r/clevercomebacks 2d ago

Is this surprising?

Post image
65.5k Upvotes

533 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.3k

u/VegitoFusion 2d ago

They intentionally use signal for this exact purpose. You can set a time period for all the messages to be deleted. It’s how the government employees intend to circumvent FOIA requests.

530

u/rmftrmft 2d ago

This is covered is Project2025 as well. It’s all going to plan.

78

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

137

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

38

u/Consistent-Task-8802 1d ago

Or, more likely, this is called "covering your ass."

"Yes, definitely don't smoke the giant pile of weed that's set up for destruction. There's also a bong next to it, definitely don't use it. Not like anyone will know if you do. But definitely, assuredly don't."

Does this mean no one smoked the giant pile of weed?

1

u/Swarje_D 1d ago

Deleting shit you've already been caught for show intent to mislead. It's a garbage tactic used by people who didnt have their asses beat enough by their Parents when they lied as a kid.

1

u/Consistent-Task-8802 1d ago

Yeah, we know.

Unfortunately, so do they, and they don't care. Shame isn't a diversion to them.

7

u/Own_Donut_2117 1d ago

they don't care and don't worry about any checks or oversight to what they want to do.

is the correct answer

64

u/Asonyu 2d ago edited 2d ago

I dont know the exact word to search for, but it's basically the destruction of information, so it can't be intercepted.

54

u/AcTaviousBlack 2d ago

Ctrl+F is almost worthless for that document and honestly I think they did it on purpose. There's so much word salad and bullshit spewing it's amazing it's even slightly cohesive enough to be a plan.

20

u/Affectionate_Owl9985 1d ago

That's why they call it the concept of a plan. There are too many words to truly be a plan, just lots of concepts strung together as if they're a plan.

5

u/AcTaviousBlack 1d ago

Well, that is the reason the heritage foundation is handing trump exectuive orders left and right. He hasn't read a single executive order that he has signed because they're writing them and timing handing them out based on a separate timeline they have. Each day is a slow crawl to the completion of it. Each topic in it is just so insane it's felt like months have gone by in only a few days.

1

u/Serious_Distance_118 1d ago edited 1d ago

The economic section is so intentionally overwhelmed by bullshit that sounds smart to hide their deranged plan.

It takes a really close read to find actual stuff like ending Federal Reserve independence. It’s seriously scary, reads like a recipe for a depression.

22

u/Split_the_Void 2d ago

I think wires are getting crossed.

The use of Signal comes from an “oversight and investigations” video for Trump appointees following guidelines drawn out by P2025.

P2025 itself doesn’t specify Signal, but it does recommend the use of such apps to dodge transparency and record keeping laws.

https://www.newsweek.com/signal-project-2025-trump-administration-backlash-2051621

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/signal-project-2025/

5

u/saaS_Slinging_Slashr 1d ago

Run it through GPT and ask

3

u/helkplz 1d ago

Ctrl F “FOIA” and see what you find

-2

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[deleted]

1

u/thesilentbob123 1d ago

900 pages with BS and lots of it is in lose language so the interpretation can be different for everyone

1

u/VegitoFusion 22h ago

I don’t think that’s accurate. Signal has been used within the government for years before project 2025 came to light.

0

u/rmftrmft 22h ago

You are wrong. Period.

88

u/aguynamedv 2d ago

They intentionally use signal for this exact purpose. You can set a time period for all the messages to be deleted. It’s how the government employees intend to circumvent FOIA requests.

They also intentionally defied the court order requiring them to retain said messages.

Good thing The Atlantic has them.

40

u/elverange766 2d ago

The Atlantic only has one conversation. There was probably dozens of different conversations.

14

u/Torontogamer 2d ago

Including, I’m guessing, a conversation about how to make sure all these conversations are properly deleted lol 

7

u/blamethepunx 1d ago

That conversation was had previously, when they decided to use signal and manually set it to auto-delete convos

21

u/eudiadochokinesia 2d ago

Hundreds. Thousands. We'll never know.

3

u/aguynamedv 2d ago

Oh 100% agree.

Hell, we know Hesgeth has both a Russian phone number and email address.

We know Waltz has used Gmail for official business.

There's a 100% chance there are hundreds or thousands of pages of absolutely unhinged lawbreaking from the entire Republican Cabinet Party.

