Trump Admin - Leak or OpSec
- Thread starter GURPS
- Start date
I keep thinking of William Wallace (Braveheart) and Dan Bongino...
Hoooold... hoooold....
Hoooold... hoooold....
Beware reply-all. The Wall Street Journal ran the latest and greatest mis-texting story under the headline, “Top Trump Officials Debated War Plans on Unclassified Chat Shared With Journalist.” But The Hill most captured the media’s tremulous excitement, breathlessly running dozens of articles on the story; its entire homepage was one “war chats” headline after another. Apparently it is the most important story in the world. Finally! A scandal they can use to sink the Trump Administration!
With that kind of wall-to-wall coverage, you would think something dangerous, damaging, or at least saucy was accidentally disclosed. So far though— nope. All of the Hill’s dozen over-excited stories have the same scraps of information.
On March 11th, the Atlantic’s executive editor, Jeffrey Goldberg, was ‘accidentally’ added to a group Signal chat including most of Trump’s national security cabinet and Vice President Vance (but not President Trump). Golberg’s invitation to join —which the media immediately assumed was a mistake— apparently came from Mike Walz, Trump’s national security advisor.
Goldberg, of course, accepted the unsolicited invitation. He never announced his presence. He didn’t exit the chat after realizing he’d walked into the wrong digital dressing room. Instead, he became a peeper. He quietly huddled under some discarded Cats costumes in the corner, proving he is an unethical hyena instead of leaving any scrap of doubt.
Peeping-Goldberg claimed to have read real-time operational details of last week’s strike on the Houthis. Goldberg insisted he refrained from reporting the military details out of his praiseworthy concerns over US troops. But his restraint was probably also motivated by concerns over his own pimply backside, since if he had leaked them, Goldberg would have been arrested before he could finish saying, “Elon Musk is a Naz…”
Nor did Goldberg’s high principles extend to other parts of the group’s private discussion that Goldberg deemed unclassified. Yesterday, the Atlantic’s top editor reported that JD Vance, in particular, said he was disgusted the US was even bothering to attack the Houthis, since most of the trade affected by Houthi mad-missiles and dynamite-laden drone ships is European trade. Let the free-loading Europeans fight the Houthis themselves, was JD’s rather pointedly delivered theme.
“I just hate bailing Europe out again,” Vance complained at one point. SecDef Pete Hegseth agreed with JD’s sentiment and went further, calling the Europeans “PATHETIC” (in all caps). “If the US successfully restores freedom of navigation at great cost, there needs to be some further economic gain extracted in return,” unidentified user SM chimed in.
In other words, make the Europeans pay for it somehow.
Like clockwork, corporate media and Democrats descended into sheer hysteria, attempting to seize the classified breach and use it as a political drone to take down the entire Trump national security team. In his story in the Atlantic, Goldberg opined that, from his elite perspective, using Signal to discuss military strikes “may have violated several provisions of the Espionage Act, which governs the handling of national defense information.” He forgot how much Biden’s team used Signal. Furious Senator Elizabeth “Firewater” Warren (D-Mass.) called it “blatantly illegal and dangerous beyond belief.” She sneered, “Our national security is in the hands of complete amateurs.”
And so on, ad infinitum. They’re madder than Houthi militants.
https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/states-and-secrets-tuesday-march
With that kind of wall-to-wall coverage, you would think something dangerous, damaging, or at least saucy was accidentally disclosed. So far though— nope. All of the Hill’s dozen over-excited stories have the same scraps of information.
On March 11th, the Atlantic’s executive editor, Jeffrey Goldberg, was ‘accidentally’ added to a group Signal chat including most of Trump’s national security cabinet and Vice President Vance (but not President Trump). Golberg’s invitation to join —which the media immediately assumed was a mistake— apparently came from Mike Walz, Trump’s national security advisor.
Goldberg, of course, accepted the unsolicited invitation. He never announced his presence. He didn’t exit the chat after realizing he’d walked into the wrong digital dressing room. Instead, he became a peeper. He quietly huddled under some discarded Cats costumes in the corner, proving he is an unethical hyena instead of leaving any scrap of doubt.
Peeping-Goldberg claimed to have read real-time operational details of last week’s strike on the Houthis. Goldberg insisted he refrained from reporting the military details out of his praiseworthy concerns over US troops. But his restraint was probably also motivated by concerns over his own pimply backside, since if he had leaked them, Goldberg would have been arrested before he could finish saying, “Elon Musk is a Naz…”
Nor did Goldberg’s high principles extend to other parts of the group’s private discussion that Goldberg deemed unclassified. Yesterday, the Atlantic’s top editor reported that JD Vance, in particular, said he was disgusted the US was even bothering to attack the Houthis, since most of the trade affected by Houthi mad-missiles and dynamite-laden drone ships is European trade. Let the free-loading Europeans fight the Houthis themselves, was JD’s rather pointedly delivered theme.
“I just hate bailing Europe out again,” Vance complained at one point. SecDef Pete Hegseth agreed with JD’s sentiment and went further, calling the Europeans “PATHETIC” (in all caps). “If the US successfully restores freedom of navigation at great cost, there needs to be some further economic gain extracted in return,” unidentified user SM chimed in.
In other words, make the Europeans pay for it somehow.
Like clockwork, corporate media and Democrats descended into sheer hysteria, attempting to seize the classified breach and use it as a political drone to take down the entire Trump national security team. In his story in the Atlantic, Goldberg opined that, from his elite perspective, using Signal to discuss military strikes “may have violated several provisions of the Espionage Act, which governs the handling of national defense information.” He forgot how much Biden’s team used Signal. Furious Senator Elizabeth “Firewater” Warren (D-Mass.) called it “blatantly illegal and dangerous beyond belief.” She sneered, “Our national security is in the hands of complete amateurs.”
