I surely hope it was an intentional leak. However, there are many ways to make an intended leak with folks like Seymor Hersh eager for service. There is no need to put mud on the face of NSA, Defense Chief, CIA head, and DNI. And then the POTUS has to stand up and defend such a mistake.
And if this act was indeed a leak, then what is the purpose? To warn Yemem so they can ring air raid siren? I don't think so. To slow down the momentum on the push to attack Iran? The testimony by CIA, DNI, FBI chiefs in Congress is more powerful. And if Iran should not be attacked, DJT should stand up and say so.
In 1943, the exact timing of German attack at Kursk was revealed to the Russians by German deserters about 4 hours (?) before the event. Russians launched a preemptive artillery attack 2 hours (?) before the event. German memoirs downplayed the effect of this artillery attack but Russians thought this attack reduced the tempo of the attack. A leak of tactical details 2 hours before the event (as is this leak) can be a serious issue.
Last time Isrel air force launched a large formation to bomb Iran. They dropped some missiles and aborted the second wave. The reason was the leading planes reported being locked on by an unknown radar. I suspect this is S400 as Russians in Syria had turned on S300 radar to scare off Israel airplanes before. I am not sure about Iran's radar technology. Without good radar, Iran's missile technology does not translate into effective defense. Iran's real defense is deterrence: no matter how Americans attack Iran, Iran only needs to dump their return fire toward Israel. Train up a few battalions of drone operators and precede the missile wave with say, 300+ Shahed-136 and 238. A year after Iran's retaliation strike, maybe Israel leaders think they are better prepared now.
The challenge is there is no IT in Federal Government. The antidote stories I have heard regarding military equipment like GPS devices; soldiers prefer to use the commercial equivalent than the GI issues equipment because they are more easier and effective.
It is kinda amazing though, the federal govt is 35+ Trillion dollars in debt and we can’t produce an equivalent encryption communication system with its own operating systems and encryption messaging infrastructure that does not require being stuck in a vault? What the hell did we spend all that taxpayers money on?
'The Pentagon's internal watchdog criticized a former official's use of the Signal app in 2021, calling it a breach of the department's "records retention policies" and an unauthorized means of communicating sensitive information.
'The report, which focused on Brett Goldstein, a former director of the Defense Digital Service, found that Goldstein violated department policies by using Signal "to discuss official DoD information" and encouraging subordinates to communicate with him on the encrypted messaging app.
' "Signal is not approved by the DoD as an authorized electronic messaging and voice-calling application," the report asserted, adding that "the use of Signal to discuss official DoD information does not comply with Freedom of Information Act requirements and DoD's records retention policies." '
The idea expressed here that the highly embarrassing leak was somehow intentional reminds me of a Fox anchor's response to questions about growing chaos in the administration and its leader's plans, if there actually are any such things:
"My lesson to the media, this one line I wish they would take — President Trump is playing four-dimensional chess, y'all are playing checkers."
Talking of the fourth dimension, I doubt Trump has the patience or attention span to play checkers.
"In an interview this morning with RS, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) said there was clearly "no urgency" for U.S. military airstrikes against the Houthis in Yemen, now in their 13th day. Therefore, the administration should have gone to Congress for authorization and without it, those strikes are illegal."
"Massie pointed to Vice President J.D. Vance's contribution to the now infamous signal chat which described the strikes as they were happening. 'JD' as identified in the chat, which has been authenticated by the administration, among other points, said that 'there is a strong argument for delaying this a month, doing the messaging work on why this matters, seeing where the economy is, etc.' ”
What is the point in investing time, money, and effort into providing government with secure communications if government employees can't bother to use them?
Security is a meme and not followed in the main until some embarrassing incident occurs. I worked for years in the Pentagon and AMHA HQ, e.g., HQ USAREUR, or HQ TRADOC. Ret in 2011. In those days, the Blackberry smartphone was the device of choice and every single Col or General officer and their civilian equivalent carried one. Not authorized for Classified communications they still conveyed sensitive FOUO (for official use only). Data. Blackberry was a canadian company and every single "bit" of data passed through and was stored on canadian servers; this information was subject to canadian court orders. Never seemed to bother the Generals. Oh yes, I held SIPRNET. Even when accessing SIPRNET, all classified data was compartmentalized "need to know". Also, you could not access non-classified communication systems from within the SIPRNET.
