn't know
a journalist was present so it's not my fault because everybody who
knows me knows that I just start spilling all the secrets the minute my
mouth opens so it's their job to make sure no one's put in front of me
that hasn't been cleared because I'm far too lazy to check anything out
myself."
They should all lose their jobs is what Senator Tammy Duckworth told Rachel last night on MSNBC and I think she's correct.
Tuesday's
Senate hearing, covered in yesterday's snapshot, included some strong
questions from Senator Jack Reed. Yesterday, his office issued the
following:
WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senator Jack Reed
(D-RI), the Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee today
joined Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and top Senate Democrats
on key national security committees in seeking information about members
of President Trump’s cabinet using the Signal app to convene a group
chat to “coordinate and share classified information about sensitive military planning operations.”
In a letter to President Trump,
the U.S. Senators sounded the alarm over the public discovery that the
Trump Administration has been sharing discussions of classified military
operations via unsecured text chains, jeopardizing national security,
and endangering the lives of American servicemembers. The letter was
also cc’ed to Attorney General Pam Bondi as well as numerous Trump
administration officials who were reportedly members of the Signal group
chat, including: Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, CIA Director John
Ratcliffe, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Director of National
Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.
Reed and Schumer, along with U.S. Senator Mark Warner (D-VA), Vice
Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee; U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen
(D-NH), Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee; U.S.
Senator Gary Peters (D-MI), Ranking Member of the Senate Homeland
Security Committee; U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ranking Member of
the Senate Judiciary Committee; and U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-DE),
Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, are
pressing for answers to questions after The Atlantic revealed
that an unsecured text chain with at least 18 senior-level Trump
administration officials was used to coordinate and share highly
sensitive military planning and operations information. This reckless
operational security failure made a sensitive military mission
vulnerable to interception by U.S. adversaries, and was exposed after
the group inexplicably included a journalist, damaging our national
security and risking the lives of American servicemembers.
“We write to you with extreme alarm about the astonishingly poor judgment shown by your Cabinet and national security advisors,” the seven Senators wrote. “You
have long advocated for accountability and transparency in the
government, particularly as it relates to the handling of classified
information, national security, and the safety of American
servicemembers. As such, it is imperative that you address this breach
with the seriousness and diligence that it demands.”
The Senators note the willful or negligent disclosure of classified
information constitutes a criminal offense and call for Attorney General
Bondi to conduct a thorough and impartial investigation.
Additionally, the Senators demanded answers to ten questions, more
information about the “Houthi PC small group” chat, and if any other
classified information is currently being discussed on unsecured text
chains in a similar fashion by senior administration officials.
We have learned that members of your Cabinet recently convened a
group chat on the commercial messaging app “Signal” to discuss active,
highly classified military plans and operations, and that they
mistakenly included the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic in this group.
The group, which was titled “Houthi PC small group,” apparently
encompassed at least 18 people including your Vice President;
Secretaries of Defense, State, and Treasury; National Security Advisor;
CIA Director; Director of National Intelligence; White House Chief of
Staff; and several other senior appointees.
Over the course of several days, this group chat reportedly
discussed operational plans, targets, and weapon systems for upcoming
U.S. military strikes in Yemen, and provided after-action battlefield
damage assessments. These messages allegedly provided detailed
intelligence about the movements and future locations of specific
military assets and personnel in active combat zones. The group chat
also contained extremely sensitive conversations between the Vice
President and Cabinet officials that could have a negative impact on our
diplomatic efforts with foreign allies and partners, particularly in
Europe. We are aware that the Director of National Intelligence, and
possibly others, appears to have been overseas while this group chat was
active, making the entire discussion more vulnerable to interception by
foreign adversaries. Inexplicably, throughout the days-long chat
conversation, the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic remained in the group
chat and his presence was never questioned.
Let us be clear, if any American military servicemember,
intelligence official, or law enforcement officer committed such an
egregious breach of operational security and endangered the lives of
their comrades downrange, they would be investigated and likely
prosecuted.
We write to you with extreme alarm about the astonishingly poor
judgment shown by your Cabinet and national security advisors. You have
long advocated for accountability and transparency in the government,
particularly as it relates to the handling of classified information,
national security, and the safety of American servicemembers. As such,
it is imperative that you address this breach with the seriousness and
diligence that it demands.
Our committees have serious questions about this incident, and
members need a full accounting to ensure it never happens again.
