Oops, I did it again.
April 20, 2025 5:13 PM Subscribe
Hegseth texted Yemen strike information to his family in a second Signal group chat on his private phone. This time the group chat included his wife and brother, as well as Dan Caldwell and Darin Selnick, who were fired last week for leaking sensitive information.
At this point, the Pentagon is a sieve where classified information is concerned, and surely Hegseth's position as Defense Secretary is now untenable. Isn't it?
At this point, the Pentagon is a sieve where classified information is concerned, and surely Hegseth's position as Defense Secretary is now untenable. Isn't it?
I'm trying to decide between "DUI hire" and "DE1 hire".
posted by clawsoon at 5:29 PM on April 20 [1 favorite]
posted by clawsoon at 5:29 PM on April 20 [1 favorite]
Exhibit 1: "A vulnerability has been identified in the Signal Messenger Application. The use of Signal by common targets of surveillance and espionage activity has made the application a high value target to intercept sensitive information," the internal bulletin begins.
Exhibit 2: Some of those people said that the information Mr. Hegseth shared on the Signal chat included the flight schedules for the f/A-18 Hornets targeting the Houthis in Yemen — essentially the same attack plans that he shared on a separate Signal chat the same day that mistakenly included the editor of The Atlantic.
Mr. Hegseth’s wife, Jennifer, a former fox News producer, is not a Defense Department employee, but she has traveled with him overseas and drawn criticism for accompanying her husband to sensitive meetings with foreign leaders.
Mr. Hegseth’s brother Phil and Tim Parlatore, who continues to serve as his personal lawyer, both have jobs in the Pentagon, but it is not clear why either would need to know about upcoming military strikes aimed at the Houthis in Yemen.
posted by mhoye at 5:32 PM on April 20 [1 favorite]
Exhibit 2: Some of those people said that the information Mr. Hegseth shared on the Signal chat included the flight schedules for the f/A-18 Hornets targeting the Houthis in Yemen — essentially the same attack plans that he shared on a separate Signal chat the same day that mistakenly included the editor of The Atlantic.
Mr. Hegseth’s wife, Jennifer, a former fox News producer, is not a Defense Department employee, but she has traveled with him overseas and drawn criticism for accompanying her husband to sensitive meetings with foreign leaders.
Mr. Hegseth’s brother Phil and Tim Parlatore, who continues to serve as his personal lawyer, both have jobs in the Pentagon, but it is not clear why either would need to know about upcoming military strikes aimed at the Houthis in Yemen.
posted by mhoye at 5:32 PM on April 20 [1 favorite]
The previous leak already revealed operational details to Iran (there are only a few runways that would enable the ordnance delivery for that attack on the Houthis in the time frame implied by his messages.)
Shit like this gets American soldiers killed.
posted by ocschwar at 5:33 PM on April 20
Shit like this gets American soldiers killed.
posted by ocschwar at 5:33 PM on April 20
NYTimes is the original reporting: story link, paywall bypass.
Not just being pedantic linking their story, I'm wondering about the NYT's sourcing. I'm not questioning the story's accuracy, more curious why it's coming out in this way today. I've read this article three times and am failing to understand exactly where their information is coming from. "Officials", unnamed, but how many? And do we know more about them?
Another bit of detail new to me in this article: there's a Pentagon inspector general investigation into the first Signal leak. I thought the White House had buried the story but a bipartisan group of congresspeople requested a Pentagon review which is underway.
(on preview, the "vulnerability' in Signal is a pretty limited phishing weakness. It's real, and Signal is inappropriate for classified use for many reasons, but Signal itself is still one of the most secure consumer communication tools out there.)
posted by Nelson at 5:34 PM on April 20 [2 favorites]
Not just being pedantic linking their story, I'm wondering about the NYT's sourcing. I'm not questioning the story's accuracy, more curious why it's coming out in this way today. I've read this article three times and am failing to understand exactly where their information is coming from. "Officials", unnamed, but how many? And do we know more about them?
Another bit of detail new to me in this article: there's a Pentagon inspector general investigation into the first Signal leak. I thought the White House had buried the story but a bipartisan group of congresspeople requested a Pentagon review which is underway.
(on preview, the "vulnerability' in Signal is a pretty limited phishing weakness. It's real, and Signal is inappropriate for classified use for many reasons, but Signal itself is still one of the most secure consumer communication tools out there.)
posted by Nelson at 5:34 PM on April 20 [2 favorites]
« Older Matters of fact
if I was flying f18s I would be so. pissed.
posted by toodleydoodley at 5:21 PM on April 20