I am not sure security is a meme, but traditional security has been overtaken by the availability of mobile devices. NSA protects itself by declaring they should not be used for classified information, but the reality is they are in fact, because the line between FOUO and classified is very blurry or is just ignored. While Canada and Blackberry was an issue in those days, today's APPS often are supported by servers in China, including Zoom.
Stephen, you don't mention the fact that the timed auto-delete function on Signal contravenes the legal requirement to archive administration discussions.
It has not been ruled to be inconsistent with current archiving regulations. Its use in government security circles is well known and informally approved. It will continue until someone says otherwise.
A screenshot showed the chat was set to delete after 4 weeks.
"A law President Barack Obama signed in 2014 requires federal employees who use personal accounts to discuss official business to copy those messages to an official account within 20 days so they can be preserved. That means the officials involved in these discussions on Signal still have time to comply since these messages came about 10 days ago."
I guess this specific chat will now be preserved for over 4 weeks in various places :-)
But there seems to be no claim or evidence that was the initial intention.
Given that the use of auto-deleting chats was clearly routine practice at higher levels of the adminstration, how many earlier chats were copied to an official database before the 20-day window expired?
Was it a law with the details you mentioned passed by Congress or a regulation put out by Obama to indicate the requirements of conforming to a law passed by Congress?
I'm pretty sure there is no legal obligation for every member of the administration to carry a wired up microphone around with them at all times so they can archive their conversations. So the question becomes where does a personal simple verbal conversation become subject to archiving if put to text? Would a deaf person who has to text to anyone outside his field of view have archive every word he wants to utter while at work? If I engage in text conversation with an AI chat bot am I required to archive the entire conversation? President Trump often uses the interpreter provided by the other side rather than the designated American translator. If he uses the American translator it will be archived because the translator will record it. Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
My point is that nothing is as simple at the highest levels of government as people want it to be. Archiving Signal chats defeats one of the main security features of the program. Namely that the information will soon disappear and thus not be available for perusal by anyone other than the intended audience when they receive it.
Sigh......the law refers to records. The President defines what constitutes a record until instructed to change his definition. If the President draws a doodle on a piece of paper while waiting for some event or conversation to start, is that a record that must be archived by law? Does it make a difference if it is a serious attempt to draw something, say a plant or flower? Does it make a difference if he shows it to someone? If they discuss it? If he records himself pronouncing a difficult name so he can play it back and compare it to the correct pronunciation? If he uses a chat bot do the same thing? The President or his agent establishes the guidelines to answer those questions.
The executive staff being human will always try to find ways to avoid the burden of having to archive possibly everything. Every now and then, their preferred choice will blow up in their faces and they have to switch to something new that hasn't been ruled on yet. They will always want to say that they were in the elevator with Ambassador X and he farted, deliberately so. And the other party to the chat will want to say ....yeah happened to me to. He actually enjoys doing it Must be a cultural thing. .. And they definitely don't want to have it archived. They will find a way to function as human beings.
What happened does not look like a data leak but a strategic intentional leak. Including Goldberg in the group was not a mistake. Goldberg has been an inside war planner of every US president for at least 30 years. His writing in Atlantic obfuscates and externalises the war plans for the gentry while manufacturing their consent. He is the permanent deep state of the USA. Google Facebook Instagram Amazon WhatsApp and Signal are all DARPA software created by DARPA or DARPA with Unit8200. The original research for these software happened under Rockefeller and Harriman supervision and their funding in the client frenemy hermetic proxy state USSR. After1990s the researchers and the research was moved Israel and the USA under Rockefeller. It is utterly unbelievable that a secure version of Signal doesnt exist for the deep state. All which indicates that this is a strategic leak intended for an external audience.
