Patterico's Pontifications

3/26/2025

The Atlantic Releases Signal Chats By Senior White House Officials

Filed under: General — Dana @ 8:34 am



[guest post by Dana]

Today we are now able to see some of those alleged “not classified” messages sent between senior officials on Signal:

The Atlantic released the entire Signal chat among Trump senior national security officials Wednesday, showing that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth provided the exact times of warplane launches, strike packages and targets — before the men and women flying those attacks against Yemen’s Houthis this month on behalf of the United States were airborne.

. . .

Hegseth has refused to say whether he posted classified information onto Signal. He is traveling in the Indo-Pacific and to date has only scoffed at questions, saying he did not reveal “war plans.” Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe told members of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday that it was up to Hegseth to determine whether the information he was posting was classified or not.

One of the messages from Hegseth:

“1215et: F-18s LAUNCH (1st strike package)”

“1345: ‘Trigger Based’ F-18 1st Strike Window Starts (Target Terrorist is @ his Known Location so SHOULD BE ON TIME – also, Strike Drones Launch (MQ-9s)”
“1410: More F-18s LAUNCH (2nd strike package)”

“1415: Strike Drones on Target (THIS IS WHEN THE FIRST BOMBS WILL DEFINITELY DROP, pending earlier ‘Trigger Based’ targets)”

“1536 F-18 2nd Strike Starts – also, first sea-based Tomahawks launched.”

“MORE TO FOLLOW (per timeline)”

“We are currently clean on OPSEC” — that is, operational security.

“Godspeed to our Warriors.”

As a reminder: White House spokesperson Karoline Leavett said that:

“No classified material was sent to the thread.”

Additionally, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said this morning when asked by Democrats whether the timing and location of planned military strikes were shared on the chat thread:

“I can attest to the fact that there were not classified or intelligence equities that were included in that chat group at any time.”

Finally, Mike Waltz reassures us:

No locations.

No sources & methods.

NO WAR PLANS.

Foreign partners had already been notified that strikes were imminent.

BOTTOM LINE: President Trump is protecting America and our interests.

While a few Democrats are calling for Hegseth to be fired or resign, Republican Don Bacon is the only Republican thus far to publicly push back against the White House company line:

“The WH is in denial that this was not classified or sensitive data,” said Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), a House Armed Services Committee member and former Air Force brigadier general.

Bacon told Axios: “They should just own up to it and preserve credibility.”

And I’ll just leave this here:

Gift article here.

—Dana

103 Responses to “The Atlantic Releases Signal Chats By Senior White House Officials”

  1. Hello.

    Dana (633e20)

  2. Are we conflating “classified” with “confidential” here?

    whembly (2c5586)

  3. Are we conflating “classified” with “confidential” here?

    whembly (2c5586) — 3/26/2025 @ 8:44 am

    “Confidential” is the lowest level of classification; but one would expect that attack launch times, weaponry, etc. would require far higher security.

    (3) “Confidential” shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  4. Some of you demanding that Hegseth be fired are acting like the “act of adding Goldberg to this group chat” got 13 American troops killed while withdrawing from Yemen…and then hellfire-missiled a carload of civilians in retribution…and demanding that someone be fired for it.

    whembly (2c5586)

  5. Waltz should be fired setting up the chat on Signal and including Goldberg; and Hegseth should resign for lying to the American public.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  6. Hegseth should resign for lying to the American public.

    And possibly the President.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  7. I’ll tell you why Signal is not as secured as people think.

    Other than stupidity (ie, adding Goldberg into the chat)…

    Signal is absolutely susceptible to phishing attacks. And I cannot imagine how much phishing attacks high level administration faces on day-to-day basis.

    Furthermore, using it on personal devices is another vulnerability. The MDM policy can only lockdown the device so much and there are TONS of exploits known/unknown out in the wild.

    This is why, in my large healthcare organization, we flat out prohibit things like Signal our our mobile devices because we deal with patient’s PHI and financial data. (we can’t even install/see tiktok for that matter!)

    There are other solutions/strategies for this, and frankly, the government should be routinely release different encryption platforms to stay ahead in the information-war space.

    whembly (2c5586)

  8. Some of you demanding that Hegseth be fired are acting like the “act of adding Goldberg to this group chat” got 13 American troops killed while withdrawing from Yemen…and then hellfire-missiled a carload of civilians in retribution…and demanding that someone be fired for it.

    whembly (2c5586) — 3/26/2025 @ 9:06 am

    People are serving long prison terms for leaking classified information to unauthorized persons. Being forced to resign would be gift to Waltz and Hegseth. He can always go back to Fox News.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  9. @8

    People are serving long prison terms for leaking classified information to unauthorized persons. Being forced to resign would be gift to Waltz and Hegseth. He can always go back to Fox News.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/26/2025 @ 9:19 am

    Yeah, for willfully intending to break the law.

    If it was classified, why did Goldberg release it then?

    whembly (2c5586)

  10. “Confidential” is the lowest level of classification; but one would expect that attack launch times, weaponry, etc. would require far higher security.
    ……….
    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/26/2025 @ 9:00 am

    From Executive Order 13526-Classified National Security Information

    Sec. 1.4. Classification Categories. Information shall not be considered for classification unless its unauthorized disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause identifiable or describable damage to the national security in accordance with section 1.2 (Classification Levels) of this order, and it pertains to one or more of the following:

    (a) military plans, weapons systems, or operations;
    ……….

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  11. If it was classified, why did Goldberg release it then?

    whembly (2c5586) — 3/26/2025 @ 9:22 am

    Since the President, Secretary of Defense, and the Directors of National Intelligence and Central Intelligence all said that there was no classified information discussed in the chat, I assume The Atlantic felt free to publish the chats. However, based on EO 13526 noted above, “military plans, weapons systems, or operations” should be considered classified.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  12. ……the Directors of National Intelligence and Central Intelligence all said that there was no classified information discussed in the chat

    Which was said under oath, so there could be problems with that.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  13. This is not Valerie Plame 2.0 or Abbygate 2.0 or HRC email server 2.0.

    Try to dispassionately assess this situation, and maybe you’ll recognize that this was a staff F-up, but not really a scandal.