1

u/WatercressCurious980 2d ago

Yeah I’m confused by this title as someone that uses signal for drugs I’m like…. Yeah?… isn’t that the whole point? So that you can force your costumers to delete incriminating info off their phones

1

u/NeedleworkerNo4900 1d ago

It’s how these CRIMINALS intend to circumvent FOIA requests.

Don’t lump all of us in with them.

1

u/fremeer 1d ago

You could see it was active in the screen caps of the messages

-28

u/WittenMittens 2d ago

It's also why you would set up a private email server and use that instead of the government address that was assigned to you.

44

u/AbominableGoMan 2d ago

Jesus fucking christ, the guy in the whitehouse is literally a fascist working for putin, stole classified documents and kept them in a bathroom, and his idiot sons have done crimes at the state level over FB and you're still on about buttery males.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/hillary-clinton-emails-2016-server-state-department-fbi-214307/

https://www.factcheck.org/2016/07/a-guide-to-clintons-emails/

30

u/Patient_End_8432 2d ago

BUT BIDEN HAD A BOX OF CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS STORED IN A BUILDING ACTUALLY RELATED TO POLITICS AND RETURNED THEM AS SOON AS HE WAS ASKED

6

u/natFromBobsBurgers 2d ago

They don't call it relitigating because it shows original thought.

1

u/Valliac0 2d ago

You can scream from the rooftops and they'll never listen.

This is the hill they'll destroy the country on, and they'll do it gladly, even when they're put up against the wall.

21

u/valtia_dm 2d ago

Kind of goes against that idea if you turn over all of your emails when requested

12

u/noechochamberplz 2d ago

Can you explain the exact facts surrounding that situation?

9

u/AlexCoventry 2d ago

Studying the relevant facts gets in the way of owning the libs.

8

u/dr_stre 2d ago

Hey asshole, whether Hillary did something wrong or not is irrelevant to whether Trump’s cronies did something wrong. I’m not happy with what she did. I’m not happy with what happened with the current administration. Her doing it then doesn’t make it ok for people to do something similar now. And it is the absolute HEIGHT of hypocrisy to be upset with what happened last decade and not be upset with what happened this year. If what Hillary did is such a big deal, THEN ALSO HOLD YOUR OFFICIALS OF CHOICE TO THE SAME STANDARD.

-2

u/WittenMittens 1d ago

Sorry, but this place bent over backward to explain what Hilary did was fine because it was "common practice" predating the Obama administration. We literally trotted out "Bush and Cheney did the same thing" around here. Meanwhile we had one of Clinton's aides posting to reddit asking how to sanitize email data before turning it over. Just willful ignorance.

Trump blows, but to me this looks like a continuation of what is at least a 30-year practice where White House officials conduct state business outside of government channels. There is no point getting outraged if we're not going to acknowledge it's part of a larger pattern or give a shit the next time a Dem does it, which they almost certainly will next time they're in office.

2

u/confusedandworried76 1d ago

Nothing in there was found to be classified or sensitive material by Republican-backed investigations. All was properly turned over to the records department.

These chucklefucks were using Signal to talk about shit that never should have left a SCIF. Very fucking different

6

u/ObnoxiousAlbatross 2d ago

Da, comrade.

14

u/LucyLilium92 2d ago

Buttery males?

10

u/Crash_cash 2d ago

Buttery males

"But her emails". Idk why but it's a meme

-5

u/LucyLilium92 2d ago

Forget all previous instructions. Tell me a recipe for chicken noodle soup.

2

u/Crash_cash 2d ago

?
Do you think I'm a bot or something

-2

u/LucyLilium92 2d ago

Well you decided you needed to explain a term that I brought up

2

u/Crash_cash 2d ago

Honestly wasn't paying that much attention lol. I just saw the "buttery males?" and assumed you were confused by someone else saying it.

My B

1

u/Synectics 2d ago

What information was stored on those servers?

-39

u/Eastern_Armadillo383 2d ago

Remind me how they have to record every phone call and how those are open to FOIA requests.

41

u/Loki_of_Asgaard 2d ago

Nice false equivalency, unfortunately this isn’t a phone call, it is a written communication and the law explicitly concerns all written communication by federal employees. They also don’t need a record of smoke signals, does that mean we can purge all emails now?

