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.
I'm not saying anything novel here but it really is just truly despicable to watch them use THEIR OWN COLOSSAL SCREW UP to slander the reporter THEY INCLUDED ON THEIR CLASSIFIED GROUP CHAT
-- Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes.bsky.social) March 25, 2025 at 7:12 PM
[image or embed]
When you've lost the National Review:
This episode is a product of this administration's flippancy. Its casual unseriousness is what produced a text message in the first place. So, too, did that outlook license the way in which the administration's principles disclosed its internal disputes, which are of inestimable value to our enemies, to say nothing of our capabilities. That same unseriousness produced this unsatisfying cleanup operation, which fails to marshal a persuasive argument and relies instead on the assumed partisanship of the intended audience. We have seen this sort of thing a lot from Republicans in the second Trump era. . . .www.nationalreview.com
Maybe it's better that Trump 2.0 has dispensed with Biden's mock solemnity even if it has retained his insouciance. Still, the degree to which this administration seems comfortable discussing matters both grave and trivial as online gamers would in a Discord forum is as puerile as it is reckless.
The work of government is serious business. The American public deserves serious people at the helm. So far, and for elusive reasons, this presidency seems to believe that voters will disregard its mistakes if its officials act as though anyone who notices and objects to them are picayune obsessives and cranks. This strategy, such as it is, is not working.
Testimony raises questions about Pete Hegseth's handling of secrets and sensitive communications
www.nbcnews.com
...Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., a retired Air Force general, scoffed at Hegseth's assertion that no war plans had been shared on the text chain.
"That's baloney,' Bacon told reporters. "Just be honest and own up to it." ...
Nine years ago, Hegseth, speaking on Fox News on Election Day in 2016, harshly criticized Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server.
"Any security professional, military, government, or otherwise, would be fired on the spot for this type of conduct and criminally prosecuted for being so reckless with this kind of information," he said. ...
Houthi group chat: What top Trump officials claimed vs. what the texts show
www.axios.com
... "No classified info"
Gabbard under oath to the Senate Intelligence Committee: "I can attest to the fact that there were not classified or intelligence equities that were included in that chat group at any time."
- - - Ratcliffe concurred, though both officials later deferred to Hegseth as the ultimate authority for classifying and declassifying Defense Department materials.
The texts include highly detailed information about the sequencing of an attack that had yet to take place.
- - - Under intelligence community guidelines, information "providing indication or advance warning that the U.S. or its allies are preparing an attack" should be treated as "Top Secret."
State of play: The president and senior officials like the secretary of defense have considerable discretion over what information is classified, and whether to declassify it after the fact.
- - - But Gabbard and Ratcliffe declined to offer any explanation in the hearing as to why this information would not have been considered classified at the time it was inadvertently shared with Goldberg. ...
Source:
www.reddit.com
The Signal controversy reveals a deeper structural failure in American governance"one where critical national decisions are increasingly being made through emotional urgency rather than long-term strategy. Instead of relying on formal institutional channels that emphasize oversight, accountability, and deliberative planning, key actors are using encrypted group chats to coordinate actions like military strikes and geopolitical maneuvers. This shift reflects not just a communication breach, but a breakdown in trust within the system itself. When senior officials feel the need to bypass established processes, it signals that they prioritize speed, optics, and internal loyalty over legal procedure or strategic modeling.
This emotionally driven decision-making loop leads to instability on multiple fronts. Public trust erodes when actions appear impulsive or tribal, rather than rational and transparent. Foreign nations struggle to interpret U.S. policy when decisions are made in secret, informal forums with unclear lines of authority. As a result, global actors are left guessing who is truly in control"and whether decisions represent the state, a faction, or a momentary mood.
The most dangerous consequence is that strategy becomes reactive and performative. Decisions are no longer about shaping the future, but about sending messages, managing perception, or reinforcing in-group consensus. Governance becomes a feedback loop of emotional impulses disguised as policy. If left unchecked, this trend will accelerate the collapse of institutional legitimacy and deepen the fragmentation of global order.
Drudge Retort Headlines
Canadian Tourists Have Stopped Visiting U.S. (87 comments)
DOGE Stimulus Checks to Get Big Boost from Social Security Cuts (82 comments)
Hillary: How Much Dumber Will This Get? (45 comments)
Hegseth Texted Plan Time of Killing of Yemeni 'Terrorist' (44 comments)
Trump's Executive Order on Smithsonian Targets 'Improper Ideology' (21 comments)
Fallout Coming for Trump's Rug Pull on Stefanik (19 comments)
Signalgate: There's an IT Lesson Here (16 comments)
Russian HMS Researcher Detained (16 comments)
U.S. Officials Went Door-to-Door in Greenland (16 comments)
7.7 Earthquake Hits Myanmar (15 comments)