    It’s between “not great” and “embarrassing”. Or both.

    whembly (2c5586)

  14. @12

    Which was said under oath, so there could be problems with that.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/26/2025 @ 9:34 am

    I guess what constitutes:
    “military plans, weapons systems, or operations”

    What does the law say about that? Not what we think it should be…

    whembly (2c5586)

  15. If it was classified, why did Goldberg release it then?

    whembly (2c5586) — 3/26/2025 @ 9:22 am

    This:

    The statements by Hegseth, Gabbard, Ratcliffe, and Trump—combined with the assertions made by numerous administration officials that we are lying about the content of the Signal texts—have led us to believe that people should see the texts in order to reach their own conclusions. There is a clear public interest in disclosing the sort of information that Trump advisers included in nonsecure communications channels, especially because senior administration figures are attempting to downplay the significance of the messages that were shared.
    ……….
    Yesterday, we asked officials across the Trump administration if they objected to us publishing the full texts. In emails to the Central Intelligence Agency, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the National Security Council, the Department of Defense, and the White House, we wrote, in part: “In light of statements today from multiple administration officials, including before the Senate Intelligence Committee, that the information in the Signal chain about the Houthi strike is not classified, and that it does not contain ‘war plans,’ The Atlantic is considering publishing the entirety of the Signal chain.”
    ……….
    Late yesterday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt emailed a response: “As we have repeatedly stated, there was no classified information transmitted in the group chat. However, as the CIA Director and National Security Advisor have both expressed today, that does not mean we encourage the release of the conversation. This was intended to be a an [sic] internal and private deliberation amongst high-level senior staff and sensitive information was discussed. So for those reason [sic] — yes, we object to the release.” (The Leavitt statement did not address which elements of the texts the White House considered sensitive, or how, more than a week after the initial air strikes, their publication could have bearing on national security.)

    A CIA spokesperson asked us to withhold the name of John Ratcliffe’s chief of staff, which Ratcliffe had shared in the Signal chain, because CIA intelligence officers are traditionally not publicly identified. Ratcliffe had testified earlier yesterday that the officer is not undercover and said it was “completely appropriate” to share their name in the Signal conversation. We will continue to withhold the name of the officer. Otherwise, the messages are unredacted.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  16. I guess what constitutes:
    “military plans, weapons systems, or operations”

    What does the law say about that? Not what we think it should be…

    whembly (2c5586) — 3/26/2025 @ 9:36 am

    18 U.S. Code § 798 (Disclosure of classified information) and 18 U.S. Code § 793 (Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information) are quite broad in their coverage regarding how to handle classified information (see here).

    Using common sense, and the plain meaning of words, this sure sounds like “military plans, weapon systems, or operations”:

    At 11:44 a.m. eastern time, Hegseth posted in the chat, in all caps, “TEAM UPDATE:”

    “TIME NOW (1144et): Weather is FAVORABLE. Just CONFIRMED w/CENTCOM we are a GO for mission launch.” Centcom, or Central Command, is the military’s combatant command for the Middle East. The Hegseth text continues:

    “1215et: F-18s LAUNCH (1st strike package)”
    “1345: ‘Trigger Based’ F-18 1st Strike Window Starts (Target Terrorist is @ his Known Location so SHOULD BE ON TIME – also, Strike Drones Launch (MQ-9s)”

    ………This Signal message shows that the U.S. secretary of defense texted a group that included a phone number unknown to him—Goldberg’s cellphone—at 11:44 a.m. This was 31 minutes before the first U.S. warplanes launched, and two hours and one minute before the beginning of a period in which a primary target, the Houthi “Target Terrorist,” was expected to be killed by these American aircraft. ……..

    The Hegseth text then continued:

    “1410: More F-18s LAUNCH (2nd strike package)”
    “1415: Strike Drones on Target (THIS IS WHEN THE FIRST BOMBS WILL DEFINITELY DROP, pending earlier ‘Trigger Based’ targets)”
    “1536 F-18 2nd Strike Starts – also, first sea-based Tomahawks launched.”
    “MORE TO FOLLOW (per timeline)”
    “We are currently clean on OPSEC”—that is, operational security.
    “Godspeed to our Warriors.”

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  17. #4

    Some of you demanding that Hegseth be fired are acting like the “act of adding Goldberg to this group chat” got 13 American troops killed while withdrawing from Yemen…and then hellfire-missiled a carload of civilians in retribution…and demanding that someone be fired for it.

    Whembly,

    My beef with Hegseth is his lying about the chat, and pairing that lie with a lot of angry bombast about Goldberg’s lack of credibility. It turns out that, in this case, Hegseth’s lying was easy to prove — which calls into question his judgment. After all, Add to this Hegseth’s prior alleged lack of credibility on other matters — this isn’t somebody who will own up when something has gone wrong and will deflect blame on anyone and everyone. That’s not the right sort of character for SecDef and America would be well advised to cut their losses.

    As for Waltz — he should go too. Everyone makes stupid mistakes. But he’s the National Security Advisor — and he’s not really allowed to make a mistake like this.

    Appalled (a50afd)

  18. Wembley’s participation in this chat is fantastic. His starting position was thatGoldberg lied and was completely untrustworthy. Now he wants to parse the definition of classified vs confidential.

    The fact remains that these completely unqualified clowns discussed timing and specific capabilities of a US military attack hours ahead of that attack on an unsecure system with the editor of the Atlantic included. He can’t dispute that anymore so now he wants to parse words. At some point soon it will move from what is the definition of “is” to this isn’t the worst thing that ever happened so it’s not actually that bad.

    He and other maga will stay true to the one underlying principle that they have left. They win. the people they dislike lose. And winning and losing entirely defined by the media conversation in the moment.

    This is even better given how passionate he’s been about HRCs horrible and stupid use of a personal email server.

    Time (99a6af)

  19. People demanding to fire people they didn’t support in an administration they didn’t support enacting policies they don’t support while also claiming they’d never support anyone willing to work for the administration.

    That about cover it.

    NJRob (a3f796)

  20. Why would Hegseth say “we are currently clean on OPSEC” if the content of their little chat wasn’t classified? I’ve used the word “absurd” here a few times over the last few days, with good reason, because hyperpartisans are in AbsurdTrumpWorld here, telling us down is up, that classified intel isn’t classified, that discussing a war plan isn’t a war plan, that Signal is okay because Biden did something.

