From: Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.trump,can.politics
Subject: Re: Nothing quite says "incompetence"...
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 17:22:39 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
On 2025-03-25 16:11, Skeeter wrote:
> In article <vrvbdh$ap3j$2@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com
> says...
>>
>> On 2025-03-25 15:18, Skeeter wrote:
>>> In article <vrv8nn$33t9$1@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com
>>> says...
>>>>
>>>> On 2025-03-25 14:12, Skeeter wrote:
>>>>> In article <vrv41f$34ao$3@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com
>>>>> says...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2025-03-25 13:24, Skeeter wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <B%BEP.70102$D41.43475@fx45.iad>,
>>>>>>> mike.am.surreal@earthlink.nut says...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/25/2025 9:10 AM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2025-03-25 08:46, Skeeter wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In article <vruiqq$3kg8d$1@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com
>>>>>>>>>> says...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-03-25 04:10, Skeeter wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <vrt9lq$2br2p$4@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-03-24 20:48, Skeeter wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <vrt785$1u3up$15@dont-email.me>, nuh-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uh@nope.com says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-03-24 20:14, Skeeter wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <vrt5mh$1u3up$12@dont-email.me>, nuh-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uh@nope.com says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-03-24 19:47, Skeeter wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <vrt1nn$26kf2$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> super70s@super70s.invalid says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-03-25 00:22:27 +0000, Skeeter said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <vrso3b$1u3up$1@dont-email.me>, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...like accidentally including a "The Atlantic" reporter on your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Signal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group chat to discuss your attack plans for Yemen.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How is your trolling working out for you.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's the trolls who are running the current government.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cry baby cry.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dude,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your administration is so incompetent that they included a reporter for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Atlantic on a top-secret Signal chat about attacking Yemen.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That has already been debunked. Now go burn something.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It has?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Show it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I already told you. You are just a kick toy. Go look it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you have nothing...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Debunked.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It absolutely happened.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But not like they are saying. I'm watching the hearings.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> How do you claim it was different than what I posted?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The editor of The Atlantic was added to a group chat on Signal.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The subject of the group chat was the US attacks about to be launched against
>>>>>>>>> Yemen and included operational details.
>>>>>>>> *Classified* operational details.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Skeeter-Shit "Lamey" Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell is lying, as always.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Show us these classified texts. Betcha wont.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He refrained from posting them...
>>>>>
>>>>> If they are classified he wont. But they weren't and we
>>>>> win while you lose.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...because he was more careful with classified information than the
>>>>>> idiots that decided to hold a meeting about attack plans on Signal.
>>>>>
>>>>> Never happened. Why doesn't the bullshit reporter show
>>>>> them? Because he doesn't have them.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The White House has already acknowledged it happened.
>>>
>>> But no classified info was discussed.
>>
>> Who says that?
>
> All of them.
All of whom?
Let's see the quotes.
>>
>> Would they have reason to lie about it?
>
>
> Lie about what? No classified info was discussed.
If classified information WAS discussed, then "them" would be in big
trouble...
...right?