Currently Clean on OPSEC

I can't remember how many times I've said, let alone thought, that a Trump administration action is a more significant illegal action than Watergate. That Nixon, what a piker. And here we are again with "Signalgate."

The basic story is that about 20 high-level defense and national security appointees were on a Signal chat in mid-March discussing a planned, and then carried-out, military strike in Yemen against Houthi rebels. The chat was started by National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, who somehow added the editor of The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg, to the chat group. Signal, while encrypted, is not allowed as a method for classified communication and is prohibited on DoD devices and some of the other departments' devices. 

The fact that the editor was added, and none of them realized it, is one indication of the channel's insecurity. The fact that they were using it on their personal phones is another, since those phones are vulnerable to hacking by adversaries. After The Atlantic published its first story detailing the existence of the chat, two of the chat participants, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard appeared before a Senate committee, where they proceeded to obfuscate, cover up, and (it appears) perjure themselves. One of their statements was that there was no classified information in the chat, which appeared to contradict The Atlantic reporting, since Goldberg had clearly omitted some information he thought was too sensitive.

Today The Atlantic published additional content from the chat (gift link), since the DNI and head of the CIA had stated the information isn't considered classified. 

I'm sure I've missed something in that summary. There's more in the chat for sure, like the gleeful way they talk about bombing civilians, and the way they think of the U.S. military as mercenaries who European countries should be paying. And who was it that authorized this military action in the first place? Hmmm...

Here's a BlueSky round-up in chronological order starting from Monday, March 24. Everything below the line is quoted from the attributed account.

__

Trump says: "I don't know anything about it." In a functioning democracy, Hegseth would resign and Trump would be impeached over this. OVER JUST THIS.
Greg Pak

I'd like to live in a country where the National Security Adviser doesn't sum up a discussion of war plans with the FIST FLAG FIRE emojis like he's talking about Fortnite:


Kevin M. Kruse

Just saying: if Lloyd Austin had done this, every GOP lawmaker would call for his resignation by close-of-business the same day, and they'd probably have it.
Charlotte Clymer

Lemme also just shout out ol buddy from The Atlantic for not selling the Signal Group Chat for a book deal and waiting two years to reveal what was in it
David Dennis Jr

"This is just the one chat we know about. What other sensitive US government details are on Signal? What is being done to keep that in approved classified channels?" –National security lawyer Brad Moss
Greg Sargent

there are like three overlapping scandals with signalgate — illegal distribution of sensitive government materials by top members of the administration, illegal attempt to circumvent records laws and possible unlawful use of military force — and democrats should be screaming about them all
jamelle @jamellebouie.net

What you have to understand about Pete Hegseth copying and pasting war plans into Signal is that it almost certainly means he’s got classified documents on his personal UNSECURE devices. Signal isn't on a secure device...are our war plans on his personal devices?
Fred Wellman

Ask Airman Reality Winner what happens when you leak classified information to a reporter:


David Carroll

I think as bad as this whole story is, the worst part hasn't even happened yet. And that is the likelihood that no one who leaked secret war plans is going to suffer any negative consequences over it. No one will be fired and the media will drop the story pretty soon.
The Alternate Historian

Real Estate salesman Witkoff Trump picked as ambassador and sent to meet with Putin. He didn't know any better and let RU clone his cellphone. Yesterday that phone was in RU when CIA Director Ratcliffe blew the cover of a CIA Intelligence Officer.
Bryan @papootx.bsky.social

If they were using private phones and outside the country, this should a story on the front page of the newspaper until at least Halloween
Costa Samaras

Here's the things. You can't install Signal on federal devices. Ergo, this entire chat was being carried out on PRIVATE phones. So not only does the APP not have the proper security, the DEVICES don't either.
Machine Pun Kelly @kellyscaletta.bsky.social

