eyeball Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 2 minutes ago, robosmith said: ^This is why I have Luser on ignore. They can't acknowledge Hegseth is a drunkard no matter how many report seeing him falling down drunk. LMAO The capacity for intransigent right wing stubbornness is just to much of a phenomenon to ignore. It's just plain weird. 1 Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
User Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 6 minutes ago, robosmith said: ^This is why I have Luser on ignore. They can't acknowledge Hegseth is a drunkard no matter how many report seeing him falling down drunk. LMAO You have us on ignore because you are a liar and when you get caught in your repeated lies you run away. Hegseth has a ton of people on record refuting the anonymous allegations against him. Just now, eyeball said: The capacity for intransigent right wing stubbornness is just to much of a phenomenon to ignore. It's just plain weird. Lets see those 10 people at Fox Robo claimed existed that said Hegseth was drunk that you defend then. The only stubbornness here is on your side. It is not weird, it is just a dishonest schtick and game you guys play. Quote
eyeball Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 12 minutes ago, User said: What does that have to do with your assertion that Hegseth corroborated the accusations that he was drunk at work at Fox? The corroboration was evident in the same article is all. I don't have a clue why you're making it an issue. 15 minutes ago, User said: I am well aware of the assertions... but that Guardian article did not outline 10 people making the accusations either, as Robosmith claimed and you defend. The Guardian article clearly outlined the fact whistleblowers provided the assertions/accusations. Like I said however the number of whistles blown is moot given what Hegseth himself said about his drinking. I E he corroborated he was a drinker by saying he was going to stop. I'm not defending Robosmith. I'm simply challenging what you said. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
User Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 8 minutes ago, eyeball said: The corroboration was evident in the same article is all. I don't have a clue why you're making it an issue. So evident you can't explain it or quote it... It is an issue because what you asserted is not true. 8 minutes ago, eyeball said: The Guardian article clearly outlined the fact whistleblowers provided the assertions/accusations. Like I said however the number of whistles blown is moot given what Hegseth himself said about his drinking. I E he corroborated he was a drinker by saying he was going to stop. I'm not defending Robosmith. I'm simply challenging what you said. 10 people at Fox? It is relevant because you keep defending Robosmith and that is one of the false things he claimed. Quote
Nationalist Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 On 3/25/2025 at 12:26 PM, 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. A truth-teller from that Libbie rag? Sure... It's a bad situation. Nothing worse than what you're guys and gals have done. I wonder what Trump will do... Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
robosmith Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 2 minutes ago, Nationalist said: A truth-teller from that Libbie rag? Sure... It's a bad situation. Nothing worse than what you're guys and gals have done. I wonder what Trump will do... You can be sure that his responses will include many LIES. Quote
eyeball Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 15 minutes ago, User said: It is an issue because what you asserted is not true. I'm simply asserting there's no reason for you to not accept that what the Guardian is reporting is accurate. 17 minutes ago, User said: 10 people at Fox? It is relevant because you keep defending Robosmith and that is one of the false things he claimed. Bully for what Robosmith claimed. I responded to the sense you seemed to be communicating that everything leveled against Hegseth was/is false or somehow uncorroborated. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
User Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 (edited) 26 minutes ago, eyeball said: I'm simply asserting there's no reason for you to not accept that what the Guardian is reporting is accurate. That is not all you asserted at all. 26 minutes ago, eyeball said: Bully for what Robosmith claimed. I responded to the sense you seemed to be communicating that everything leveled against Hegseth was/is false or somehow uncorroborated. It certainly is not leveled by people on the record. Nor was it 10 people as claimed at Fox. Nor is it corroborated when it is anonymous sources. 29 minutes ago, robosmith said: You can be sure that his responses will include many LIES. That is you... now you run and hide like usual. Edited March 26 by User Quote
eyeball Posted March 27 Report Posted March 27 1 hour ago, User said: That is not all you asserted at all. Well, I haven't got a clue what's bugging you. 1 hour ago, User said: It certainly is not leveled by people on the record. Nor was it 10 people as claimed at Fox. Nor is it corroborated when it is anonymous sources. It's corroborated by Hegseth. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
User Posted March 27 Report Posted March 27 2 minutes ago, eyeball said: Well, I haven't got a clue what's bugging you. Finally to the phase of the discussion where you just pretend you don't know anything. 3 minutes ago, eyeball said: It's corroborated by Hegseth. Nope. Quote
Hodad Posted March 27 Author Report Posted March 27 (edited) 3 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: All you guys do is post lie after lie: Why did you post that? Jeebus, that is one dumb farking frat boy--and he's lying right to your face. If you believe him that a detailed timeline of the attack doesn't constitute classified "war plans" then you're even dumber. If they had added the wrong person to that chat it could have compromised the mission or cost lives. Edited March 27 by Hodad Quote
Hodad Posted March 27 Author Report Posted March 27 3 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: Posting lies again? My gawd man, have some dignity. Here is the language from the Biden era memo that encouraged the use of Signal specifically. My military friends are all talking about how they were ordered to use Signal after this memo came out. WhatsApp had been their previously favored app. You have everyone on ignore because you can't handle dissenting opinions. While you're shilling for your Orange Jesus and his incompetent disciples, why don't you show us where it was approved for classified information, hmmm? 1 Quote