Every single one of the people in the conversation in question is unalterably opposed to all the elements you refer to. The feeling is mutual. The factions view the other as borderline traitors to the American ideal.
American Ideal is something in the peoples mind. Presidential admin teams or parts of it can do things without the president assenting or knowing. As you see in the chat there are various views. Trumps job is that of a typical manager - coaxing cajoling and managing egos to ensure that they agree to what HE thinks is good for America. What he says about the incident is diplomatic politically correct speech not what he knows that really happened. It is perception management - as a businessman he has done it all his life.
There is a perceived problem with a particular platform commonly used to handle national security issues. Stephen advanced a serious, thoughtful, relevant posting on what has turned into a hot issue loaded with misinformation. His post offered a timely solution which involved what amounts to a replacement for Signal. What did you want him to do instead?
You don't seem to get it. I don't want the President to do what you want. I want him to do what I want, or at least try. But whatever he does and how well he does it, I definitely don't want him to act in the way the you require. I rest a little more comfortably secure in the knowledge that you consider him a clown so he is succeeding at least a little in doing what he promised to do.
Every aspect of your comment is so off base and ill founded that it is starting to seem kind of weird. The American attack was perfectly executed and achieved it stated goals.
The Houthis are not a sovereign nation but are instead a terror group. The Houthis are civilian in the sense that most of their fighters don't wear a uniform when attacking their fellow citizens. The Houthis routinely attack their neighbors as well as commercial shipping that comes within range. That means for practical purposes they attack every country in the world including wherever you live. It is not persecution to respond with the military.
There have been dozens if not hundreds of such executive ordered attacks over the centuries and not once has the Supreme court ruled any one of them unconstitutional. Not once has Congress impeached a President for initiating such actions. So whatever constitution you are citing it isn't the American constitution or any legal reading of it.
Wrong. US warships loaded with US citizens were attacked multiple times. Plenty of justification. Moreover, the President is commander in chief and he decides when to wage war. Under the War Power Act he is pretty much free to do so. The US attacks on the Houthis were definitely not "illegal" as you claim, quite the contrary. You may want to read up on what are Presidential powers and the laws under which the President carries out his work. (Not to mention the Houthis are listed as a terrorist group, giving the President all the mandate he needs, attacks notwithstanding.)
Not certain about that. DoD could firewall every single .MIL computer to block outside connectivity making them virtually impenetrable, but it doesn't because of so-called troup "morale". The soldiers and civilians need to be able to surf the web, so the gateways are left open and the security administrators continuously play catchup on hackers. By all accounts, DoD is still far more secure than most other government agencies. God forbid!
Maybe the attitude of these officials toward war and national security is the more fundamental problem.
My pure SWAG is that the "leak" was intnetional.
Why would they do that?
A few possibilities discussed here:
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2025/03/russia-us-negotiations-trump-criticism-follows-the-bad-sign-of-the-lack-of-a-joint-statement-after-last-round-and-the-iran-angle.html
Thanks, will give this a read.
This must be the wrong link. I didn’t see anything relevant to what the purpose of a deliberate leak would be.
I surely hope it was an intentional leak. However, there are many ways to make an intended leak with folks like Seymor Hersh eager for service. There is no need to put mud on the face of NSA, Defense Chief, CIA head, and DNI. And then the POTUS has to stand up and defend such a mistake.
And if this act was indeed a leak, then what is the purpose? To warn Yemem so they can ring air raid siren? I don't think so. To slow down the momentum on the push to attack Iran? The testimony by CIA, DNI, FBI chiefs in Congress is more powerful. And if Iran should not be attacked, DJT should stand up and say so.
In 1943, the exact timing of German attack at Kursk was revealed to the Russians by German deserters about 4 hours (?) before the event. Russians launched a preemptive artillery attack 2 hours (?) before the event. German memoirs downplayed the effect of this artillery attack but Russians thought this attack reduced the tempo of the attack. A leak of tactical details 2 hours before the event (as is this leak) can be a serious issue.
Perhaps to try and throw a scare into Iran?
