Much Adu About Nothing. The Signal Scandal.

The recent disclosure of a Signal thread by high level officials shows sloppiness, but not unauthorized disclosure of classified information. 

The usual suspects are screaming about a compromise of a classified war plan by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, National Security Advisor Michael Waltz, among others. Now people who should know better are screaming about the compromise of “classified” information on an unsecure network (paging Mrs. Bill Clinton).  

 

In handling similar issues over the years, I’ve learned to calm down, investigate the matter, obtain the facts, then go forward. First, look at the source. Jeffrey Goldberg and The Atlantic are known Trump haters, facts be damned. More on that later. 

 

It is useful define what is classified information? It’s information or assets secured to protect the nation’s security. There are three basic levels, in order: 

 

CONFIDENTIAL: Unauthorized disclosure will cause damage to the nation’s security, such as unit radio call signs (they are changed at least regularly).

 

SECRET: Unauthorized disclosure will cause serious damage to the nation’s security, such as most national defense plans or intelligence agency budget plans.  

 

TOP SECRET: Unauthorized disclosure will cause exceptionally grave damage to the nation’s security, such as technical specifications of weapon systems or intelligence assets. 

 

Also, what makes something classified? An office holder must, by statue, have Original Classification Authority. They are authorized by the president to declare information or items classified. The National Security Advisor,  Secretaries of State, Defense, or the Attorney General can classify up to and including TOP SECRET. The Secretaries of Agriculture, HHS, or Transportation can classify up to and including SECRET.  

 

Now, let’s look at Mr. Goldberg’s claims. He states he knew about the March 15^th attack on the Houthi. Did he?

The world found out shortly before 2 p.m. eastern time on March 15 that the United States was bombing Houthi targets across Yemen.

I, however, knew two hours before the first bombs exploded that the attack might be coming. The reason I knew this is that Pete Hegseth, the secretary of defense, had texted me the war plan at 11:44 a.m. The plan included precise information about weapons packages, targets, and timing.

 

This was precise information about targets? No question it was the Houthi, who had been attacking our shipping for years from Yemen, are in Yemen. So is it a surprise we would be attacking the Houthi in…Yemen? But looking at these two screenshots I don’t see the work Yemen mentioned once. So what are the targets specifically. His article has two screen shots from the thread and I don’t see the word Yemen mentioned once. The word Yemen is mentioned twice in this article, once in the introduction. So how did Mr. Goldberg get specific insight into our targets? Sounds like a spy in 1943 England informing the 3^rdReich, “The Allies are planning an invasion of Europe.”

Weapons, ok, there is a list of weapons. The F/A-18 has been our primary Naval aircraft since 1999. We have been using drones such as the MQ-9 Reaper have been used for over 20 years, and the Reaper has been used in Middle East and Afghanistan for attack and intelligence collection for over a decade. Again, it’s like being shocked B-17s are flying out of England to bomb the NAZIs during World War II. 

Timing, yes, he did get advanced notice of about two hours. Was this operational information for our enemies? I doubt the attack time was set four months ago, or one year ago (attacking our enemies was not the priority of the O’Biden administration). Bit of an OPSEC violation, yea. Especially if the NSA put on a high level distro list a radical leftist propagandist. We got enough people leading sensitive/classified information to our nation’s enemies (e.g., The New York Times). We don’t need to give it to them directly. 

But the question still remains, can we take this as the full story? I say that because Mr. Goldberg has not released every screen shot, only two he chose to put out on his magazine website. Not that we don’t trust you sir, but…

You lied about the Russian Collusion Hoax. A discredited narrative that was based on opposition  research from the Hillary Clinton 2016 campaign. 

You lied about President Trump calling fallen soldiers “suckers and losers,” relying only on “anonymous sources,” in spite of over 20 people who were present refuting it, including John Bolton. Mr. Bolton it’s safe to say is no friend of Donald Trump.

Under your “leadership” Mr. Goldberg, The Atlantic has pushed one piece of leftist propaganda after another, such as Jussie Smollett and the Charlottesville “very fine people” comment, which was taken out of context.

So no Mr. Goldberg you’re not give then benefit of the doubt. Or suspension of disbelief for that matter. My first boss in the Army was a great officer and man, and on day one he gave me his expectations for his new lieutenant. First, “You lie to me, you’re dead!” I take it you didn’t get kind of advise at journalism school.

 

If you want to read  the full article, it’s linked here.