eyeball Posted March 27 Report Posted March 27 22 minutes ago, User said: Finally to the phase of the discussion where you just pretend you don't know anything. I know what I wrote. I haven't got a clue what you read however. Besides which you subscribe to an alternate version of English. 22 minutes ago, User said: Nope Why on Earth do you think the Guardian would include what he said at his confirmation hearing about drinking in an article that reported on his drinking? You won't answer which is why it needs to be asked. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
gatomontes99 Posted March 27 Report Posted March 27 (edited) 35 minutes ago, Hodad said: Why did you post that? Jeebus, that is one dumb farking frat boy--and he's lying right to your face. If you believe him that a detailed timeline of the attack doesn't constitute classified "war plans" then you're even dumber. If they had added the wrong person to that chat it could have compromised the mission or cost lives. Ah. So you don't want to talk about how you posted a lie. Instead, you employ Rule #2 because you got caught and had no other recourse. Well, you did. You just can't get there. Edited March 27 by gatomontes99 Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
gatomontes99 Posted March 27 Report Posted March 27 29 minutes ago, Hodad said: While you're shilling for your Orange Jesus and his incompetent disciples, why don't you show us where it was approved for classified information, hmmm? There was no classified information. Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
robosmith Posted March 27 Report Posted March 27 3 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: Posting lies again? My gawd man, have some dignity. Here is the language from the Biden era memo that encouraged the use of Signal specifically. CISA recommendations are NOT FOR CLASSIFIED COMM, lDIOT. 3 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: My military friends are all talking about how they were ordered to use Signal after this memo came out. WhatsApp had been their previously favored app. IF ANYONE actually GAVE that order, they are FOOLS. 3 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: You have everyone on ignore because you can't handle dissenting opinions. No, it's because the few who are on ignore, are LIARS like YOU, and not worth the waste of my time. Quote
gatomontes99 Posted March 27 Report Posted March 27 4 minutes ago, robosmith said: CISA recommendations are NOT FOR CLASSIFIED COMM, lDIOT. It's a good thing nothing classified was released then. 4 minutes ago, robosmith said: IF ANYONE actually GAVE that order, they are FOOLS. Joe Biden gave the order. 5 minutes ago, robosmith said: No, it's because the few who are on ignore, are LIARS like YOU, and not worth the waste of my time. Yet, you reapond to me more now than before you ignored me. I mean, you triple quoted me. Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
Hodad Posted March 27 Author Report Posted March 27 18 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: Ah. So you don't want to talk about how you posted a lie. Instead, you employ Rule #2 because you got caught and had no other recourse. Well, you did. You just can't get there. I didn't post a lie, dumbass. Nor can you point out any such thing. You posted a video of Hegseth lying through his teeth and trying to deflect from the issue with an angry tangent. He's not very bright, if you haven't noticed. 1 Quote
Hodad Posted March 27 Author Report Posted March 27 21 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: There was no classified information. Are you farking nuts. You don't think the timings, sequence and methods of an upcoming military strike are classified? Jeebus. That could literally get people killed. 1 Quote
gatomontes99 Posted March 27 Report Posted March 27 7 minutes ago, Hodad said: I didn't post a lie, dumbass. Nor can you point out any such thing. You posted a video of Hegseth lying through his teeth and trying to deflect from the issue with an angry tangent. He's not very bright, if you haven't noticed. You posted the lie that Hegseth never denied that there was classified information. He had. On multiple occasions. That's just the one I could find. 1 Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
Hodad Posted March 27 Author Report Posted March 27 7 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: You posted the lie that Hegseth never denied that there was classified information. He had. On multiple occasions. That's just the one I could find. Hey! You're almost trying to turn that into a coherent point. Do you have any information on when that statement (a total lie) was made relative to when the article was written? And let it not be overlooked that in that whole goddamn clusterfark of a scenario, your objection is that he did claim not to have done something that we all know he did. Can't make this stuff up--but you do keep trying. Quote
SpankyMcFarland Posted March 27 Report Posted March 27 Michael Waltz and others have been more than a little careless online: https://www.wired.com/story/michael-waltz-left-his-venmo-public/ You’d think some grim-looking chaps would arrive to go through all this with you before you did anything at US gov? Quote
gatomontes99 Posted March 27 Report Posted March 27 6 minutes ago, Hodad said: Hey! You're almost trying to turn that into a coherent point. Do you have any information on when that statement (a total lie) was made relative to when the article was written? And let it not be overlooked that in that whole goddamn clusterfark of a scenario, your objection is that he did claim not to have done something that we all know he did. Can't make this stuff up--but you do keep trying. Lol...you can't handle it, can you? I showed you the lie you posted and you are trying to make it about someone else. K.I.S.S. Waltz was given a phone programmed with important numbers to be used in his official capacity. Waltz said he added the number using someone else's name (presumably Jameison Greer https://www.ibtimes.sg/was-jeffrey-goldberg-mistakenly-added-instead-jamieson-greer-signal-chat-group-discussing-war-79200 ). The simplest explanation, that requires the fewest assumptions, is that the intern (or whomever) that programmed the phone numbers, copied the number from the wrong line in the database. Hence Jeffery Goldbloom got the messages when Jameison Greer was the intended recipient Now, had this happened under Joe, we wouldn't have heard about it. But we know that you and your ilk made all the excuses in the world for the disasterous withdrawal from Afghanistan. So which would you rather have? Disaster with no leaks or victory with minor leaks? Or hell, major leaks. As far as I am concerned this discussion is over. The adults are in charge and have indulged the children for far to long. Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
SpankyMcFarland Posted March 27 Report Posted March 27 Let’s not add to the typos here: Jamieson Greer; Jeffrey Goldberg. Actor Jeffrey Goldblum has nothing to do with this story. 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
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.