    Paul Montagu (97a04c)

  21. Time,

    Signal is stupidly approved for use on their phones. Hillary’s server was not.

    She got off scot free while her associates got immunity and a grant from the FBI to destroy the evidence of their crimes aka their phones.

    So you continue to misrepresent the situations.

    NJRob (a3f796)

  22. That said, using the app is stupid and shouldn’t be done by any government official even though we know they are all rather take the easy way than the smart way.

    NJRob (a3f796)

  23. The Tao of the Trump Administration, in a headline (from Politico):

    Waltz takes ‘full responsibility’ – and calls Atlantic editor ‘scum’

    Appalled (a50afd)

  24. NJRob, your response is 100% on brand. They’re also allowed to use Twitter. Doesn’t mean it’s remotely appropriate for them to share /the timing of an upcoming military strike/ on their timeline. Which I /think/ you’re smart enough to know, but probably aren’t honest enough to admit.

    Time (99a6af)

  25. People demanding to fire people they didn’t support in an administration they didn’t support enacting policies they don’t support while also claiming they’d never support anyone willing to work for the administration.

    Bullshyte.
    My first comment about this episode was in support of the strike.

    Striking Houthi terrorist targets: Good call, long overdue, keep it going.
    Using a commercial app to discuss an upcoming military strike: Dumb, reckless, illegal.

    I objected to Hegseth as SecDef because he’s unqualified for the job and unqualified on character. All he’s doing now is proving me 100% right, telling America all about his incompetence and shiddy character since Monday.

    Paul Montagu (97a04c)

  26. “I’d be court-martialed for that”

    ………
    “If this was someone on active duty, their career would be completely over and they would be facing jail time most likely just because of the nature of this, of using the inappropriate system, never mind the fact that it demonstrates recklessness,” said retired Air Force Lt. Col. Rachel VanLandingham, a former military attorney. “Individuals get administrative punishment at the minimum for leaving classified information on their desk.”
    ………
    It was unclear Tuesday if the detailed operational information Goldberg said he received — including times of strikes, identities of targets, and intelligence that indicated its method of collection — was unclassified prior to the strikes, but similar information was almost universally classified during the two decades of post-9/11 wars.
    ………
    “If I were a sergeant or a captain and I called up the Washington Post and I worked in the Pentagon in the J2 [intelligence branch] or the J3 [operations branch] and I said ‘hey I got a hot tip for you, we’re gonna attack the Houthis,’ Oh, I’d be court-martialed for that,” said Josh Kastenburg, who tried disclosure cases under the Uniform Code of Military Justice both as a judge and lawyer.

    Kastenburg recalled two cases he oversaw involving the mishandling of classified documents by service members. One case involved Air Force Staff Sgt. Daniel Chin, who took a hard drive of classified materials home. He received a bad conduct discharge and was reduced to the rank of private. The other case involved an airmen who showed documents on weapons of mass destruction to someone without the proper security clearance.

    “Neither person deliberately spilled national security,” Kastenburg. “They just failed to safeguard it like they brought work home with them and they shouldn’t have done it or they showed their spouse, ‘hey, look at the cool stuff I’m working on,’ and in both instances, they got punitive discharges that deprived them of their [veteran] benefits and they went to jail.”
    ………..
    “The higher ranking you are, ….the less chances are you’re gonna do something accidentally,” (Lt. Col. VanLandingham) said. “Our J3 and our J2 and our commander and our deputy commander at the U.S. Central Command, they had SCIFs in their houses on base.”
    ………..
    There are many examples of military members of all ranks losing careers and even their freedom after relatively small, and even good-intentioned, disclosures of classified information.
    ………

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  27. People demanding to fire people they didn’t support in an administration they didn’t support enacting policies they don’t support while also claiming they’d never support anyone willing to work for the administration.

    That about cover it.

    NJRob (a3f796) — 3/26/2025 @ 10:44 am

    No, it doesn’t cover it.

    It doesn’t matter what people believe re administrations or individuals who are demanding a firing. It doesn’t matter if they like or dislike, support or don’t support the administration or anyone willing to work for the administration. What matters is: were laws and rules concerning classified material broken. That is not a left or right, us versus them matter. That *you* view it that way only reveals your own partisanship and efforts to blame others for the egregious and careless decisions made by senior Trump officials. It’s your standard M.O. when Trump is guilty of something. Deflect and blame. How about we left politicians take the consequences of their bad decisions. I think if we did, across the board, it would reinforce to them that they can no longer get away with the things they have in the past. And that would be good for all voters.

    Dana (91ddac)

  28. Signal is stupidly approved for use on their phones. Hillary’s server was not.
    She got off scot free…

    First

    The app is not banned outright by the US government. Under President Joe Biden, some officials were allowed to download Signal on their White House-issued phones.

    But they were instructed to use the app sparingly and never to share classified information on it, former national security officials who served in the Democratic administration told US media.

    Pentagon regulations state that messaging apps “are NOT authorized to access, transmit, process non-public DoD information”, reports CNN.

    There is no doubt that these top-echelon national security lightweights accessed, transmitted and processed non-public DoD information regarding their Houthi small group, so they were violating their own protocols. Putin and Xi have to be smiling about this, and the Europeans that Vance and Hegseth were insulting have to be enraged.

    Second, Hillary lost an election in part because she foolishly used a home-brewed server to conduct official business, and then played her usual slimy games of parsing and lying and evading to excuse her bad judgment.
    She may have got off scot free legally, but not politically, because she never became president and she self-destructed her political career.

    Paul Montagu (97a04c)

  29. People demanding to fire people they didn’t support in an administration they didn’t support enacting policies they don’t support while also claiming they’d never support anyone willing to work for the administration.

    None of which has to do with Waltz’s or Hegseth’s conduct or statements as it relates to the chat. No one has said here that the Administration shouldn’t have bombed the Houthis (except maybe asset); my only issue is that the Administration hasn’t continued to bombed them again and again since March 16th. Right now it feels like one of Biden’s one-off attacks.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  30. >Which was said under oath, so there could be problems with that.

    There *should be* problems with that, but there is no way that Trump’s DoJ will prosecute.

    aphrael (13a689)

  31. Knives are out, Part II

    ……….
    Waltz, who apparently inadvertently added Goldberg to the chat, is taking the brunt of the blame inside the White House.