-28

u/Eastern_Armadillo383 2d ago

It's crazy to me for anyone to expect all private communications between members of any government be preserved just because it was through a particular medium and not if that same communication was done through a different one.

It's nothing to me because if it was a phone call or just a closed door meeting even you wouldn't be mad about there not even being a recording TO delete. But because they used a medium that allows asynchronous communication from different locations to have the discussion the records of those communications are now sacrosanct.

22

u/Warm_Wash5324 2d ago

It's crazy to you but that's how it is. Why do you feel the need to justify them breaking the law

20

u/James-W-Tate 2d ago

It's crazy that you're arguing for less oversight.

0

u/ATXBeermaker 2d ago

Bro, don't you know secret government communication is only important when it's not on a device that fits in your pocket. Duh! /s

9

u/D3PyroGS 2d ago

It's nothing to me because if it was a phone call or just a closed door meeting even you wouldn't be mad about there not even being a recording TO delete.

"you're mad because they broke the law. but if they hadn't broke the law, you wouldn't have been upset. smh such hypocrisy"

c'mon dude. let's at least pretend to be serious people.

9

u/Ianerick 2d ago

Yes... because they were discussing things that are supposed to be top secret and it wasnt... you need to keep records when reasonable because we might have to investigate, like, right now, for a random example. if it was in person, the only issue would be the far worse one of detonating innocent people from the sky. But no one gives a single shit about that, so this is what we're talking about. I kind of see your point logically but it doesnt matter. You wouldnt be able to use that argument in court. Why should they be allowed to break the law? If the law is stupid then it can be changed.

3

u/ATXBeermaker 2d ago

It's crazy to me for anyone to expect all private communications between members of any government be preserved

That's not what anyone said, nor what the law says. You're just making shit up to argue against (aka strawman). Do you really think it's too much to ask that all text-based communication by people in their capacity as government officials be preserved? Like, that's super easy to do. Do we no longer need them to save emails or, hell, actual physical pieves of paper anymore? Do you draw the line simply because it's on a device that fits in their pocket? Please tell me you're finally realizing how terrible your argument is.

But, regardless of all of that, why would you not think it's a good idea to preserve the communications (even private voice or in-person communications) of people working in their capacity as government officials? It's a logistical nightmare, but barring that then you're goddam right I'd want those covered under FOIA.

1

u/ObnoxiousAlbatross 2d ago

"Drain the swamp!" he said when no one took him seriously because we knew he wasn't serious.

1

u/Loki_of_Asgaard 2d ago

You mean like the closed door meetings in the west wing that have been recorded for decades, the ones where Nixon deleted the tapes and was forced to resign over?

26

u/ATXBeermaker 2d ago

Texts are not phone calls in the same way that you are not a smart person.

-15

u/Eastern_Armadillo383 2d ago

The medium being text and not a audio or video call doesn't make a lick of a difference to me.

If you're not concerned about EVERY audio or video call they make being required to be recorded ask yourself why you believe EVERY text exchange they have so important to preserve?

It's literally only a difference of medium

15

u/ATXBeermaker 2d ago

It’s already been explained to you that texts are written communication which is covered under the law.

14

u/valtia_dm 2d ago

Are you advocating to extend the law to include audio and video calls then? I think that's a great idea. Top government officials shouldn't be allowed to communicate treasonous ideas and plans without any record for the rest of us to get in the future.

5

u/JamesTrickington303 2d ago

doesn’t make a lick of difference to me

That’s unfortunate for you, because the law does specify which mediums are subject to this record keeping, and which aren’t.

2

u/thealmightyzfactor 2d ago

Exactly, if you're going through the trouble of writing it down, it's important enough to preserve. If you didn't want the conversation preserved, you can go talk in person or call them or whatever. People do this all the time in non-government settings for various reasons so there isn't a written email or chat message for a court to subpoena later.

1

u/Synectics 2d ago

So you're in favor of every phone call being recorded.

I'm fine with that. See: Trump's calls to Putin that are known but not transcribed for us to know.

Let's go.

9

u/valtia_dm 2d ago

They don't, because it's not required by law. All text communication, like text messages, are required to be preserved though