Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 1001 posts

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#141

Post by atonse »

Setting aside the obvious shock of the actual subject, I'm going to try the herculean task of bringing this back to being a HN-related topic...

My guess is that there is someone named Jeffrey Goldberg in the NatSec team (or high up, it seems like a common combination of first and last name at least), and likely that they meant to add him, rather than the EDITOR IN CHIEF of the Atlantic of all people. Could this be a UI/UX thing with Signal? (not differentiating between two Jeffrey Goldbergs on your contact list?).

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#142

Post by malshe »

Balgair wrote: post #77

If anything, I'm a bit surprised that Jeff Goldberg burned this source. If anything, I'd suspect that he'd keep the channel open as long as he could. Or, he's got other channels that work better. All the same, I mean, wow. These guys are just morons here, there's really no other way around it. I'm trying to think of a charitable way to spin this and I've got nothing. Like, very clearly, these people are going to get…

One lawyer I follow on Bluesky mentioned the longer he stayed on more exposed he became to legal ramifications. Also, this involves national security which courts may treat differently than other issues.

I am more surprised that he did not save this incident for a future book

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#145

Post by [deleted] »

iteratethis wrote: post #122

This is bad news for entire genres of books, TV shows and movies that are based on the supreme competence, sophistication and wealth of the Pentagon, NSA and CIA. Turns out US military strategy is the same as me and my mates setting up a bar date. It's a disturbing leak in itself but i take issue with the journalist obsessing over the tool of choice whilst ignoring the actual strategizing. The casual way in which a m…

[deleted]

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#146

Post by cocacola1 »

malshe wrote: post #142
Balgair wrote: post #77

If anything, I'm a bit surprised that Jeff Goldberg burned this source. If anything, I'd suspect that he'd keep the channel open as long as he could. Or, he's got other channels that work better. All the same, I mean, wow. These guys are just morons here, there's really no other way around it. I'm trying to think of a charitable way to spin this and I've got nothing. Like, very clearly, these people are going to get…

One lawyer I follow on Bluesky mentioned the longer he stayed on more exposed he became to legal ramifications. Also, this involves national security which courts may treat differently than other issues. I am more surprised that he did not save this incident for a future book

Might boost their subs. This legit got me to resubscribe to the Atlantic.

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#147

Post by [deleted] »

iszomer wrote: post #139
Jtsummers wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sounds like he received the message purposefully and pretends it was an mistake? Why would he have been added to the group? For what purpose would the current National Security Advisor have to bring in an outsider to discussions that ended up involving almost certainly classified data? > 2h is a lot but not that much time He was added to the group two days (13 March) before the strikes (15 March), not two hours.

My guess is as a honeypot: see who would publish this alleged "leak" and give the administration justification to "open an investigation" on them.

[deleted]

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#148

Post by Jtsummers »

iszomer wrote: post #139
Jtsummers wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sounds like he received the message purposefully and pretends it was an mistake? Why would he have been added to the group? For what purpose would the current National Security Advisor have to bring in an outsider to discussions that ended up involving almost certainly classified data? > 2h is a lot but not that much time He was added to the group two days (13 March) before the strikes (15 March), not two hours.

My guess is as a honeypot: see who would publish this alleged "leak" and give the administration justification to "open an investigation" on them.

That would make a lot more sense if the information hadn't been accurate. You don't leak real operational data deliberately to try and catch someone who might publish it. Because if they do, you've compromised your real mission (the attacks on the Houthis in this case).

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#149

Post by [deleted] »

jacquesm wrote: post #62
tptacek wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I'm pretty sure this is actually about shipping lanes and freedom of navigation. Israel doesn't need the help. If you read the story, one of their concerns is that if they don't act, Israel was going to instead.

So no, then it clearly wasn't about shipping lanes and freedom of navigation but just about taking the credit. After all if Israel was going to do it instead it could simply be solved by waiting a little bit. These guys are super transactional and they were afraid they missed the moment that would allow them to take credit and use it as coin for exchange.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN