Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.testing.testing > #5178

Re: Jeffrey Goldberg Accidentally Proved His 'Signalgate' Narrative Is a Hoax

Show all headers | View raw

In <vs75je$3le63$2@dont-email.me> somebody wrote:
>
> The Democrats' latest effort to manufacture a Trump administration scandal
> blew up in their faces this week after Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief
> of The Atlantic, reported that he was somehow included in an encrypted
> Signal chat group with top administration officials discussing a planned
> attack on Houthi rebels in Yemen. According to Goldberg, officials
> discussed classified and/or top-secret war plans.
>
> No one disputes that Goldberg was erroneously included in the chat, but
> the real issue is whether classified or top-secret war plans were actually
> discussed.
>
> CIA Director John Ratcliffe and DNI Director Tulsi Gabbard testified that
> nothing classified or top secret was discussed in the chat. Others in the
> administration have said the same thing.
>
> Goldberg had been given the opening to release the chats in their entirety
> to prove them wrong. But he insisted that he wouldn’t.
>
> During an interview on The Bulwark Podcast with Tim Miller, Goldberg
> repeatedly evaded calls to produce evidence, raising serious questions
> about the credibility of his claims.
>
> Miller directly challenged Goldberg, pointing out that top Trump
> administration officials had accused him of lying. “Now, the Secretary of
> Defense and the White House Press Secretary have said you’re lying, have
> said there are no war plans there, have said there’s no classified
> information,” Miller stated. “So the obvious question is, shouldn’t you
> now demonstrate it? Shouldn’t you publish the text?”
>
> Goldberg flatly refused. “No, because they’re wrong. They’re wrong,” he
> insisted, offering no proof to back up his claims.
>
> Here's the problem with that claim: In the encrypted chat, National
> Security Advisor Michael Waltz explicitly mentioned the participants'
> “high side” inboxes, a reference to the classified system. This made it
> clear they knew certain topics couldn’t be discussed on the Signal
> platform.
>
> Miller pressed Goldberg further in the interview, asking whether he would
> at least provide the alleged messages to congressional intelligence
> committees. Instead of responding substantively, Goldberg deflected with
> sarcasm. “Wow. What? You wanna become my lawyer?” he quipped with an
> annoyed tone. He clearly wasn’t comfortable with the line of questioning,
> and I got the sense he was hiding something.
>
> As the conversation continued, Goldberg struggled to justify his refusal
> to produce evidence, resorting to vague justifications. “Just because
> they’re irresponsible with material doesn’t mean that I’m gonna be
> irresponsible with this material,” he said. He further attempted to cast
> doubt on the administration’s credibility, suggesting officials were
> merely trying to “get out of a jam.”
>
> In a final attempt to defend his decision, Goldberg framed it as a matter
> of principle. “I have a pretty clear standard in my own behavior of what I
> consider information that I consider to be in the public interest, even
> if it’s technically classified or not,” he said, adding that he was
> “sticking to my principles.”
>
> Yet on Wednesday, Goldberg published the full chat after all. He went from
> insisting he was being responsible by not publishing the full chat to
> publishing it while claiming that in doing so, he was proving the Trump
> administration was mischaracterizing the sensitivity of the chats.
>
> Goldberg went against his self-proclaimed “principles” when he published
> the chat. If he truly felt it contained top secret or classified
> information, the principles he claims to hold dear would have kept him
> from releasing it. By releasing the chat in full, he proved his entire
> narrative about the situation was a hoax.
>
> Goldberg’s actions only undermined his claims, revealing he was lying
> about top-secret or classified information being discussed. The content of
> the chat reveals no war plans or classified details, just a discussion
> weighing the pros and cons of striking now versus waiting. It’s a
> conversation among cabinet members and staffers on the best way to move
> forward.
>
> After this weekend, this non-story will be just a memory, and Goldberg
> will move on to making other false accusations against the Trump
> administration. Remember, this is the same guy who has a history of
> publishing fake stories about President Trump.
>
> https://pjmedia.com/matt-margolis/2025/03/26/jeffrey-goldberg-just-proved-
> his-signalgate-narrative-is-a-hoax-n4938288

He's a Jew.  Of course he's a lying shit bag.  They all are.

Back to alt.testing.testing | Previous | Next | Find similar

Thread

Re: Jeffrey Goldberg Accidentally Proved His 'Signalgate' Narrative Is a Hoax orangedog <ordog@your.service.biz> - 2025-03-29 10:33 +0100

csiph-web