Moreover, given that willful or negligent disclosure of classified or
sensitive national security information may constitute a criminal
violation of the Espionage Act or other laws, we expect Attorney General
Bondi, copied here, to conduct a thorough and impartial investigation
of the conduct of the government officials involved in improperly
sharing or discussing such information. We also ask that you immediately
direct relevant officials to preserve records of these communications
and any other discussions of government business occurring on any
messaging application. Some of the messages in the Signal chat were
apparently set to disappear after a certain period of time – a potential
violation of both the Federal Records Act and the Presidential Records
Act.
We hereby request answers to the following:
1. Please provide a complete and unredacted transcript of
the “Houthi PC small group” chat for review by our appropriate
committees in a secure setting.
2. Please provide a complete list of all personnel who
participated in or had access to the “Houthi PC small group” chat.
3. What dates was the “Houthi PC small group” established
and when was the last message transmitted to the Signal group chat?
4. Were there any other individuals, in addition to
Jeffrey Goldberg, who were erroneously included in the “Houthi PC small
group” chat?
5. Did any U.S. government personnel access the “Houthi PC small group” chat using personal communication devices?
6. Were any personnel who participated in or had access
to the “Houthi PC small group” chat traveling overseas while the group
chat was active? If yes, on which devices did group members operate
while accessing the group chat?
7. Did any individuals transfer classified information,
including operational war plans, from classified systems to unclassified
systems, and if so, how?
8. Has the intelligence community conducted a damage
assessment of the potential leakage of classified and sensitive
information via the “Houthi PC small group” chat and subsequent
reporting?
9. Are any Cabinet level officials, their deputies or
other designees, or White House officials using Signal or other
commercial products to discuss classified or sensitive information or
any communications subject to statutory recordkeeping requirements?
10. If so, how is the Administration ensuring that it meets
its statutory requirements with regard to these conversations?
You and your Cabinet are responsible for the safety and security
of the American people, as well as our military servicemembers and
intelligence personnel in the field. We expect your Administration to
address this dangerous lapse in security protocol—whether intended or
not—with the utmost seriousness, and to uphold the ethic of
accountability that our nation holds sacred. We must work together to
ensure this does not happen again, and we look forward to reviewing the
forthcoming reports.
Sincerely,
I was hoping to squeeze in another
hearing in this snapshot. There's really not room. Maybe we'll pick up
tomorrow or maybe Ava and I'll work it into our piece for THIRD this
weekend. I'm also still looking for a video segment from Rachel's
Monday show. I am not finding it at MSNBC but if I can, I will put it
in Friday's snapshot.
Let's wind down with this from Senator Patty Murray's office:
Washington, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray
(D-WA), Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chair, and Congresswoman
Rosa DeLauro (D-CT-03), Ranking Member of the House Appropriations
Committee, issued the following joint statement after the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) moved to unlawfully hide how the agency
directs agencies to spend taxpayer dollars. OMB hid this information by
destroying a website that publicly displayed all of these decisions, known as apportionments.
“Federal law is unequivocal: OMB must publish the agency’s
legally-binding budget decisions. Congress enacted these requirements
over a Democratic President’s objections on a bipartisan basis because
our constituents, and all American taxpayers, deserve transparency and
accountability for how their money is being spent. Taking down this
website is not just illegal it is a brazen move to hide this
administration’s spending from the American people and from Congress. We
call on OMB to immediately restore access to the website and resume
compliance with this most basic, bipartisan transparency requirement.”
Apportionments are legally binding budget decisions issued by OMB
under title 31 of the U.S. Code. These documents are final, decisional,
and legally binding on agencies, and officials responsible for violating
an apportionment may be subject to administrative discipline, including
suspension without pay and termination, and the knowing and willful violation of an apportionment carries with it criminal penalties under the Antideficiency Act.
The 2022 bipartisan appropriations bills instated a requirement for
OMB to publicly post in an accessible format all approved apportionments
within two business days, along with any footnotes, an explanation for
those footnotes. The following year, Congress made those requirements
permanent. Those bipartisan requirements have been carried out for the
last three years without incident—allowing lawmakers and the public to
track OMB’s legal-binding budget decisions.
As of March 24, however, OMB’s apportionments database was taken down
with no notice or explanation, and reporting indicates the website was
destroyed in defiance of the bipartisan requirements enshrined in
federal law that OMB maintain the site.
Importantly, there have never been national security concerns
associated with this statutory requirement, and the law requires OMB to
make any classified documentation referenced in any apportionment
available at the request of the Chair or Ranking Member of any
appropriate congressional committee. Classified programs are frequently
addressed in public statutory language, including in the recently passed
Republican full year continuing resolution, with classified annexes
available on a need-to-know basis.
