Here are the Attack Plans That Trump's Advisers Shared on Signal
theatlantic.com
theatlantic.com
Posting the statement with all of the typos is a nice little touch.
You can complain all you want about the media, but the White House (ostensibly) pays a team of people to deal with the media full time and it doesn't seem like they do a better job communicating for themselves.
Something that's piqued me (and my ignorance of Signal): It's not clear to me what Goldberg's Signal display name is, i.e. is it "Jeffrey Goldberg" or "JG". And who sets that? Goldberg, or the user who has him in his contacts? I mean if he were simply "JG", and it was Waltz who set that — then the question is not so much why Waltz has a prominent journalist like Goldberg in his contacts, but why does he obfuscate Goldberg as "JG"?
It's fun to imagine that maybe Waltz has in the past been a secret source of Goldberg's. Goldberg outing the chat like this would seem to undercut that theory, but it's possible that Goldberg judged the situation as so egregious that it was worth burning his source (Waltz). And technically, Waltz wasn't acting as a "source" for this story and thus Goldberg isn't obligated to give him the usual journalistic protections.
[0] https://cdn.theatlantic.com/thumbor/TcCybzsovOAQXiH4pDwlQupn...
Seems very likely that Goldberg (who confesses to being a Signal noob) set himself to “JG” so as to not inadvertently expose himself (or his source) in the event of over-the-shoulder surveillance. Still leaves open the question of how he is even in Waltz’s contact book. That said, if Waltz is a secret source, makes sense that Waltz would make a huge public show of how he would never ever be in contact with “bottom scum” like Goldberg
>The Atlantic has conceded: these were NOT “war plans.”
The leak:
>...1410: More F-18s LAUNCH (2nd strike package)”
>1415: Strike Drones on Target...
Seems kind of war plan like to me.
No, Really, I'm thoroughly entertained and really invested in this story. I eagerly await the name-reveal of that CIA operative!
It's also hilarious how they seemingly understand rhe president is an absolute babbling buffoon (note how they discussed the inconsistency in his messaging), but are still catering to all his needs. it's a rare moment from behind the scenes showing how morally bankrupt that faction is.
These guys really hate Europeans but ate still forced to do theor boss' bidding like some sort of cliche mafia family.
The text beneath this began, “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)”
Let us pause here for a moment to underscore a point. 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.”
At 1:48 p.m., Waltz sent the following text, containing real-time intelligence about conditions at an attack site, apparently in Sanaa: “VP. Building collapsed. Had multiple positive ID. Pete, Kurilla, the IC, amazing job.” Waltz was referring here to Hegseth; General Michael E. Kurilla, the commander of Central Command; and the intelligence community, or IC. The reference to “multiple positive ID” suggests that U.S. intelligence had ascertained the identities of the Houthi target, or targets, using either human or technical assets.
Which, by the way, is sufficient time and targeting information to down a F-18.
> What I will say, in order to illustrate the shocking recklessness of this Signal conversation, is that the Hegseth post contained operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing.
He did not lie or exaggerate.
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.
Bio includes: Former CIA attorney
It's been a minute since the classified-documents case was surreptitiously scuttled by the <checks notes> Honorable Judge Aileen Cannon — so The Atlantic must have forgotten that Trump can change the law by thinking about it, and that he did change the law by thinking that he could declassify documents by thinking that they are declassified, even later in time than the point at which that later thinking about the declassification actually had the effect of declassifying them.
We have concepts of a justice system.
Time travel non of the president‘s powers
https://www.congress.gov/116/meeting/house/110331/documents/...
I had thought that once Goldberg realized what he was into, that he and The Atlantic would've taken some steps to mitigate the risk of the government seizing his phone. Like using another camera to take photos of his phone displaying the group chat's contents (and then saving those jpegs on several USB drives via an air-gapped computer). Maybe they did do that, but realized they don't need to publish those stowed-away jpegs after Trump asserted that nothing classified was in that group chat.
It's kind of a scary "what if" had the administration denied the legitimacy of the thread from the start. This could have been drawn out into months of questionable digital forensics. Maybe they were worried another one of the unknown numbers in the thread would have come forward?
> 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)
Was certainly supposed to be classified, lest "target terrorist" goes "oh fuck, get out of the house" in those two hours.
Expect some investigations into the outlet and their staff.
The rising costs do the rest
I checked Fox, OANN, Breitbart, Newsmax, and Infowars. Of those outlets, Newsmax is only covering the attacks themselves, not the breach of national security[0], Fox is criticizing The Atlantic and calling them a partisan rag that's getting humiliated by Trump[1], and Infowars is downplaying and making excuses while also claiming The Atlantic is run by globalist (by which Alex Jones means Jewish) pedophiles[2]. For Infowars and Fox, I had to scroll pretty far down their respective front pages to find any mention of this.
I think it's safe to say Trump will continue to retain the support of his base because his base are insulated from these inconvenient truths.
"Mass propaganda discovered that its audience was ready at all times to believe the worst, no matter how absurd, and did not particularly object to being deceived because it held every statement to be a lie anyhow. The totalitarian mass leaders based their propaganda on the correct psychological assumption that, under such conditions, one could make people believe the most fantastic statements one day, and trust that if the next day they were given irrefutable proof of their falsehood, they would take refuge in cynicism; instead of deserting the leaders who had lied to them, they would protest that they had known all along that the statement was a lie and would admire the leaders for their superior tactical cleverness."
Could the DoJ behave sufficiently separately from the office of the President to conduct a proper prosecution?