Politics

More Jofi Josephs, Please

|

Credit: trekkyandy / Foter / CC BY-SA

Last night, The Daily Beast's Josh Rogin reported that Jofi Joseph, who worked on nuclear nonproliferation at the National Security Council, was fired last week after it was discovered that he was behind the @natsecwonk Twitter account, which had been around for over two years and included some unflattering posts about Obama administration officials and other prominent political figures. 

From The Daily Beast:

During his time tweeting under the @natsecwonk name, Joseph openly criticized the policies of his White House bosses and often insulted their intellect and appearance. At different times, he insulted or criticized several top White House and State Department officials, including former National Security Advisor Tom Donilon, Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes, Secretary of State John Kerry, and many many others.

You can read an archive of some of the tweets here.

According to Foreign Policy's Situation Report, Joseph is facing a DOJ investigation into whether he revealed any confidential or sensitive information on the @natsecwonk account, which Politico reports was "obsessively and angrily followed by officials in the bowels of Foggy Bottom and the West Wing."

Speaking about Joseph's @natsecwonk account on NBC's Today Show, Rogin said that "His Twitter feed was a mix of leaking sensitive national security information, criticizing the policies of the administration he worked for and insulting the personalities and appearance of very famous national security officials." The Washington Post reports the following on the sensitivity of some of the material on the @natsecwonk account:

The posts never included classified or highly sensitive information, making a true leak investigation difficult to mount, but they often contained insider details. 

While setting up accounts like @natsecwonk is obviously a risky career move (and it would perhaps be better to leak sensitive information to journalists directly rather than on Twitter), I hope that we will see more like it in the future.

The unintentional comedy in Washington D.C. can quickly become stale and depressing. Wouldn't it have been a refreshing joy to have had a prominent official running a @natsecwonk equivalent in HHS amid the latest and ongoing Obamacare debacle, in the IRS during the latest scandal surrounding the targeting of conservative groups, or in the DOJ amid the Associated Press scandal? I can't help but think that given the size of the federal government that there must be some untapped Twitter talent out there that could provide some welcome comedy to the tragedy in every federal department and agency. 

NEXT: European Parliament Votes For Data Privacy Rules After Snowden Revelations Break Two Year Deadlock

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. So when you shut down your Tweeter account, does that delete all of your twits and scrub your existence from human memory? It seems weird that the account is just gone like that.

    1. Anthony Weiner believes that yes, your tweets are gone forever and no one else can read them. Because tweets, like facebook, are private.

  2. The tweets are coming from inside the administration!

  3. He would have been fine had he not insulted Valerie Jarrett. Big Val takes no prisoners.

    1. Who did he think that the NSA works for, if not for Valerie?

      1. Careful, you've said too much. I've said to much....ahhhhh, their right behind m...

      2. I bet the first time she lay eyes on Barry she knew her ship had come in to harbor.

  4. "His Twitter feed was a mix of leaking sensitive national security information, criticizing the policies of the administration he worked for and insulting the personalities and appearance of very famous national security officials."

    Two out of three of these charges are true, and form the basis of the actions against him. Guess which two!

    1. Yep. Dissenters of course must be purged, but he clearly wasn't that personally threatening to the head of the regime, or he'd be dead already.

      1. So he's not in the union huh.

      2. It's not even that he was dissenter, it's that he criticized the policies of the administration and insulted them. These are people who have absolutely no sense of humor about themselves whatsoever.

        Frankly I'm suprised he hasn't already been black bagged.

        1. Well, officially lese majeste is no longer a crime. That's why they have to come up with something else to charge the guy with.

      3. Maybe they'll send the FBI and Mass Police to "interview" him.

  5. "and it would perhaps be better to leak sensitive information to journalists directly rather than on Twitter"

    Says the journalist.

    1. Uh, yeah, that stuck out like a sore thumb to me too.

    2. Why isn't posting info on an account monitored by journalists leaking to journalists?

      Unless you think the critical factor is that the journalist acquire control of the information and determine what to do with it.

    3. Didn't Snowden leak directly to a journalist at the Guardian? How did that work out for him?

  6. Me thinks @peggynoonannyc and @chrismatthews should get together and swap stories, share some drinks and discuss why they are irrelevant

    Ha ha ha ha ha ha

  7. Can we all agree that the word "twitter" and "tweets" is officially the dumbest new media term in the English language?

    1. The word "blog" is nails-on-chalkboard irritating, but it is wholly surpassed by anything to do with Twitter.

      1. I think when the word "tweet" became common in the lexicon we finally passed a threshold of stupidity that may be impossible to reverse.

    2. If something can't be explained in 140 characters, then it just isn't worth explaining.

      1. I would say, if something can't be mocked in 140 characters, yer doin' it wrong.

        See, also, iowahawk's twitter feed.

  8. Not sure if this has been covered here, but just in case anyone was having a nice day, here's a kick in the nuts.

    Cops kill 13 year old carrying toy gun

    1. Dennis O'Leary says they repeatedly ordered him to drop what appeared to be a rifle before firing several rounds.

      Doesn't say he pointed it at them. Doesn't say he threatened them. Doesn't say he shot at them. He simply didn't obey a command.

      That's where we're at. Failure to obey a command gives the cops an excuse to kill you.