    White House staff and the president’s allies are exasperated with Waltz’s strategy to double down on his claims that he doesn’t know how Goldberg’s number ended up in his phone, and how the journalist was added to a Signal thread discussing U.S. military operations in Yemen.

    “People are mad that Waltz didn’t just admit a mistake and move on,” said a senior administration official who was granted anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter. Waltz’s response has now raised concerns that he’s only digging a deeper hole for the White House.
    ……….
    Administration officials and others close to the White House are worried that Waltz’s decision to ask tech mogul Elon Musk to investigate the leak will lead to more political damage. “Well, Waltz just opened the door for the FBI to investigate the compromise of his text chain,” one wrote in another message shared with POLITICO.
    …………

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  32. Signal is stupidly approved for use on their phones. Hillary’s server was not.

    Huh, if someone linked to the policy documents for these agencies and those specifically forbade Signal, that would absolutely be the end of it for you?

    Ah, Time, myself, Paul, have all linked to specific DoD new employment docs and internal FAQ’s that specifically say Signal is no bueno, and that sharing ANY data on it is cause for termination and civil charges. Confidential and Classified leads to a biggly house.

    Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a)

  33. @18

    This is even better given how passionate he’s been about HRCs horrible and stupid use of a personal email server.

    Time (99a6af) — 3/26/2025 @ 10:43 am

    Not even close to the same situation as HRC server.

    Nice try though.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  34. “Not even close to the same situation as HRC server.”

    What’s the difference?

    Davethulhu (14e9e4)

  35. I know. It’s much worse because it shared specific operational details /with the media/ ahead of the operation.

    Time (99a6af)

  36. @34 “Not even close to the same situation as HRC server.”

    What’s the difference?

    Davethulhu (14e9e4) — 3/26/2025 @ 12:09 pm

    SAP Classified info was found on HRC server.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  37. Not even close to the same situation as HRC server.

    Nice try though.

    Right, it’s worse, live play by play after the kill chain started is betraying your country by your own stupidity is supper bad. Doing it after bictchin about Clinton for 12 years is so much worse.

    Immature, ignorant, unqualified.

    Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a)

  38. @35

    I know. It’s much worse because it shared specific operational details /with the media/ ahead of the operation.

    Time (99a6af) — 3/26/2025 @ 12:09 pm

    lol. No.

    Probably the most charitable I can give Hegseth, is that he probably shouldn’t have included what he did on Signal.

    Even though, Waltz mentioned upthread to 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.

    Hegseth was trying to split the baby…engaging the group chat with generalized details, but not specifics.

    This is far and away no where as serious as HRC’s homebrew server, because she wanted to prevent her communications to be FOIA’able, while maintaining communications to maximize her foundations profitability, even though she was found to have RE-COPIED highly classified information, including one of the highest categorized Classified setting (SAP).

    Waltz deserves the most criticizes to accidently add Goldberg.

    HRC didn’t accidently having a homebrew email server.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  39. super not supper bad. Although I lazily got cheap Pizza Hut yesterday, not good. Always get Dewey’s or Camporosso.

    Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a)

  40. This fiasco invites the memes, like this, and this, and this, or parsing the silliness between “war plans” and “attack plans”.

    Paul Montagu (97a04c)

  41. @37

    Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a) — 3/26/2025 @ 12:17 pm

    I didn’t bring up HRC email saga.

    Others did.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  42. @27

    How about we left politicians take the consequences of their bad decisions. I think if we did, across the board, it would reinforce to them that they can no longer get away with the things they have in the past. And that would be good for all voters.

    Dana (91ddac) — 3/26/2025 @ 11:15 am

    This is the problem with politics.

    There’s zero incentives to say “we screwed up”.

    Until that dynamics changes…we’re going to keep seeing wagons circle over everything.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  43. Back in the olden days of last second when I had a security clearance, I’d probably get it pulled just for leaking the working group name, add in the other people, fired, content, jailed. All of this is CUI.

    All of these folks are the biggest cheerleaders for meritocracy and anti-DEI. There is no way these neurodivergent folks would have their job if not for being DEI hires.

    Signal promises privacy, not security.

    Also…

    SUBJECT: Use of Unclassified Mobile Applications in Department of Defense

    Mobile applications (apps) are software products designed to function on mobile devices. The misuse and mismanagement of mobile apps poses a cybersecurity and operations security (OPSEC) risk and may result in the unauthorized disclosure of controlled unclassified information (CUI) and unclassified Department of Defense (DoD) information that has not been approved for public release (hereinafter jointly referred to as “non-public DoD information”) and jeopardize operations, strategies, or missions, as described in references (b) and ( c ). This memorandum provides guidance on the use of mobile apps on unclassified DoD government owned, leased or issued, mobile devices (hereinafter referred to as “government owned mobile devices”) and on the managed partition of non-government owned mobile devices approved in accordance with reference (d) (hereinafter referred to as “Approved Mobile Device” (AMD)).

    Numerous mobile apps access or use non-public DoD information (e.g., authorized email apps, collaboration apps, command/control apps). Other applications may be used in support of mission requirements but do not directly access non-public DoD information (e.g., travel and educational apps). Although mobile apps can provide ease of use and increased functionality for users across the Department, there are risks that must be considered. Mobile apps may contain malware or have vulnerabilities that can disclose CUI, personally identifiable information (PII), non-public DoD information not approved for public release, or other sensitive information. This is all possible without the user’s consent or knowledge.

    In accordance with DoD Instruction 5200.48, DoD personnel will not use non-DoD accounts or personal e-mail accounts, messaging systems or other non-public DoD information systems, except approved or authorized government contractor systems, to conduct official business involving CUI. In accordance with DoD Instruction 5200.01, DoD personnel will not use unclassified systems, government-issued or otherwise, for classified national security information. DoD CIO will continuously consult with all DoD Components to evaluate risks mobile applications may present to the DoD and update References (m), (n), and (o), as appropriate.

    Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a)

  44. This is far and away no where as serious as HRC’s homebrew server……..

    You would think Republicans would have a higher standard.

    Rip Murdock (f259db)

  45. You would think Republicans would have a higher standard.

    Rip Murdock (f259db) — 3/26/2025 @ 1:01 pm

    Than “not Hillary”, which actually is debatable.

