Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
17 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

But of course it did happen amd the White House confirmed it and Hegseth knew it happened too because he was in the chat.
 

But he did the usual MAGA scumbag response which not only is “LIE AND DENY”but to also go on the attack claiming fake news conspiracy, denouncing and smearing the reputation of the truth-teller. 

What Hegseth was denying was that "war plans" or top secret documents were being shared, it was the characterization of the discussion he was disputing. 

 

 

 

 

Posted
18 minutes ago, User said:

Name the "co-host" that said this. 

You can't. No one did. You have anonymous sources that were not a host, but just some random person affiliated with the show that has been refuted by the actual co-hosts who are on record. 

Of course the co hosts are protecting their JOBS. 10 others who work on the set confirmed he was OFTEN DRUNK.

  • Thanks 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Of course the co hosts are protecting their JOBS. 10 others who work on the set confirmed he was OFTEN DRUNK.

You just asserted: 

"Maybe it was too embarrassing that his FOS LIES CO HOSTS often smelled liquor on his breath when he showed up for the weekend morning show."

So... what co-hosts often smelled liquor on his breath like you claimed here?

Or do you care to admit you lied?

Who were the "10 others" who work on the set that confirmed he was often drunk? Lets see your evidence or is this just another lie?

 

 

Posted
20 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Of course the co hosts are protecting their JOBS. 10 others who work on the set confirmed he was OFTEN DRUNK.

Who did this?

Posted
39 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

But it’s bigger than that because they should be discussing and sharing these documents on a commercial app in the first place. There are very strict rules about this stuff. Unfortunately Trump has appointed people who are so grossly unqualified for the job not only do they not know or care about the rules they have open contempt for the very idea of rules… at least for rules applying to them.  This attitude is part of MAGA culture. 

While i appreciate you're fairly partisan and want desperately for it to be trump's fault, i'm not sure that it will be the trump appointees that are the problem here.  Normally the apps chosen and the invites and so on and the agendas and invites are handled by professional bureaucrat types. 

Perhaps there was some weird confusion and this was the 'wrong meeting' and wasn't supposed to be about security or perhaps there was some other confusion. 

I mean trump and his people have to wear it in the end no matter what, but i'd be interested in knowing the real story behind it. 

Posted
10 minutes ago, robosmith said:

People who want to keep their jobs.

Stop running from your assertions. You said:

"10 others who work on the set confirmed he was OFTEN DRUNK."

Who are these 10 others? Give us names. 

 

 

Posted
47 minutes ago, User said:

Who are these 10 others? Give us names. 

They're whistleblowers various news reporters quoted on condition of anonymity. That's how media often works.

In any case Hegseth's own words provide strong corroboration to the whistleblower's veracity.

During his confirmation hearing, Hegseth acknowledged he was “not a perfect person”. He promised senators that he has stopped drinking and would not do so if confirmed as defense secretary. But he would not commit to resigning if he did drink on the job.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/24/pete-hegseth-what-we-know

  • Thanks 1

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted
5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

They're whistleblowers various news reporters quoted on condition of anonymity. That's how media often works.

In any case Hegseth's own words provide strong corroboration to the whistleblower's veracity.

During his confirmation hearing, Hegseth acknowledged he was “not a perfect person”. He promised senators that he has stopped drinking and would not do so if confirmed as defense secretary. But he would not commit to resigning if he did drink on the job.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/24/pete-hegseth-what-we-know

So... you did not have anything relevent to add here. There were not 10 others at Fox News who claimed they seen him drunk on the job, there were a couple of anonymous sources. 

The point here is that @robosmith has repeatedly lied here. 

Your contention that Hegseth admits he is not a perfect person (in response to a question about being faithful to his wife) somehow proves anything anonymous sources said is legit is illogical nevermind you are ignoring all the times Hegseth and others on the show outright refuted those claims that he was drunk at work. 

 

 

 

Posted
1 hour ago, robosmith said:

People who want to keep their jobs.

Who would that be?

22 minutes ago, eyeball said:

They're whistleblowers various news reporters quoted on condition of anonymity. That's how media often works.

In any case Hegseth's own words provide strong corroboration to the whistleblower's veracity.

During his confirmation hearing, Hegseth acknowledged he was “not a perfect person”. He promised senators that he has stopped drinking and would not do so if confirmed as defense secretary. But he would not commit to resigning if he did drink on the job.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/24/pete-hegseth-what-we-know

Goalpost series 2

  • Like 1
Posted
19 hours ago, Hodad said:

Guardian

Senior members of Donald Trump’s cabinet have been involved in a serious security breach while discussing secret military plans for recent US attacks on the Houthi armed group in Yemen.