      1. What if the kid was deaf and couldn't hear them? They would still get way with murder.

        1. Totality of the circs. They didn't know he was deaf. They thought those gestures he was making were gang signs. At that point they had no choice but to kill him. Furtive movements. Feared for their lives. Policies were followed. Justified.

          1. Yep. Nothing else will happen.

            The deputies in question have, of course, been given a paid vacation put on administrative leave.

          2. After spotting the boy, the deputies called for backup and repeatedly ordered him to drop the weapon, O'Leary said in a news release. They fired several rounds from their handguns immediately afterward, according to O'Leary.

            Yeah, how immediately? Like so immediately the kid had no time to obey the commands? Because I bet that's what happened. Why would a kid carrying a toy gun not drop it when he realized a bunch of cops had their weapons pointed at him? That's bullshit.

            1. He probably couldn't hear the cops' orders over the cops' gunfire.

      2. Dennis O'Leary says they repeatedly ordered him to drop what appeared to be a rifle before firing several rounds.

        Why do I have a suspicion that one deputy shouted at him to drop it while the other one told him to put his hands up? Then they switched up a little bit and the one who initially shouted to drop it switched to "hands up!" while the other shouted "face down on the ground, now!"

        They love shouting confilcting orders afterall, that way they always charge you with "refusing a lawful order." When they don't just execute you, that is.

    2. So it's not just open season on mentally disabled adults but now regular kids?

      When is it open season on pigs?

      1. And where do I get some tags?

    3. Motherfuckers. I wish there was a real Hell for those cunts to go to.

      1. One of the many pleasures being a believer affords me is imagining people like this explaining to God why they did what they did.

    4. Reading the comments there and other stories like this I have read lately, the public sentiment is starting to turn against the authorities on this. You don't see too much defense of it any longer. People are getting outraged. But when will it reach a level that we do something to stop this crap? Do they have to kill at least one person that everyone personally knows before we do something?

      1. There is a reason the police are militarizing. We're coming to the tipping point where our government governs not with the consent of the governed, but with brute force.

        1. They govern with the consent of the governors, isn't that what the framers intended?

      2. I do think that someday, somewhere, the cops are going to fuck up even worse than this, and it is going to result in a lot of dead cops.

        Imagine if this occured on the fringe of your property - but still your property. Cops draw and aim their weapons at your kid. What would you do? If you go running out shouting "No!" you are just as likely to get shot.

        1. My stepson said of his cop father "My dad's a cop. He can do whatever he wants."

          And it's true.

          1. As long as he doesn't fuck with other cops or fail to show them proper "professional courtesy".

            1. And by "fuck with" I mean actually do his job properly and investigate crimes the same way no matter who the suspect is.

            2. I noticed one of those thin-blue-line stickers on his rear license plate. A while back I worked with a guy who claimed a buddy of his had put one of those stickers on the driver's side rear window of his car. As the story goes, the next time he got pulled over the cop noticed the sticker as he walked around the car, apologized for pulling the dude over, and then drove away.

    5. There was a time when after mistaking a toy gun for real and shooting a kid cops would at least be racked with guilt enough to quit the force or at least take a strictly desk job. I'm guessing these guys will be back on the streets after a brief paid vacation.

      The replica gun resembled an AK-47 with a black magazine cartridge and brown butt, according to a photograph released by the sheriff's office.

      It's curious that there's no pictures of the toy gun with the article. I'd like to know if it had the requisite orange tip and how "realistic" it actually looked.

      1. Here's one with embedded video. Around the 0:48 second mark they show the picture of the toy. Admittedly, it looks pretty realistic, I can see them mistaking it for real especially from a distance. Still, unless he started to point it at them, there was no need to open fire.

        1. I love the headline they use: "Deputies shoot, kill suspect."

          Exactly what crime was this boy suspected of, again?

          1. TERRORISM!

      2. When I was a kid, in the late 80s and early 90s, we used to spray paint the "new generation" toy guns all black to bring back the realism. The whole neighborhood used to have epic gun battles, 30 or 40 kids at a time. They would spill into everyone's yard and fenced in decks would be POW camps. My dad welded an old scope onto a toy rifle for me. Can you imagine what would happen today, if a "concerned citizen" called in an event like this?

        1. Considering that kids suspended from school for Lego guns and Pop Tarts chewed into the shape of guns or for pointing their fingers and saying "bang" at recess, I'd hate to imagine the pants shitting that would happen over kids actually playing with toy guns.

        2. Today that would generate a full SWAT response and a lot of dead kids.

  9. While setting up accounts like @natsecwonk is obviously a risky career move...

    Oh, I think it will cost him more than his career. The Obama Justice Department isn't above cheap and ugly reprisals.

    1. You give them too much credit. Cheap and ugly reprisals are all they do. Actually enforcing the law in an impartial manner is for suckers.

  10. my buddy's step-sister makes ==$82== an hour on the computer. She has been laid off for ==8== months but last month her payment was ==$19918== just working on the computer for a few hours. Here's the site to read more
    ==========================
    http://www.works23.com
    ==========================

  11. Reason won't fire you for alt-text.

  12. I'm not familiar with any job that allows one to regularly hurl personal insults at co-workers and management, and then still remain employed

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.