Last time Isrel air force launched a large formation to bomb Iran. They dropped some missiles and aborted the second wave. The reason was the leading planes reported being locked on by an unknown radar. I suspect this is S400 as Russians in Syria had turned on S300 radar to scare off Israel airplanes before. I am not sure about Iran's radar technology. Without good radar, Iran's missile technology does not translate into effective defense. Iran's real defense is deterrence: no matter how Americans attack Iran, Iran only needs to dump their return fire toward Israel. Train up a few battalions of drone operators and precede the missile wave with say, 300+ Shahed-136 and 238. A year after Iran's retaliation strike, maybe Israel leaders think they are better prepared now.
Apparently the Americans think otherwise.
Exactly, am I the only one who reads those texts as if they are written by frat boys who are about to go clubbing and starting fights?
If all US government officials have interactions like those ones I pity the poor mossad guy who has to read through that every day.
The challenge is there is no IT in Federal Government. The antidote stories I have heard regarding military equipment like GPS devices; soldiers prefer to use the commercial equivalent than the GI issues equipment because they are more easier and effective.
It is kinda amazing though, the federal govt is 35+ Trillion dollars in debt and we can’t produce an equivalent encryption communication system with its own operating systems and encryption messaging infrastructure that does not require being stuck in a vault? What the hell did we spend all that taxpayers money on?
As the King said, It's a Puzzlement.
Signal was authorized "for work."
By whom?
by CIA Management during the Biden administration
What is the source for that claim?
'The Pentagon's internal watchdog criticized a former official's use of the Signal app in 2021, calling it a breach of the department's "records retention policies" and an unauthorized means of communicating sensitive information.
'The report, which focused on Brett Goldstein, a former director of the Defense Digital Service, found that Goldstein violated department policies by using Signal "to discuss official DoD information" and encouraging subordinates to communicate with him on the encrypted messaging app.
' "Signal is not approved by the DoD as an authorized electronic messaging and voice-calling application," the report asserted, adding that "the use of Signal to discuss official DoD information does not comply with Freedom of Information Act requirements and DoD's records retention policies." '
So maybe the new administration should review and act accordingly, IJS.
The idea expressed here that the highly embarrassing leak was somehow intentional reminds me of a Fox anchor's response to questions about growing chaos in the administration and its leader's plans, if there actually are any such things:
"My lesson to the media, this one line I wish they would take — President Trump is playing four-dimensional chess, y'all are playing checkers."
Talking of the fourth dimension, I doubt Trump has the patience or attention span to play checkers.
The issue is moot as it was "leaked" after the bombing. The bombing of civilians is the issue.
The funniest thing is that Team Trump went apeshit after Hillary did something similar.
There is nothing remotely similar between the two.
😵💫
signal (adj)
unusual; notable; outstanding:
'a signal failure'
Synonyms: striking, remarkable, exceptional, unique
The chat contravened not only the 2014 records act, but also Pentagon directives:
https://dodcio.defense.gov/Portals/0/Documents/Library/Memo-UseOfUnclassMobileApps.pdf
a Secretary of Defense makes the rules not some printed directive that he can avoid if he decides to do so
"In an interview this morning with RS, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) said there was clearly "no urgency" for U.S. military airstrikes against the Houthis in Yemen, now in their 13th day. Therefore, the administration should have gone to Congress for authorization and without it, those strikes are illegal."
"Massie pointed to Vice President J.D. Vance's contribution to the now infamous signal chat which described the strikes as they were happening. 'JD' as identified in the chat, which has been authenticated by the administration, among other points, said that 'there is a strong argument for delaying this a month, doing the messaging work on why this matters, seeing where the economy is, etc.' ”
But who cares?
Rules are for losers, right?
What is the point in investing time, money, and effort into providing government with secure communications if government employees can't bother to use them?
