March 28, 2025
Signal Silliness
Timothy Birdnow
Wishful thinking from the GOPe.
A New Administration’s Signal Failure
From the RINO's at the Wall Street Urinal:
It apparently never occurred to tthe author of this piece that perhaps, just perhaps, this thing was SUPPOSED to be leaked, that it was, oh, I don't know, a misinformation campaign perhaps?
Signal is not a secure system, merely a private one, and Hegseth and the rest know full well that is the case. A caller to Sean Hannity described it as one step up from pig latin.
Also, does it occur to this author that the journalist who gained access had to have help aka someone on the inside? Maybe, just maybe, they were trying to flush out the moles?
The author speaks of Ronald Reagan and forgets Trump went through the very same assassination attempt and handled it with the same aplomb.
One of Trump's key strategies is to be unpredictable and seemingly chaotic. He derives this strategy from the ancient Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu, I might add, who admonished generals to do this very thing. This whole Signal business appears to me to be exactly that - a tempest in a teapot designed to throw everyone off.
so all the pearl-clutching and breast beating is simply silly; this President has been to this rodeo before. But then it's an attempt to take out Hegseth, not Trump, and the WSJ wants a war hawk in Hegseth's position.
Contrary to the dark prophecy of the author this thing will blow over and be forgotten. And our enemies abroad are not licking their chops over this in any way, shape, or form.
Wishful thinking from the GOPe.
A New Administration’s Signal Failure
From the RINO's at the Wall Street Urinal:
"The Signal mess is a real mess, not something that will fade away quickly, because it’s one of those scandals that give the world a picture of a new administration.
At just about this time in John F. Kennedy’s presidency (April 17-20, 1961) came the Bay of Pigs disaster, the failed invasion of Cuba by U.S.-backed and trained exiles who had been assured of American air support but learned on the beach it wouldn’t be forthcoming. It shadowed JFK for a long time. The Soviets concluded he was a dilettante and inferred from his actions an ambivalence about the use of force, which led Premier Nikita Khrushchev to rough him up at their first summit, that June in Geneva. JFK wasn’t prepared for such treatment. He confided to the journalist James Reston that it was "the worst thing in my life”; Khrushchev "savaged me.”
In August the Soviets erected the Berlin Wall; a year later they put missiles in Cuba. Kennedy’s mastery in the latter crisis, in October 1962, had a reordering effect on his international reputation. Good things followed, including his American University address in which he felt free, having proved himself, having established a more grounded relationship with the Soviet government, to unveil a new plea for nuclear arms control. His speechwriter, the great Ted Sorensen, told me years later that of all the speeches they worked on—the Inaugural Address, the announcement of the missile crisis—the one at American University was the most important.
An opposite example: It was at almost exactly this point in the new administration of Ronald Reagan, on March 30, 1981, that the president was shot outside the Washington Hilton. His aplomb, the warmth of his gallantry as he joked with doctors and nurses—"I hope you’re all Republicans”—even though his wound was nearly fatal, also carried immense implications. Among world leaders: This cowboy star is both tough and lucky. (Some of them hated a lucky American president, but all saw the luck as a major factor: Politicians are among the most superstitious people on earth.) The shooting also cemented Reagan’s relationship with the American people. Even Democratic House Speaker Tip O’Neill’s Massachusetts voters were impressed: Tip, don’t be too tough on my Ronnie. That was the beginning of serious bipartisan progress between the White House and Congress, when O’Neill realized you can’t ignore this guy or try to roll him every day, you’d better play ball.
The Signal mess lacks the size and depth of both these events. But it too will have implications for the reputation of this White House because, again, it gives a picture that is not so forgettable.
Every government in the world, even those with the best intelligence services, has wondered exactly what it’s like in there, how exactly it works. To see the transcripts of the now famous "Houthi PC small group” is to conclude it’s pretty ad hoc. Pretty messy. The word jejune comes to mind. So does callow. There’s a lot of freelancing. The vice president questions what appears to have been a presidential decision, and the debate is conducted on a publicly available encrypted app. No one on the 19-person call said, "Guys, should we be doing this on Signal?”
They don’t come across as steely-eyed pros, and often express themselves in ways that are emotional (JD Vance: "I just hate bailing Europe out again.” It made me think of a 1950s housewife in a Rinso commercial: "I just hate those stubborn stains!”
