Republicans Grow Weary of Trump Team's Signal Chat Denials

... A guide from the national intelligence director's office says "information providing indication or warning that the U.S. or its allies are preparing an attack" should be top secret. ...

"I don't think there is any question that we are dealing with classified information," Leon Panetta, a former CIA director and defense secretary, told MSNBC on Tuesday.

Plans for possible military operations are kept strictly secret because the Defense Department "recognizes that if that information were to leak to an adversary, that it would not only cost lives but would damage our national security," Panetta said. ...

The three other officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity citing fears of retaliation, said it would be difficult to imagine a scenario in which details of a planned military operation would not be considered classified.

Sharing sensitive information in advance of an operation could put pilots flying fighter jets or the crews of warships launching missiles at risk or even imperil the mission itself, former officials said.

According to a Pentagon manual on classification, significant military plans or intelligence matters are defined as "secret" and their disclosure could cause "serious damage to operations, assets or individuals." ...

Walgreens has better security for Gillette razors than ----- Pete has for his war plans.

Republicans made their bed, now they get to have Trump Dutch Oven them for the remainder of America's life.

...it was the refusal by Trump or other top officials on the chat to admit they'd done anything wrong

Exactly. Had they been like Rick Perry and just said "Oops!", it would have been over days ago.

Stacking obvious lies on top of obvious incompetence is not a good look. You expect it from the press bimbo since that's her job, but the rest of them?

... Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) said Wednesday he believes the information detailing the attack plan against the Houthis in Yemen should have been classified.

Wicker told reporters that the plans Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth laid out via a Signal chat, which included when fighter jets would take off and drone strikes would drop over the region, were sensitive enough to warrant that level of classification.

"The information as published recently appears to me to be of such a sensitive nature that, based on my knowledge, I would have wanted it classified," Wicker said at the Capitol. ...

Is Susan Collins concerned yet?

It looks like Pres Trump is looking for someone to throw under the bus to try to make this go away.

From a couple days ago...

www.cbsnews.com

... Mr. Trump told reporters at the White House that the information that was discussed on the 18-member group chat, which included high-ranking officials like Vice President JD Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, was not classified and said Waltz is a "very good man" who will "continue to do a good job."

"I don't think he should apologize. I think he's doing his best," the president said of Waltz. "It's equipment and technology that's not perfect and probably he won't be using it again, at least not in the very near future." ...

And more recently...

Trump changes his tune on Signalgate: I always thought it was Mike'
www.politico.com

... President Donald Trump tentatively blamed national security adviser Mike Waltz for the Signal leak scandal -- while continuing to vigorously defend Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth -- during a Wednesday evening executive order signing.

"Mike Waltz, I guess he said, he claimed responsibility," Trump said.

"I would imagine it had nothing to do with anyone else. It was Mike, I guess I don't know. I always thought it was Mike." ...

"Mike Waltz, I guess he said, he claimed responsibility," Trump said.

Mike Waltz is not responsible for anyone other than Mike Waltz.

Everyone else in the Signal chat needs to be prosecuted for their deliberate choice to conduct official government business illegally.

"Republicans still taking victory laps for Trump team's Signal chat win that owned the libs"

Is a more accurate headline for DR Republicans.

Headline fail. Should read:

"GOPers Becoming More and More Concerned for Their Jobs Thanks to Idiots They Confirmed."

There, fixed...

Is Susan Collins concerned yet?

#7 | Posted by qcp

When she reaches Level 4 of her Susan Collins threat advisory system LOL

The real question Trump & Co need to answer is "why they're using a commercial app instead of secure U.S. government systems?"

So they aren't officially recorded as they're supposed to be rather than deleted after a short period of time on Signal.

That's why.

Every one of the folks on that chat had a pro-active responsibility to say "WTF are we doing outside a skiff?!?"

Instead, they all violated the Espionage Act.

And they had one participant IN RUSSIA, ffs.

And then some guy named JG.

"We are currently clean on OPSEC"

Not sure who was laughing harder: Jeffrey, or Vlad?

#12: midwestoutreach.org

@#13 ... So they aren't officially recorded as they're supposed to be rather than deleted after a short period of time on Signal. ...