Security is a meme and not followed in the main until some embarrassing incident occurs. I worked for years in the Pentagon and AMHA HQ, e.g., HQ USAREUR, or HQ TRADOC. Ret in 2011. In those days, the Blackberry smartphone was the device of choice and every single Col or General officer and their civilian equivalent carried one. Not authorized for Classified communications they still conveyed sensitive FOUO (for official use only). Data. Blackberry was a canadian company and every single "bit" of data passed through and was stored on canadian servers; this information was subject to canadian court orders. Never seemed to bother the Generals. Oh yes, I held SIPRNET. Even when accessing SIPRNET, all classified data was compartmentalized "need to know". Also, you could not access non-classified communication systems from within the SIPRNET.
I am not sure security is a meme, but traditional security has been overtaken by the availability of mobile devices. NSA protects itself by declaring they should not be used for classified information, but the reality is they are in fact, because the line between FOUO and classified is very blurry or is just ignored. While Canada and Blackberry was an issue in those days, today's APPS often are supported by servers in China, including Zoom.
One of the stranger aspects of this is that the only people I know who use Signal are paranoid leftists.
Its use is widespread in government and routinely installed on c.i.a. computers.
"The Signal Problem and a Solution - Improving Government Security"
Remove idiots in government, especially at the highest levels. Trump's cabinet was chosen for servility to Israel and Zionism, not for intelligence.
I guess we’re safe from you serving in government…
"I guess we’re safe from you serving in government…"
If that was meant to be a clever riposte, it fell miserably short.
Stephen, you don't mention the fact that the timed auto-delete function on Signal contravenes the legal requirement to archive administration discussions.
I did not mention it because it did not occur to me.
Martin
It has not been ruled to be inconsistent with current archiving regulations. Its use in government security circles is well known and informally approved. It will continue until someone says otherwise.
Who has ruled on this?
A screenshot showed the chat was set to delete after 4 weeks.
"A law President Barack Obama signed in 2014 requires federal employees who use personal accounts to discuss official business to copy those messages to an official account within 20 days so they can be preserved. That means the officials involved in these discussions on Signal still have time to comply since these messages came about 10 days ago."
I guess this specific chat will now be preserved for over 4 weeks in various places :-)
But there seems to be no claim or evidence that was the initial intention.
Given that the use of auto-deleting chats was clearly routine practice at higher levels of the adminstration, how many earlier chats were copied to an official database before the 20-day window expired?
Was it a law with the details you mentioned passed by Congress or a regulation put out by Obama to indicate the requirements of conforming to a law passed by Congress?
I'm pretty sure there is no legal obligation for every member of the administration to carry a wired up microphone around with them at all times so they can archive their conversations. So the question becomes where does a personal simple verbal conversation become subject to archiving if put to text? Would a deaf person who has to text to anyone outside his field of view have archive every word he wants to utter while at work? If I engage in text conversation with an AI chat bot am I required to archive the entire conversation? President Trump often uses the interpreter provided by the other side rather than the designated American translator. If he uses the American translator it will be archived because the translator will record it. Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
My point is that nothing is as simple at the highest levels of government as people want it to be. Archiving Signal chats defeats one of the main security features of the program. Namely that the information will soon disappear and thus not be available for perusal by anyone other than the intended audience when they receive it.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/1233
Sigh......the law refers to records. The President defines what constitutes a record until instructed to change his definition. If the President draws a doodle on a piece of paper while waiting for some event or conversation to start, is that a record that must be archived by law? Does it make a difference if it is a serious attempt to draw something, say a plant or flower? Does it make a difference if he shows it to someone? If they discuss it? If he records himself pronouncing a difficult name so he can play it back and compare it to the correct pronunciation? If he uses a chat bot do the same thing? The President or his agent establishes the guidelines to answer those questions.
The executive staff being human will always try to find ways to avoid the burden of having to archive possibly everything. Every now and then, their preferred choice will blow up in their faces and they have to switch to something new that hasn't been ruled on yet. They will always want to say that they were in the elevator with Ambassador X and he farted, deliberately so. And the other party to the chat will want to say ....yeah happened to me to. He actually enjoys doing it Must be a cultural thing. .. And they definitely don't want to have it archived. They will find a way to function as human beings.