And so on, ad infinitum. They’re madder than Houthi militants.
https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/states-and-secrets-tuesday-march
OK, so no actual war planning.
Just interoffice execs bitching about Europeans.
Never were any war plans ... and yeah bitching about Europe
the ignored scandal Signal was already on Computers and Phones ... but I have to as, why were the phone FACTORY RESET after backing up before re-issuesncer ... hell we did this at my last job
National Security Advisor Mike Waltz Invited Leftist Journ-o-Lister Jeff Goldberg to Group Chat on Signal Discussing Houthi Attacks - The Last Refuge
According to Jeffrey Goldberg from The Atlantic [SEE HERE], National Security Advisor Mike Waltz invited him to a group chat on the Signal app, where various Trump administration officials and cabinet members were discussing how to address the Houthi rebels in Yemen in advance of military...
theconservativetreehouse.com
These geopolitical considerations show up in the story as JD Vance engaged in the text message discussion, as shared by Breitbart News:
The 18 members of the group chat included Waltz, Vice President JD Vance, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, United States Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff, White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, someone believed to be Homeland Security Advisor and White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller, and others.
The group chat was called “Houthi PC small group,” with PC meaning “Principals Committee” — a reference to the group of top decision-makers from each agency during National Security Council meetings.
Waltz reportedly sent the following message on March 13:
Team — establishing a principles [sic] group for coordination on Houthis, particularly for over the next 72 hours. My deputy Alex Wong is pulling together a tiger team at deputies/agency Chief of Staff level following up from the meeting in the Sit Room this morning for action items and will be sending that out later this evening.
Pls provide the best staff POC from your team for us to coordinate with over the next couple days and over the weekend. Thx.
Members of the group chat then sent names for points of contact for them on the strikes.
The next day, Waltz told the group they should have received messages in their classified computer and communications systems regarding taskings.
The text conversation then begins a dive into the geopolitical considerations behind any operation with a myriad of issues to be considered. Vice-President JD Vance overlays the strategic geopolitical dynamic:
Vance said regarding the strikes, “I think we are making a mistake,” adding, “3 percent of US trade runs through the Suez. 40 percent of European trade does. There is a real risk that the public doesn’t understand this or why it’s necessary. The strongest reason to do this is, as POTUS said, to send a message.”
“I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now. There’s a further risk that we see a moderate to severe spike in oil prices. I am willing to support the consensus of the team and keep these concerns to myself. But there is a strong argument for delaying this a month, doing the messaging work on why this matters, seeing where the economy is, etc.,” he argued.
The back and forth between Defense Secretary Hegseth, National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, Vice-President JD Vance and Assistant Chief of Staff to POTUS, Stephen Miller, is then included:
Hegseth reportedly wrote, “VP: I understand your concerns — and fully support you raising w/ POTUS. Important considerations, most of which are tough to know how they play out (economy, Ukraine peace, Gaza, etc). I think messaging is going to be tough no matter what — nobody knows who the Houthis are — which is why we would need to stay focused on: 1) Biden failed & 2) Iran funded.”
He reportedly added, “Waiting a few weeks or a month does not fundamentally change the calculus. 2 immediate risks on waiting: 1) this leaks, and we look indecisive; 2) Israel takes an action first — or Gaza cease fire falls apart — and we don’t get to start this on our own terms. We can manage both. We are prepared to execute, and if I had final go or no go vote, I believe we should. This [is] not about the Houthis. I see it as two things: 1) Restoring Freedom of Navigation, a core national interest; and 2) Reestablish deterrence, which Biden cratered. But, we can easily pause. And if we do, I will do all we can to enforce 100% OPSEC—operations security. I welcome other thoughts.”
Waltz then reportedly posted a “lengthy note” about trade figures, and the limited capabilities of European navies.
“Whether it’s now or several weeks from now, it will have to be the United States that reopens these shipping lanes. Per the president’s request we are working with DOD and State to determine how to compile the cost associated and levy them on the Europeans,” Waltz said.
Vance then reportedly wrote to Hegseth, “if you think we should do it let’s go. I just hate bailing Europe out again.”
Hegseth responded: “VP: I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It’s PATHETIC. But Mike is correct, we are the only ones on the planet (on our side of the ledger) who can do this. Nobody else even close. Question is timing. I feel like now is as good a time as any, given POTUS directive to reopen shipping lanes. I think we should go; but POTUS still retains 24 hours of decision space.”
The person identified as potentially [Stephen] Miller wrote, “As I heard it, the president was clear: green light, but we soon make clear to Egypt and Europe what we expect in return. We also need to figure out how to enforce such a requirement. EG, if Europe doesn’t remunerate, then what? If the US successfully restores freedom of navigation at great cost there needs to be some further economic gain extracted in return.”
Hegseth reportedly responded, “Agree.” (Sourcing)
Anyone who follows the intersection of U.S. policy and geopolitical analysis would be fascinated, but this type of discussion doesn’t come as any big surprise. Indeed, the conversation is quite factually correct and the type of prudent background one would expect to see in any decision-making conversation of strategic importance.
In essence, every fly on the wall would be supportive of the tone, angles and prudent ‘American Interest’ considerations within the conversation. This overview is, quite simply, what we would expect to see. There is no negative here outside the fact the security of the conversation was seemingly compromised by Waltz, or someone on his behalf, inviting a journalist to watch it.
No that is an excuse leftists are using ....
Leaks on Signal Worse then Hillaries Email Server