    Rip Murdock (f259db)

  46. You would think Republicans would have a higher standard.

    Rip Murdock (f259db) — 3/26/2025 @ 1:01 pm

    Than “not Hillary”, which actually is debatable.

    Rip Murdock (f259db) — 3/26/2025 @ 1:04 pm

    Not that I want to get into that ancient history.

    Rip Murdock (f259db)

  47. >because she wanted to prevent her communications to be FOIA’able

    use of time-disappearing signal messages is also preventing communications from being FOIA’able.

    this practice should be outright banned.

    aphrael (13a689)

  48. like, above and beyond the f*ckup involved in inviting a journalist, and above and beyond the security risk of this kind of detail being discussed on an insecure platform like signal, *no* conversation between government officials which involves discussion of anything government related should *ever* take place on an app where it’s possible to just delete messages.

    aphrael (13a689)

  49. > You would think Republicans would have a higher standard.

    I would have thought that a decade ago. Now, though … there are no standards whatsoever that I can see, beyond “does Trump approve” and “will it piss woke libtards off”.

    aphrael (13a689)

  50. @47

    >because she wanted to prevent her communications to be FOIA’able

    use of time-disappearing signal messages is also preventing communications from being FOIA’able.

    this practice should be outright banned.

    aphrael (13a689) — 3/26/2025 @ 1:19 pm

    I agree.

    Because its not that great of a “secured” platform imo.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  51. At 2 p.m., Waltz responded: “Typing too fast. The first target – their top missile guy – we had positive ID of him walking into his girlfriend’s building and it’s now collapsed.”

    Too bad for the other folks in that building, eh? I don’t mind killing terrorists, but I think we should stay away from that line ourselves. No concern here for civilian casualties.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  52. aphrael (13a689) — 3/26/2025 @ 1:21 pm

    *no* conversation between government officials which involves discussion of anything government related should *ever* take place on an app where it’s possible to just delete messages.

    Written messages.

    For historical reasons, this does NOT apply to voice calls, and as a matter of fact it is totally against public policy to record messages. It is even illegal in DC to record calls without the knowledge of both parties to the call. (in Maryland it is illegal also but only if the person dong the recording was aware of the law.)

    Even conversations with foreign leaders are not recorded, (as we saw with the July 35, 2019 call between President Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky) but an automatic transcript made, which is corrected by people who listened in to the call.

    All this because Nixon taped everything, and Kennedy and Johnson some conversations before that.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  53. Are we conflating “classified” with “confidential” here?

    DO you think that releasing this information a couple hours before the attack might cause serious damage to the United States or it’s personnel? I do, and this is probably why CNN doesn’t go on the air in a lead-up to attacks.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  54. Mobile apps may contain malware or have vulnerabilities that can disclose CUI,

    In their testimony yesterday, several high level officials wouldn’t say whether they used personal or official government phones,

    The official phones were preloaded with Signal, and presumably have only ROM.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  55. Signal is absolutely susceptible to phishing attacks. And I cannot imagine how much phishing attacks high level administration faces on day-to-day basis.

    ANYTHING is subject to phishing attacks. All you can ever do is mitigate the risk. Messaging apps cannot have obstructive security or they won’t be used, so there is a limit to mitigation. The government methods more involve fixed locations and sessions, and hardware that is itself secured.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  56. use of time-disappearing signal messages is also preventing communications from being FOIA’able.

    this practice should be outright banned.

    aphrael (13a689) — 3/26/2025 @ 1:19 pm

    The practice is banned, but the ban was ignored.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  57. Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/26/2025 @ 1:47 pm

    DO you think that releasing this information a couple hours before the attack might cause serious damage to the United States or it’s personnel?

    No it won’t. Nobody reacts that fast to new information, and, in addition, in some cases, to get approval to pass it on.

    Even Hamas knows that, because it looks like some protest groups had some advance knowledge of the October 7 2023 attacks (Private lawyers are doing a better job of linking them to Hamas than the government is)

    https://nypost.com/2025/03/24/us-news/hamas-hostages-families-sue-mahmoud-khalil-anti-israel-groups-for-aiding-and-abetting-terror-group/

    https://nypost.com/2025/03/25/us-news/families-of-hamas-hostages-claim-anti-israel-protest-groups-like-columbias-students-for-justice-in-palestine-had-prior-knowledge-of-oct-7-attack-in-bombshell-suit

    The suit, filed Monday in Manhattan federal court by six relatives of captives of the terror group, cites a “highly suggestive” Instagram post from Columbia University’s SJP allegedly published “moments” before Hamas’ attack on Israel began.

    “Three minutes before Hamas began its attack on October 7, Columbia SJP posted on Instagram ‘We are back!!’ in an announcement about its first meeting of the semester, and urging viewers to ‘stay tuned,’” according to the suit.

    The filing notes that the group’s account had been “dormant for months” before the Oct. 6 posting, which was made a couple of weeks after the start of Columbia’s Fall 2023 semester.

    The plaintiffs accuse the group as being part of “Hamas’ American propaganda arm,” and the terrorists’ “US-based in-house public relations firm, which has changed forms several times to evade criminal and civil liability.”

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  58. Yeah, for willfully intending to break the law.

    And also for being dumb. Negligence is criminal here. Letting Goldberg into this chat was grossly negligent. People are felons for simply losing stuff. You really don’t want to read those non-disclosure forms — they have serious teeth.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  59. No it won’t. Nobody reacts that fast to new information, and, in addition, in some cases, to get approval to pass it on.

    Tell it to the judge.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  60. “I can attest to the fact that there were not classified or intelligence equities that were included in that chat group at any time.”

    Presumably because it was cleared for release to give a heads up to certain foreign countries (this fact, even though it is the usual practice, is apparently still classified mainly for diplomatic reasons) before the information was put on the Signal chat.

