This analysis by @juliettekayyem.bsky.social makes a great point: Why tf were these rando political people privy to the tactical details of a military action before it happened? Like, Stephen Miller is giving input on a strike?? What is even happening
Reposted from
Juliette Kayyem
"I will tell you that as a recipient of classified information, this is not even a close call." @gbhnews.bsky.social
Comments
I'd like to know what happened to our soldiers in Lithuania. And why aren't they speaking about this?
Did they give Russia their positions and get them killed?
NATO said it was under investigation.
These aren't UNknown soldiers either!
It made him feel important like that kid in junior high that knew a secret but just couldn't help himself.
We're dealing with children...
This shows how used they are to these groups and how careless they are when sharing info
🧛♂️ 🧛♂️ 🧛♂️
Unsecured devices & software?
They viewed having info as cool & the mission as a game.
They risked lives as if they were playing an online combat game.
Did CIC even know? They seemed unsure.
I see Wiles' fingerprints all over it. I'd bet real money she invited Goldberg impersonating Waltz.
Look at what's been exposed. They were waaaayyy out of control.
Trump prefers a murky chain of command, so he can always avoid accountability, and retain more flexibility to make stuff up. Habits of a lifelong criminal.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/27/donald-trump-us-signal-scandal-passwords
At what point do we pay more attention to the possibility of a general through line that some flavor of a Manchurian candidate is playing out before our eyes?
Can we afford to discount it?
The group could have had SCIF pre meetings and been told of a successful outcome. Maybe having clear directions.
Every thing else was waste, people believing in their self importance and or someone, Pete, under qualified seeking validation.