Which then begs the question....

What other occurrences has a breach of security like SignalGate occurred?

In my view (with a nod to #14), the cavalier attitude of the participants about using an insecure app for discussing such sensitive material indicates to me that they likely were accustomed to doing such things.

Republicans Grow Weary of Trump Team's Signal Chat Denials

Yet, if there was an election tomorrow, they'd all vote for Trump.

Democrats need to stop waiting for republicans to wake up to how awful Trump is and start figuring out what they can do to get Americans to vote for them.

Newsflash, being "Republican lite" isn't the solution.

Well...except for the republican idiots who post on this site...

"I would have wanted it classified" or "should have been classified" DOES NOT EQUAL "IS CLASSIFIED". You ------- liberals need to insert fake news into this story to even make it a story. Take away the 'classified info', because there was none, and what exactly is the story? That they insulted Europe by telling the truth?

I guess this is marginally better than the 'price of eggs' talking points that blew up in the Dems' faces....but, not by much.

@#20 ... "I would have wanted it classified" or "should have been classified" DOES NOT EQUAL "IS CLASSIFIED". ...

Yeah, and that is the problem with how MAGA seems to be viewing this egregious national security issue.

So, what else yer current alias got?

How else does your current alias want to destroy the National Security?

"Yeah, and that is the problem with how MAGA seems to be viewing this egregious national security issue.
#21 | Posted by LampLighter"

So, your whining has officially shifted from 'they violated the espionage act' to 'they should have classified documents'? Am I understanding you correctly?

@#22 ... So, your whining has officially shifted from 'they violated the espionage act' to 'they should have classified documents'? Am I understanding you correctly? ...

In a word...

No.

But do try harder next time. :)

"...your whining has officially shifted from 'they violated the espionage act'...

Telling, you don't care if the Espionage Act was violated, as long as there's an (R) after the name.

That's the barometer now, right?

Tell us: was EVERY participant pro-actively charged with bringing up security concerns of Signal? (Spoiler Alert: YES)

How about after the Pentagon warned about it?

WASHINGTON (AP) " A federal judge on Thursday ordered the Trump administration to preserve records of a text message chat in which senior national security officials discussed sensitive details of plans for a U.S. military strike against Yemen's Houthis.

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg barred administration officials from destroying messages that were sent over the encrypted messaging app Signal earlier this month."

"On the chat, Hegseth provided the exact timings of warplane launches and when bombs would drop before the attacks against Yemen's Houthis began earlier this month. Hegseth laid out when a "strike window" would open, where a "target terrorist" was located and when weapons and aircraft would be used.

The images of the text chain posted by The Atlantic show that the messages were set to disappear in one week.

American Oversight sued this week to ensure that the records are kept in accordance with the Federal Records Act. The group suspects that administration officials routinely use Signal to communicate."

apnews.com

""I would have wanted it classified" or "should have been classified" DOES NOT EQUAL "IS CLASSIFIED"."

Are you going on the record facts like these SHOULDN'T be classified?!?

Go sit at the little kid's table.

"The group suspects that administration officials routinely use Signal to communicate.""

Everyone in that group should be asked, under oath, if that's true.

Even some Republicans are noticing.... not Scott, of course:

"Officials agree national security adviser Mike Waltz, who accidentally invited a journalist to a group chat with senior leaders, could more easily take the fall for a scandal that has embarrassed the administration " which may end up sparing Hegseth his job.

But Republican hawks, Pentagon officials and even some inside the White House now believe Hegseth also messed up by sending likely classified details from his phone. And that has the potential to undermine his credibility in the administration.

Because Trump clearly likes and has publicly exonerated Hegseth, "you're not going to hear a huge public outcry," said a senior GOP official on Capitol Hill who is close to the White House.

"But, privately, there is a lot of concern about his judgment, more than with Waltz."

www.politico.com

"Hegseth also messed up by sending likely classified details from his phone"

C'mon, Republicans, chant it with me:

LOCK HIM UP! LOCK HIM UP!

@#25 ... A federal judge on Thursday ordered the Trump administration to preserve records of a text message chat in which senior national security officials discussed sensitive details of plans for a U.S. military strike against Yemen's Houthis. ...