    It is almost a law of nature that information released to certain people cannot help the targets if it comes too close to the time the bombs drop. They’ve got that perfected almost to the pint of a science and Hamas also releases information to its friends in advance (so they can get started quickly)

    https://nypost.com/2025/03/25/us-news/families-of-hamas-hostages-claim-anti-israel-protest-groups-like-columbias-students-for-justice-in-palestine-had-prior-knowledge-of-oct-7-attack-in-bombshell-suit/

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  61. This will send Trump through roof:

    U.S. District Judge James Boasberg — the object of President Donald Trump’s fury for blocking his effort to summarily deport Venezuelan nationals using wartime powers — just got a second crack at the administration’s handling of national security: Signalgate.

    Boasberg on Wednesday morning was assigned to preside over a lawsuit alleging that Trump cabinet secretaries and national security aides violated federal recordkeeping laws when they used a Signal chat group to discuss a planned military strike in Yemen — and inadvertently included an Atlantic journalist in the group.
    ……….
    A spokesperson for Boasberg confirmed that the case was assigned to him through the court’s typical random assignment process. There are 20 judges on the federal district court bench in Washington.
    ……….
    Marco Rubio is a defendant in the Signalgate lawsuit brought by American Oversight, a left-leaning government watchdog group. He is being sued not only for his involvement in the text exchange but also for his dual position as acting head of the National Archives, which is responsible for preserving records used by government officials in the course of their work. The Atlantic reported that Waltz set the text thread to automatically delete.
    ………

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  62. Like I said:

    Foreign partners had already been notified that strikes were imminent.

    According to the chat, Donald Trump had for some time given himself a 24-hour window to act, which you could call T minus 24 hours and holding

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  63. Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 3/26/2025 @ 1:58 pm

    These types of lawsuits haven’t succeeded at all. The plaintiffs need to prove a nexus which isn’t there.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  64. *no* conversation between government officials which involves discussion of anything government related should *ever* take place on an app where it’s possible to just delete messages.

    Spoken like a lawyer, not a security professional. Recording stuff like this is mostly useless, except to people who want to second-guess everything and assign blame and don’t much are what a hassle it is for everyone else.

    But every recording poses a security problem, so the recording has to be secured and logged, and the log secured and logged and the transcript secured and logged and people assigned to guard the secured repository. Etc.

    Something that failed completely as the stored security clearance applications were left wide open to Chinese hackers, because the boss decided not to encrypt. Do you suppose that people could be compromised by their truthful sexual or drug history in the hands of the Chinese MSS?

    Nobody was fired there, too. On Obama’s watch.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  65. Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/26/2025 @ 2:04 pm

    Tell it to the judge.

    Legal and practical considerations are two different things. We should worry about practical, not legal,

    Nobody in the Chat group, in almost any conceivable chat group, was on speed dial to the Houthi commanders.

    The United States reveals some operational details of attacks a short time in advance to unsecure (or unvetted) sources almost all the time

    Now the raid in 2011 on the house where Osama bin Kaden was staying was an exception. The government of Pakistan was not notified. (But John McCain would have done that.)

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  66. * Something that failed completely at OPM, as the stored security clearance applications were left wide open to Chinese hackers …

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  67. Nobody in the Chat group, in almost any conceivable chat group, was on speed dial to the Houthi commanders.

    Except for the one rando, who could have been anyone.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  68. People are serving long prison terms for leaking classified information to unauthorized persons. Being forced to resign would be gift to Waltz and Hegseth. He can always go back to Fox News.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/26/2025 @ 9:19 am

    Yeah, for willfully intending to break the law.
    …….
    whembly (2c5586) — 3/26/2025 @ 9:22 am

    “Willfully” is not the only legal standard; one can be convicted of “negligently” handling classified information. See 18 U.S. Code § 793 – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information:

    (f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—

    Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

    My emphasis.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  69. violated federal recordkeeping laws when they used a Signal chat group to discuss a planned military strike in Yemen

    The least important aspect of this, by an order of magnitude. When will the legal profession realize they are not the most important people in the room?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  70. Nobody in the Chat group, in almost any conceivable chat group, was on speed dial to the Houthi commanders.
    …….
    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 3/26/2025 @ 2:14 pm

    There was at least one person who was part of the chat that was unknown to everyone.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  71. Rip is right. No one who holds a security clearance is unaware of that, either. They may have to sign a copy of several such laws.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  72. Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/26/2025 @ 2:09 pm

    The plaintiffs need to prove a nexus which isn’t there.

    The problem is that the plaintiffs need to prove a nexus which is almost certainly there.

    The protesters could not have reacted as fast as they did if someone didn’t have advance knowledge.

    The lawyers are relying on discovery, and possibly, future help from the United States government.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  73. When will the legal profession realize they are not the most important people in the room?

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/26/2025 @ 2:18 pm

    When Congresses stop passing laws and Presidents stop signing them. Until the laws are changed, they need to be enforced.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  74. Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/26/2025 @ 2:20 pm

    There was at least one person who was part of the chat that was unknown to everyone.

    But he still was a more or less loyal American citizen and also wary of violating the law.

    He was first added to Michael Waltz list of contacts by somebody else. He was identified as someone else, but the telephone number used was that Jeffrey Goldberg, not (probably) United States Trade Representative Jamieson Greer.

    This was probably done by somebody on the NSA staff to facilitate undetected leaking to the Atlantic.

    Two days later Michael Waltz created his chat group, If “JG” was actually Jamieson Greer with Jeffrey Goldberg’s phone number the leaker or would be leaker got caught by surprise.

    Maybe this is related – it does seem to indicate there is leaking to the Atlantic

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/03/trump-ukraine-russia-war/681993

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/03/buzz-saw-pine-forest/681984/

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  75. whembly (2c5586) — 3/26/2025 @ 9:22 am

    If it was classified, why did Goldberg release it then?

    Because the Administration said it was not, and because, more than a week after the attack, it was of little value to the enemy.

    Although it could conceivably help someone “walk back the cat.”

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  76. Appalled (a50afd) — 3/26/2025 @ 10:28 am

    As for Waltz — he should go too. Everyone makes stupid mistakes. But he’s the National Security Advisor — and he’s not really allowed to make a mistake like this.

    That would only help the dishonest leaker who added Jeffrey Goldberg’s number to the app. What policy to follow is more important

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  77. But (Jeffrey Goldberg) still was a more or less loyal American citizen and also wary of violating the law.

    Why is he a “more or less” loyal American citizen?

    He was first added to Michael Waltz list of contacts by somebody else. …..This was probably done by somebody on the NSA staff to facilitate undetected leaking to the Atlantic.