It’s worth stating this simply: For literally anyone in the US government from 1945 to 2025, Signalgate would require an instant resignation—and a criminal investigation. It would be a matter of personal *honor* to resign. The fact Mike Waltz and Pete Hegseth are choosing to fight it out is a terrible omen.
Garrett M. Graff @vermontgmg.bsky.social

the problem with The Signal Chat isn't that they added the editor in chief of the atlantic. the problem with The Signal Chat is WHY WAS THIS INFORMATION ON SIGNAL AT ALL. the fact that none of the 20-odd people in this signal chat said "HEY MAYBE SIGNAL ISN'T RIGHT FOR THIS" is a really bad sign!! i know that this whole situation is so fucked up that it's impossible to count the ways that it is fucked up, but even a message to a signal chat that says "hey, check your high-side inboxes for our war plans" would be a huge problem, much less just PASTING THE WAR PLANS. i basically had to *fly to DC* at some point so I could tell some people who worked on classified information to upgrade from Firefox 1.5 to Firefox 2.0 in order to use the product we were selling them. Because they couldn't just hop on a call to talk about it, because of FUCKING SECURITY CONCERNS. while that story is ridiculous, it illustrates the point that operational information security for people who work with classified / national defense material has REALLY STRICT RULES and like every military rule, it's written in the blood of the people who broke it in the past.
Christopher Schmidt (software engineer currently at Google. Founding member, Alphabet Workers Union

The Atlantic has now published the Signal texts with attack plans in response to administration denials. I worked at the Pentagon. If information like this is not classified, nothing is. If Hegseth is claiming he declassified this information, he should be shown the door for having done so.
Ryan Goodman @rgoodlaw.bsky.social

Read the attack plans now published by The Atlantic [as of Wednesday morning]. And remember what they said yesterday and Monday: no war plans; not classified; no operational details. What a disgrace.
Sherrilyn Ifill

NYT's David Sanger: "It is the timing that is critical: Had this information leaked out, the people the U.S. was targeting in Yemen would have had time to escape. And Hegseth’s reference to OPSEC — operational security — meant he was aware of the need for secrecy."
Kyle Griffin

Something I hadn’t appreciated from the initial story is that Waltz adds Stephen Miller to the group *after* JD Vance had started questioning the plan and while Waltz is in the process of arguing back at him. It’s shortly after this that Miller swoops in with his reading of the president’s mood.
southpaw @nycsouthpaw.bsky.social

On the left: Hegseth's message.
On the right: the applicable CENTCOM classification guide provisions.
This is all very plainly classified at the SECRET level. They all lied. They should all lose their jobs:


Secrets and Laws

The thing to remember is that these are crimes and the participants are criminals. At any time prior to January 20, 2025, their homes would've been raided, their electronics seized as evidence and they would've been marched out in cuffs.
Brandon Friedman

There was one singular person the Trump team wanted to kill. They thought they tracked him to his girlfriend’s place, presumably in a civilian apartment building in Sana’a. So they dropped bombs on the neighborhood and leveled the building. Reactions from the group: “amazing job” “Excellent” Fist, flag, explosion emojis
southpaw @nycsouthpaw.bsky.social

Not to be a wide-eyed naïf about such things but... am I right in thinking that they leveled an entire building to get to one guy and *that* is not controversial to anyone in the American media or political class, only that this information was recklessly shared in an unsecured chat?
The Author, Séamas O'Reilly @seamas.bsky.social

Trump changed drone strike rules of engagement to allow more civilian casualties. Under Bush (especially second term) and more so Obama, the move would've been to monitor this target and fire when he was away from civilian structures. Biden was stricter, significantly reducing drone strikes overall.
Nicholas Grossman

I am still dumbfounded that they made a war crime group chat on a civilian messaging service and invited a reporter to it. it's like there's no bar they can't slither under.
Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò

anyway calling these "war plans" when they were actually plans to blow up an apartment building full of civilians because the girlfriend of a guy we don't like lived there sounds more like "terrorism plans" or perhaps even more accurately "terrorism factory creation plans"
Timothy Burke @bubbaprog.lol

They’re only war plans if they’re sent from an official secure platform. Otherwise they’re just sparkling kakistocracy.
d.w. 1878 (just like pagliacci did) @freeke.org

ok fine I did it. I made this for myself but you are welcome to it as well:


Tom Tomorrow

Dear journalists: stop giving this administration the benefit of the doubt. Stop using old editorial standards and practices and norms. Assume that everything they say from the get-go is a lie because it always, always, is.
Mehdi Hasan