Oh, that could be an issue.

Because "preserve records" and "Signal" seem to be mutually exclusive.

"Are you going on the record facts like these SHOULDN'T be classified?!?
#26 | Posted by Danforth"

I leave it to the US President and the head of the DOD to determine that - not some ------- on drudge.com or a whining group of reporters trying to run cover now by shifting 'were classified' to 'should have been classified'.

"But Republican hawks, Pentagon officials and even some inside the White House now believe Hegseth also messed up by sending likely classified details from his phone.
#28 | Posted by Corky"

Seriously, do you hear yourselves? You were calling for people to be charged with the Espionage Act a day ago and now you are backing down to whining that details 'should have been classified'. Go back to getting your assess kicked over the price of eggs.

@#31 ... I leave it to the US President and the head of the DOD to determine that - not some ------- on drudge.com or a whining group of reporters trying to run cover now by shifting 'were classified' to 'should have been classified'. ...

Your current alias does not think they should have been classified? That's your opinion, and that of an apparently very defensive Trump administration at this point. (Why are they so defensive?)

But I don't buy it.

I look more towards National Security than obsequious loyalty to the Trump administration.

That question aside, what is your current alias' opinion about a Sec of Defense posting attack operational details on an unclassified app?

Even Republicans are questioning this security breach.

And also, if I may ask...

Is this the only time Signal has been used to discuss National Security secrets?

The cavalier attitude of those on this chat seems to indicate that this type of unsecured chat is a routine thing.

What's your current alias' opinion?

"Your current alias does not think they should have been classified? That's your opinion"

I leave it to the professionals to judge what should and should not be. I also believe that information is leaked intentionally to the press to use them as part of a larger strategy.

"I look more towards National Security than obsequious loyalty to the Trump administration."

No, you don't. You buy whatever the mainstream media tells you hook, line, and sinker.

"That question aside, what is your current alias' opinion about a Sec of Defense posting attack operational details on an unclassified app?"

It is his call - see the point about leaking above.

"Is this the only time Signal has been used to discuss National Security secrets?"
#32 | Posted by LampLighter"

Your questions pre-supposes that secrets have been discussed in this latest media hoax.

@#33 ... I leave it to the professionals to judge what should and should not be. ...

And, who does your current alias consider to be the "professionals" in this, I'll say, event?

... "I look more towards National Security than obsequious loyalty to the Trump administration."

No, you don't. You buy whatever the mainstream media tells you hook, line, and sinker. ...

That's not quite correct.

I look towards truth and substantiated evidence (and that reminds me, didn't I ask your current alias for evidence a few comments ago? What's it got?).

When MAGA starts working in truth, I will start echoing their comments.

... Your questions pre-supposes that secrets have been discussed in this latest media hoax. ...

Actually, no.

My questions asks, based upon the cavalier attitude of those in the conversation on the insecure Signal app, was this the only conversation on this insecure app?

Or were there other conversations that sought to bypass laws that Executive branch conversations must be preserved.

Oh wait, is that yet another law that may have been broken here?

"I leave it to the US President "

No you don't. You leave it to some drunken Fox weekend host, who put classified information on a non-secure platform.

Thanks to Perpetually Pissed Pete, the Houthis now know we have intelligence on the ground who KNEW the leader was going into his girlfriend's place.

You're defending the possible mortal exposure of an American intelligence source.

"Your questions pre-supposes that secrets have been discussed"

Sorry, we KNOW secrets were discussed, including a local source.

"based upon the cavalier attitude of those in the conversation on the insecure Signal app, was this the only conversation on this insecure app?"

Seeing as how EACH of the participants had a pro-active security responsibility they shirked, I'd have to say this was SOP.

@#35 ... Thanks to Perpetually Pissed Pete, the Houthis now know we have intelligence on the ground who KNEW the leader was going into his girlfriend's place. ...

Bingo.

Can you say "sources?"

I knew you could.

OK, now the Houthis know that we knew the Houthis leader was going to his girlfriend's place.

My guess is that the Houthis are now doing some major intelligence back-tracking.

For starters, who did that girl-friend talk to?