What happened does not look like a data leak but a strategic intentional leak. Including Goldberg in the group was not a mistake. Goldberg has been an inside war planner of every US president for at least 30 years. His writing in Atlantic obfuscates and externalises the war plans for the gentry while manufacturing their consent. He is the permanent deep state of the USA. Google Facebook Instagram Amazon WhatsApp and Signal are all DARPA software created by DARPA or DARPA with Unit8200. The original research for these software happened under Rockefeller and Harriman supervision and their funding in the client frenemy hermetic proxy state USSR. After1990s the researchers and the research was moved Israel and the USA under Rockefeller. It is utterly unbelievable that a secure version of Signal doesnt exist for the deep state. All which indicates that this is a strategic leak intended for an external audience.
I never thought it was an accident but that is what the administration contends. There is no evidence I know of for DARPA or Unit 8200 involvement.
Why would the Trump admin intentionally leak this? Seems all theyve done is create a scandal
Samuel Abraham
Every single one of the people in the conversation in question is unalterably opposed to all the elements you refer to. The feeling is mutual. The factions view the other as borderline traitors to the American ideal.
American Ideal is something in the peoples mind. Presidential admin teams or parts of it can do things without the president assenting or knowing. As you see in the chat there are various views. Trumps job is that of a typical manager - coaxing cajoling and managing egos to ensure that they agree to what HE thinks is good for America. What he says about the incident is diplomatic politically correct speech not what he knows that really happened. It is perception management - as a businessman he has done it all his life.
So after all that’s occurred, the best you have got to contribute, is a somewhat lame evaluation of Signal ?
I did not evaluate Signal. Read more carefully, if you can.
iS
There is a perceived problem with a particular platform commonly used to handle national security issues. Stephen advanced a serious, thoughtful, relevant posting on what has turned into a hot issue loaded with misinformation. His post offered a timely solution which involved what amounts to a replacement for Signal. What did you want him to do instead?
using the word "clowns" undermines your argument severely.
What? 'Clown' fits your current president and most of his minions very well.
If the hat fits, wear it.
You don't seem to get it. I don't want the President to do what you want. I want him to do what I want, or at least try. But whatever he does and how well he does it, I definitely don't want him to act in the way the you require. I rest a little more comfortably secure in the knowledge that you consider him a clown so he is succeeding at least a little in doing what he promised to do.
Is that why you are wearing a clown hat?
"If the hat fits, wear it."
Even if it is small and worn on the back of the head.
Maybe his next best choice was traitor.
Shane Cameron
Every aspect of your comment is so off base and ill founded that it is starting to seem kind of weird. The American attack was perfectly executed and achieved it stated goals.
The Houthis are not a sovereign nation but are instead a terror group. The Houthis are civilian in the sense that most of their fighters don't wear a uniform when attacking their fellow citizens. The Houthis routinely attack their neighbors as well as commercial shipping that comes within range. That means for practical purposes they attack every country in the world including wherever you live. It is not persecution to respond with the military.
There have been dozens if not hundreds of such executive ordered attacks over the centuries and not once has the Supreme court ruled any one of them unconstitutional. Not once has Congress impeached a President for initiating such actions. So whatever constitution you are citing it isn't the American constitution or any legal reading of it.
Wrong. US warships loaded with US citizens were attacked multiple times. Plenty of justification. Moreover, the President is commander in chief and he decides when to wage war. Under the War Power Act he is pretty much free to do so. The US attacks on the Houthis were definitely not "illegal" as you claim, quite the contrary. You may want to read up on what are Presidential powers and the laws under which the President carries out his work. (Not to mention the Houthis are listed as a terrorist group, giving the President all the mandate he needs, attacks notwithstanding.)
Your "cannot wait" claim is disgusting and unacceptable. Shame on you.
Not certain about that. DoD could firewall every single .MIL computer to block outside connectivity making them virtually impenetrable, but it doesn't because of so-called troup "morale". The soldiers and civilians need to be able to surf the web, so the gateways are left open and the security administrators continuously play catchup on hackers. By all accounts, DoD is still far more secure than most other government agencies. God forbid!