    Assumes facts not in evidence.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  78. That would only help the dishonest leaker who added Jeffrey Goldberg’s number to the app. ……

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 3/26/2025 @ 2:44 pm

    Again, pure speculation. Waltz has admitted he created the group chat.

    “A staffer wasn’t responsible,” Waltz said in an interview with Laura Ingraham on FOX News’ “The Ingraham Angle.”

    “I take full responsibility. I built the group … my job is to make sure everything’s coordinated.”

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  79. Kevin, I agree other aspects are more important, but deliberately avoiding record keeping requirements is terrible. The people have a right to know what our government is doing, and government officials who are deliberately hiding it from us should be presumed to be acting out of ill ibtent

    aphrael (ad556e)

  80. That would only help the dishonest leaker who added Jeffrey Goldberg’s number to the app. ……

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 3/26/2025 @ 2:44 pm

    Should they also be looking for who stole the strawberries?

    Rip Murdock (f259db)

  81. deliberately avoiding record keeping requirements is terrible.

    For financial and hiring decisions, sure. But for military engagements it’s not always appropriate. And even for hiring, there are risks that you create, like letting the Chinese look at everyone’s admitted secrets in those OPM files. The intent of those questions is to avoid the black-mail prone and yet their handling was such that it laid people bare to exactly that.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  82. The people have a right to know what our government is doing

    In general, sure. In specifics? Do you think that FDR wanted every order he gave to be in the public record? There were sometimes a choice of really bad options where no one in the room would look particularly good. Like discussing whether to bomb Auschwitz.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  83. That would only help the dishonest leaker who added Jeffrey Goldberg’s number to the app. ……

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 3/26/2025 @ 2:44 pm

    Occam’s Razor: Waltz had Goldberg’s phone number on his phone; but if he admitted it, he would be shoved out door by MAGA true believers.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  84. Do you think that FDR wanted every order he gave to be in the public record? There were sometimes a choice of really bad options where no one in the room would look particularly good. Like discussing whether to bomb Auschwitz.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/26/2025 @ 3:07 pm

    It’s a good thing he’s been dead for 80 years.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  85. Do you think that FDR wanted every order he gave to be in the public record? There were sometimes a choice of really bad options where no one in the room would look particularly good. Like discussing whether to bomb Auschwitz.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/26/2025 @ 3:07 pm

    Being a public record doesn’t mean it is immediately available. Many “public” records take years, if not decades, to be released in the public domain.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  86. It’s your standard M.O. when Trump is guilty of something. Deflect and blame. How about we left politicians take the consequences of their bad decisions. I think if we did, across the board, it would reinforce to them that they can no longer get away with the things they have in the past. And that would be good for all voters.

    Dana (91ddac) — 3/26/2025 @ 11:15 am

    What is Trump guilty of Dana? You’re so focused on attacking him that you cannot accept he wasn’t party to the action in question.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  87. How about we left politicians take the consequences of their bad decisions. I think if we did, across the board

    But it never seems to work that way. The MSM, for example, has an express lane for getting dirt on the Right to the front page. They even cut corners at times, or dump their raw data for the crowd to source. It’s not just Rob that sees this.

    But things that hurt the Left? Careful investigation required. Like Biden’s health and awareness, or Hunter’s behavior. Still waiting on the Khalidi tape.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  88. “What is Trump guilty of Dana?”

    – NJ Rob

    Selecting unqualified morons to run the most sensitive and dangerous branches of American government, for a start.

    But you know that, however deep down your loyalties require you to bury it.

    Leviticus (295458)

  89. Mike walz: I have never met that loser and bum jeffrey goldberg! Oh! You have picture taken of goldberg and me at the french embassy? Never mind.

    asset (1690ef)

  90. Selecting unqualified morons to run the most sensitive and dangerous branches of American government, for a start.

    Good thing they have it out of their system, and they won’t do anything like this again!

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  91. Besides, it’s not easy for Trump either. He can only pick people who reject everything we’ve learned since 1933.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  92. I try to pretend to be angry with trump and his crazys ;but its so hard when I see the destruction he has wrought. In the first test a democrat has won a state senate seat in PA. in a heavily republican district that voted for trump by 16% More elections to follow soon!

    asset (1690ef)

  93. Burned:

    Israel provided sensitive intelligence from a human source in Yemen on a key Houthi military operative targeted in an attack described by national security adviser Mike Waltz in a Signal chat with senior Trump officials, two U.S. officials said.

    Shortly after the U.S. strikes began, Waltz texted that a key target of the attacks, a Houthi missile expert, had been seen entering his girlfriend’s building, which he said had been destroyed.

    Israeli officials complained privately to U.S. officials that Waltz’s texts became public, one U.S. official said.

    Israel’s role in supplying information that helped track the militant highlights the sensitivity of some disclosures in the texts and raises questions about the Trump administration’s contention that no classified information was shared on the Signal chat, a publicly available nongovernmental app.
    ……….
    Asked whether Israel had provided intelligence for the strike described by Waltz, National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes said, “No classified information was included in the thread.”
    ……….

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  94. Israel provided sensitive intelligence from a human source in Yemen on a key Houthi military operative targeted in an attack described by national security adviser Mike Waltz in a Signal chat with senior Trump officials, two U.S. officials said.

    Who mentioned anything about Israel being the source of that intelligence? Or even if it was good? Or human, rather than electronic? Or primarily in Yemen?

    Till this WSJ article, it was assumed it was drones that spotted him. Now it looks like it was only confirmed by drones. Who leaked this complaint?

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  95. Like discussing whether to bomb Auschwitz.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/26/2025 @ 3:07 pm

    No discussion has survived. It is kind of mystery except that false reasons were given.

    Most likely, FDR was intimidated by Stalin’s and the Communists he controlled, constant calls for a “Second Front” and made a decision not to do anything militarily that didn’t directly help the war effort

    And it wouldn’t have been Auschwitz that needed to be bombed. by the train tracks leading to it. In 1944 Adolf Eichmann thought that would happen.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  96. asset (1690ef) — 3/26/2025 @ 8:34 pm

    Mike walz: I have never met that loser and bum jeffrey goldberg! Oh! You have picture taken of goldberg and me at the french embassy? Never mind.

