I think the most interesting part of this was the agency where the alert came from stated that it was based upon an "error" by an individual.
However, recent revelations and what has been being reported on nearly every major news source is that the individual in question "refuses to speak to federal authorities".
So my question is how can they come out and claim it was an "error" on the individuals part while, at the same time, also stating he refuses to speak with federal investigators and, also at the same time, the individual has retained their employment despite both the error and despite the fact they aren't cooperating with a federal investigation into their very agency.
In other words, for them to come out and claim it was an "error" would that not mean that he/she told them as much? If that is the case, and that is the only possible conclusion we can draw (unless they are lying of course and covering something bigger up), then wouldn't it mean he just told them "I made an error" and if that is so than what would prevent him from merely saying the same thing to the feds?
This issue is strange and doesn't feel right. As someone who worked in a military equivalent of such things I can tell you that such warnings are serious business and must be confirmed by several different methods before they are released to the public to assure the public doesn't fall into mass hysteria. The only conclusions of this that I can draw is:
1) It truly was an error but that would also have to mean that the agency either is set up so that one person has the power to send out such warnings without any sort of coordination or confirmation. If this is the case than that agency is utterly ripe for corruption if they employ even one single scumbag who could effectively cause a shitstorm.
2) It wasn't an error and the systems truly did pick up an object incoming which was, afterwards, swatted by the American missile defense network (which are far more advanced than the public realizes), and since then it has been covered up to assure the public doesn't catch wind of an attack. I don't like this option as I really just don't see Trump of all people sitting and waiting if a missile attack against the US took place. Doesn't seem likely.
3) The individual was/is, like the air tower controller in Hawaii, and like four others who have been nailed in the past six months, not to mention the numerous individuals who were in the service that were discovered and removed from key positions… an infiltrated position by someone who was allowed into country during the Obama administration without proper background checks and proceeded to get a high end/crucial position and, from there, caused a rash of shit. I honestly think this is the most likely scenario given all we are seeing, time and time again, about people who the Obama admin let in, failed to properly vet due to them falling under "cultural needs" for the country, and have since caused a bunch of shit. A prime example is the Somali asshole in Minnesota who they allowed to become a cop without even graduating the academy and, after that, shot and killed a woman and, since then…. we have heard absolutely not a SINGLE thing about it outside of he refuses to speak to federal authorities (much like this issue here).