In an extraordinary blunder, key figures in the Trump administration – including the vice-president, JD Vance, the defence secretary Pete Hegseth, the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, and the director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard – used the commercial chat app Signal to convene and discuss plans – while also including a prominent journalist in the group.

Signal is not approved by the US government for sharing sensitive information.

 

Buttery males!!🤣

It was a hoax. They all know US journalists are Stalin worshipping a$$holes. lol

Posted
3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

But of course it did happen amd the White House confirmed it and Hegseth knew it happened too because he was in the chat.
 

But he did the usual MAGA scumbag response which not only is “LIE AND DENY”but to also go on the attack claiming fake news conspiracy, denouncing and smearing the reputation of the truth-teller. 

And there will be no political or social consequences for this behavior from his allies and supporters. That's just the sad reality of the post-shame era. 

Posted
9 minutes ago, Hodad said:

And there will be no political or social consequences for this behavior from his allies and supporters. That's just the sad reality of the post-shame era. 

 

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

But of course it did happen amd the White House confirmed it and Hegseth knew it happened too because he was in the chat.
 

But he did the usual MAGA scumbag response which not only is “LIE AND DENY”but to also go on the attack claiming fake news conspiracy, denouncing and smearing the reputation of the truth-teller. 

Do you want to go through the list of Biden era lies that y'all never gave a damn about?

 

Don't be such verifiable hypocrites.

 

 

  • Like 1

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
1 hour ago, User said:

Your contention that Hegseth admits he is not a perfect person (in response to a question about being faithful to his wife) somehow proves anything anonymous sources said is legit is illogical nevermind you are ignoring all the times Hegseth and others on the show outright refuted those claims that he was drunk at work.

It may not qualify as slam dunk forensic proof but it sure qualifies as solid corroboration, especially as it relates to past drinking.

As you can see he's left his drinking in the future an open question.

  • Like 1

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted
Just now, eyeball said:

It may not qualify as slam dunk forensic proof but it sure qualifies as solid corroboration, especially as it relates to past drinking.

As you can see he's left his drinking in the future an open question.

You clearly do not understand the meaning of "corroboration" as nothing you have provided here was that. 

 

42 minutes ago, Hodad said:

And there will be no political or social consequences for this behavior from his allies and supporters. That's just the sad reality of the post-shame era. 

Like what?

Trump has already said he thinks they have learned their lesson. This is the biggest "scandal" so far that has blown up and everyone on the left is criticizing them over. 

Seems like social consequences to me. 

 

 

 

Posted
1 minute ago, User said:

You clearly do not understand the meaning of "corroboration" as nothing you have provided here was that.

I have a perfectly good understanding of what the word corroboration means.

Hegseth provided strong evidence. Apparently you don't understand the difference between evidence and proof.

Hegseth for example would need to blow regular breathalyzer tests to provide evidence that proves he's stopped drinking. See how it works?

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted
3 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I have a perfectly good understanding of what the word corroboration means.

Hegseth provided strong evidence. Apparently you don't understand the difference between evidence and proof.

Hegseth for example would need to blow regular breathalyzer tests to provide evidence that proves he's stopped drinking. See how it works?

Hegseth provided ZERO evidence. 

You are full of crap here. 

 

 

 

Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, User said:

Hegseth provided ZERO evidence. 

He provided corroboration.

Take blood type vs DNA for example. The same blood type may corroborate suspicion of murder where DNA proves it.

According to Merriam-Webster, to "corroborate" means to support with evidence or authority; strengthen or make more certain.

Corroboration is not the same as proof.

20 minutes ago, User said:

You are full of crap here. 

Go tell it to Miriam Webster. I haven't seen anything whatsoever that corroborates or proves you have a clue what either term means.

Edited by eyeball
  • Thanks 2

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted
14 minutes ago, eyeball said:

He provided corroboration.

No, he didn't.

14 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Go tell it to Miriam Webster. I haven't seen anything whatsoever that corroborates or proves you have a clue what either term means.

Meriam Webster is not claiming he provided corroboration. 

 

  • Haha 1

 

 

Posted
44 minutes ago, eyeball said:

As you can see he's left his drinking in the future an open question.

Say what?

  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,891
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    armchairscholar
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...