Exposing possible intelligence sources is a major problem.

"And, who does your current alias consider to be the "professionals" in this, I'll say, event?"

The professionals are the ones that run the DOD and the legitimately elected US president - not some ------- like you.

"... Your questions pre-supposes that secrets have been discussed in this latest media hoax. ...

Actually, no.

My questions asks, based upon the cavalier attitude of those in the conversation on the insecure Signal app, was this the only conversation on this insecure app?"
#34 | Posted by LampLighter "

If the conversation does not include national security relevant secrets, why the F do you have a right to know anything about what was or wasn't said on Signal?

"Sorry, we KNOW secrets were discussed, including a local source.
#36 | Posted by Danforth"

Per usual - YOU don't know ----. You pretend to know because your mind is stuck playing checkers when Trump and the DOD are playing 4D chess. The reason why people like Trump are successful is he counts on people being 'thinkers' like you.

"Per usual - YOU don't know"

Of course iI know. I read the text chain.

You haven't read the texts, have you?

YOU HAVEN'T READ THE TEXTS.

Hegseth gives away the source on the ground.

"Trump and the DOD are playing 4D chess"

Riiiiiiiiiiight. Goldberg was brought in on purpose. And the guy in Russia? Just a coincidence.

FFS, you're as dumb as they are.

"your mind is stuck playing checkers"

What part of the Houthis know that we knew the Houthis leader was going to his girlfriend's place did you not understand?

Hegseth put classified info on an unclassified platform, none of the folks involved (all charged with assuring security) fulfilled their duty, and it was all handled on an app designed to circumvent the law. And Hegseth might have compromised our on-the-ground source.

And here you are, defending the indefensible.

MORE WATER, Gunga Dim!

"What part of the Houthis know that we knew the Houthis leader was going to his girlfriend's place did you not understand?
#42 | Posted by Danforth"

The part where we use this is a threat you ------- -------.

You know the story where Trump showed the Taliban leader a picture of his hideout and then said if you touch another American, you will kill you? It worked and we didn't create any martyrs in the process. Yeah, this is basically the same thing. But, for someone playing checkers, it may be a bit confusing so you should just sit this one out.

"Hegseth put classified info on an unclassified platform"

They will never acknowledge that simple fact.

"The part where we use this (as) a threat"

That doesn't justify Hegseth possibly compromising an on-the-ground asset.

It does, however, justify you carrying water for obvious malfeasance.

" It worked and we didn't create any martyrs in the process"

You're barfing out your backside. You have NO PROOF WHATSOEVER for your ludicrous claim.

Wonder what Scott would be saying had the Signal meeting been intercepted and Military lives lost in the attack?

Oh, yeah... Biden's Fault. Got it.

Not me. I am loving watching them floundering and flopping about like a fish outa water and making stupid excuses for their obvious criminal negligence and incompetence.

I just hope the rest of America is paying better attention this time.

Country's over it already.

Over what? Did something bad happen?

Fishpus' Hero picked a drunken woman abuser and Fox Host to lead the Military, and he coulda easily gotten someone in our uniform killed this week.

Country's over. it already.

#49 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

Corrected for accuracy.

I predict DOJ and FBI will charge standard fare slick Democrat operatives like Fang Fang and others for colluding to add a leftwing reporter to the fabricated Signal call list that led to this exposure. It was done purposely by political opposition to create both real and political harm to Americans.

"the fabricated Signal call list that led to this exposure"

Fabricated by the Secretary of Defense, or was it the National Security Advisor?

@#35 ... No you don't. You leave it to some drunken Fox weekend host, who put classified information on a non-secure platform. ...

Nat King Cole - Bring Another Drink (1945)
www.youtube.com

Lyrics excerpt ...

genius.com

...
Last night we had a party
With some mellow chicks
At the gin mill down the street
Just to get some kicks

We sat down at the table
The cover was a deuce
The bad was swingin', in the mood
"Bring us all some juice"

We started lushin', the chicks got high
But they weren't high enough
'Cause we whispered love words in their ears
The chicks got rough, awful stuff

So let this be a lesson
You better stop and think
Before you whisper in her ear
Bring another drink
...