Comments by "pipsplay" (@pipsplay) on "11Alive" channel.

@ Sorry, that was my point exactly. The reckless abandon of what was discussed with no control or vetting who was listening. My workplace has better control over who's in meetings than this group and not a single one of our Government officials said a thing. They're all so cavalier about everything they do, like they're smarter, better, and don't have to follow the rules normal people do.
2
@shaunreich There were almost 2 dozen members, some of them just initials. Yes, that should have been enough of a red flag for any one of the core 4-5 who should have been in a secure meeting room or at least on secure lines to call it out. Gabbard especially. (I think Radcliff just wasn't paying attention to any of it.)
2
There were around 2 dozen people in the chat, some of them just initials. It would have been difficult for anyone to know exactly who was there and who wasn't. As to the content? He probably wasn't even paying attention. As Director of National Security, he wouldn't have been directly involved and shouldn't have been there in the first place. I'd like to hear what Gabbard (as Director of National Intelligence) has to say. And Kristi Noem. And Mike Waltz who invited the reporter to the group.
1
@ (Yes, we have secure lines, meeting rooms, and policies around where/how to discuss confidential material. But they're smarter than that.)
1
@ Because it's been published. There were 19 members, including several with only initials. Mike Waltz added the journalist to the group, but has admitted he doesn't know the reporter.
1