    Four years ago.

    https://nypost.com/2025/03/26/opinion/miranda-devine-mike-waltzs-signal-gate-blunder-is-a-hard-lesson-to-be-learned-for-trumps-winning-team

    He claimed Tuesday he has “never met, don’t know, never communicated with” the Atlantic editor-in-chief.

    Of course, swampy Washington quickly unearthed a photo of Waltz standing right in front of Goldberg in the French Embassy in 2021 at an event for French philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy that was billed as a “conversation” between Goldberg and Lévy.

    Waltz probably meets a lot of swamp-dwellers, since wife Julia Nesheiwat is a distinguished fellow at the Atlantic Council, and he has told Trump it was “one of his people” who added Goldberg to the Signal chat group.

    One of the screenshots Goldberg published in The Atlantic shows it was Waltz’s Signal account — tagged as “Admin” that sent him a Signal invite on March 11, and then added him to the “Houthi PC small group” on March 13.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  97. Lower ranking people wind up getting paralyzed by the security rules they have to adhere to: (and the supposedly super secure government systems have a history of being penetrated)

    https://www.wsj.com/opinion/signal-and-the-future-of-national-security-communications-safety-technology-18ca4d5b

    …But behind the uproar lies a deeper problem with how U.S. national-security officials communicate.

    Unlike many during the pandemic, America’s spies couldn’t telework. This should have been a warning to the intelligence community to find new ways of doing business. But that community and the rest of the national-security establishment remained physically trapped due to their need for specially designed buildings or rooms to protect the country’s secrets. As the Signal messenger chat has demonstrated, it isn’t about the space—it’s about the system.

    While Signal may not be as secure as government communications systems or protocols, the messenger is a change from the outdated, impractical and widely ridiculed systems in place. Despite the government’s best efforts, Russian hackers have managed to compromise some of its most secure departments and agencies. Chinese intelligence was able to co-opt National Security Agency hacking tools and then turn them against U.S. allies and private companies. The Defense Department’s communication woes also extend to information sharing with allies and partners, according to a report from the Defense Innovation Board, which found lower-level personnel “are paralyzed by fear of non-compliance and security violations.”

    Because of valid yet obstructive security concerns, the government can’t keep up with the pace of technological change in the private sector. U.S. Special Forces veteran Tom Katis developed Voxer, a walkie-talkie app, after military communications systems failed him during an ambush in Afghanistan. The Army is now approving the use of personal devices to conduct official business.

    This is where the future of national-security communication is headed. Smartphones are changing how wars are planned and executed. Policymakers must constantly process information and make decisions outside of government buildings or classified intelligence briefings. Officials are always reachable, stretching their schedules (and likely their patience). They may not want to have to travel back to the office on nights or weekends or wait for their staff to set up secure video teleconferencing.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  98. Steve Witkoff did not carry his personal mobile phone, (which is where he had Signal installed) into Russia but instead used a government su[plied “burner” phone for emergency use, and did not read the Signal chat until he left Russia. This was told by him to the Wall Street Journal and maybe others:

    https://www.wsj.com/opinion/steve-witkoff-russia-signal-chat-houthis-pete-hegseth-eb444e61

    …Steve Witkoff, President Trump’s special envoy to the world’s bad actors, beat us up on Wednesday for noting in an editorial that he was in Moscow amid the now infamous group chat about the Houthis. We wrote about press reports that he was receiving the Houthi chat messages on Signal while in Moscow. We suggested this was a security risk given his central role in negotiations over the future of Ukraine.

    Mr. Witkoff said on X.com he was “incredulous” because he didn’t have his personal phone with him in Moscow, and that’s the phone that has the Signal app. In an interview on Wednesday afternoon, Mr. Witkoff told us that on his trips to Russia he uses a government-issued burner phone that doesn’t have the commercial app. He also explained in great detail the security protocols he follows when traveling to Russia, including faraday bags. “No one in their right mind would go into Russia without secured burner phones,” he said.

    We’re happy to hear Mr. Witkoff’s explanation, which means we were off the mark in suggesting he might have posed a security risk in Russia. But we’re less reassured by his admission that the Houthi chat messages were still being sent on Signal to his personal phone, given that it might still travel with him on diplomatic missions outside of Russia. It isn’t Mr. Witkoff’s fault he was on the chat, and his contribution appears to have been emojis…

    The WSJ asks thugh why he needed to be included in the first place. Well, it was unknown what would be communicated.

    https://nypost.com/2025/03/26/opinion/miranda-devine-mike-waltzs-signal-gate-blunder-is-a-hard-lesson-to-be-learned-for-trumps-winning-team

    Steve Witkoff: Trump’s Middle East envoy did not participate in the group chat while he was in Russia, as has been claimed.

    “I only had with me a secure phone provided by the government for special circumstances when you travel to regions where you do not want your devices compromised,” Witkoff said in response to charges that he had allowed his phone to be compromised.

    He only read the Signal chat when he returned to the US…

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  99. @94 what about the under cover CIA agent named in the chat?

    asset (60f62d)

  100. Jeffrey Goldberg called up the CIA (and others mentined in the Signal chat) and was told he was not undercover (but the CIA did not want his name to become more widely known as being in the CIA incase they wanted him to go undercover abroad in the future) and this is only redaction Jeffrey Goldberg made (his name, which was the only thing exted at that point by John Ratcliffe.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  101. Selecting unqualified morons to run the most sensitive and dangerous branches of American government, for a start.

    But you know that, however deep down your loyalties require you to bury it.

    Leviticus (295458) — 3/26/2025 @ 6:17 pm

    Nonsense.

    But you know I’m right that’s why you are moving the goalposts.

    The hate is strong with you.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  102. NJRob, can you identify anything Trump or his team have done well wrt this mess?

    Time (40a46b)

  103. @94 what about the under cover CIA agent named in the chat?

    asset (60f62d) — 3/27/2025 @ 2:57 pm

    Goldberg did not name the CIA officer in the chat, even though DCI Ratcliffe said at the House Intelligence Committee hearing that he was not an undercover officer.

    “John Ratcliffe” wrote at 5:24 p.m. with the name of a CIA official to be included in the group. I am not publishing that name, because that person is an active intelligence officer.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

Leave a Reply


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1048 secs.