At just about this time in John F. Kennedy’s presidency (April 17-20, 1961) came the Bay of Pigs disaster, the failed invasion of Cuba by U.S.-backed and trained exiles who had been assured of American air support but learned on the beach it wouldn’t be forthcoming. It shadowed JFK for a long time. The Soviets concluded he was a dilettante and inferred from his actions an ambivalence about the use of force, which led Premier Nikita Khrushchev to rough him up at their first summit, that June in Geneva. JFK wasn’t prepared for such treatment. He confided to the journalist James Reston that it was "the worst thing in my life”; Khrushchev "savaged me.”
In August the Soviets erected the Berlin Wall; a year later they put missiles in Cuba. Kennedy’s mastery in the latter crisis, in October 1962, had a reordering effect on his international reputation. Good things followed, including his American University address in which he felt free, having proved himself, having established a more grounded relationship with the Soviet government, to unveil a new plea for nuclear arms control. His speechwriter, the great Ted Sorensen, told me years later that of all the speeches they worked on—the Inaugural Address, the announcement of the missile crisis—the one at American University was the most important.
An opposite example: It was at almost exactly this point in the new administration of Ronald Reagan, on March 30, 1981, that the president was shot outside the Washington Hilton. His aplomb, the warmth of his gallantry as he joked with doctors and nurses—"I hope you’re all Republicans”—even though his wound was nearly fatal, also carried immense implications. Among world leaders: This cowboy star is both tough and lucky. (Some of them hated a lucky American president, but all saw the luck as a major factor: Politicians are among the most superstitious people on earth.) The shooting also cemented Reagan’s relationship with the American people. Even Democratic House Speaker Tip O’Neill’s Massachusetts voters were impressed: Tip, don’t be too tough on my Ronnie. That was the beginning of serious bipartisan progress between the White House and Congress, when O’Neill realized you can’t ignore this guy or try to roll him every day, you’d better play ball.
The Signal mess lacks the size and depth of both these events. But it too will have implications for the reputation of this White House because, again, it gives a picture that is not so forgettable.
Every government in the world, even those with the best intelligence services, has wondered exactly what it’s like in there, how exactly it works. To see the transcripts of the now famous "Houthi PC small group” is to conclude it’s pretty ad hoc. Pretty messy. The word jejune comes to mind. So does callow. There’s a lot of freelancing. The vice president questions what appears to have been a presidential decision, and the debate is conducted on a publicly available encrypted app. No one on the 19-person call said, "Guys, should we be doing this on Signal?”
They don’t come across as steely-eyed pros, and often express themselves in ways that are emotional (JD Vance: "I just hate bailing Europe out again.” It made me think of a 1950s housewife in a Rinso commercial: "I just hate those stubborn stains!”
It apparently never occurred to tthe author of this piece that perhaps, just perhaps, this thing was SUPPOSED to be leaked, that it was, oh, I don't know, a misinformation campaign perhaps?
Signal is not a secure system, merely a private one, and Hegseth and the rest know full well that is the case. A caller to Sean Hannity described it as one step up from pig latin.
Also, does it occur to this author that the journalist who gained access had to have help aka someone on the inside? Maybe, just maybe, they were trying to flush out the moles?
The author speaks of Ronald Reagan and forgets Trump went through the very same assassination attempt and handled it with the same aplomb.
One of Trump's key strategies is to be unpredictable and seemingly chaotic. He derives this strategy from the ancient Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu, I might add, who admonished generals to do this very thing. This whole Signal business appears to me to be exactly that - a tempest in a teapot designed to throw everyone off.
so all the pearl-clutching and breast beating is simply silly; this President has been to this rodeo before. But then it's an attempt to take out Hegseth, not Trump, and the WSJ wants a war hawk in Hegseth's position.
Contrary to the dark prophecy of the author this thing will blow over and be forgotten. And our enemies abroad are not licking their chops over this in any way, shape, or form.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:02 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 853 words, total size 5 kb.
1
You may be correct. It's well-known that there are very few "accidents" in DC.
Posted by: Dana Mathewson at March 29, 2025 12:04 AM (QlyGH)
2
I strongly suspect this was intentional Dana. And of course the anti-American Democrats are calling for Hegseth's head over this. But why?
I further suspect the Democrats have been briefed on it and know what they are saying is a lie. We've seen THAT before too.
I further suspect the Democrats have been briefed on it and know what they are saying is a lie. We've seen THAT before too.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at March 29, 2025 06:54 AM (fH2Nv)
25kb generated in CPU 0.0095, elapsed 0.4803 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.4728 seconds, 171 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
37 queries taking 0.4728 seconds, 171 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
