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

201–210 of 1001 posts

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

#201

Post by tptacek »

itbeho wrote: post #159
tptacek wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As soon as he realizes (or a reasonable person would realize) that the group chat is not a hoax, and that he is getting confidential military information over that channel, his continued membership in the channel demonstrates intent to receive the information, which makes anything he writes about it in the future legally problematic. It's complicated and it's not like just receiving classified information from a sour…

There should be protection for people that receive information in this manner that is equivalent to whistleblower protection. No law abiding citizen should ever be prosecuted in favor of protecting a government fuck up.

I agree. I'm remarking positively, not normatively.

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

#203

Post by jredwards »

atonse wrote: post #141

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…

There is someone with the same initials, not with the same name. I saw someone else point out a potential candidate here but I don't recall the exact name.

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

#204

Post by roughly »

atonse wrote: post #141

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…

I mean, I expect the actual approved governmental secure messaging apps would make it much harder to accidentally add a journalist to the thread, so I don’t know if this is a Signal problem per se.

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

#205

Post by malshe »

cocacola1 wrote: post #146
malshe wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I think that's a fair assessment. Goldberg seems to have strong journalistic ethics too. Again, from Bluesky,

David Graham asks Jeffrey Goldberg about possible retaliation

Jeffrey: It's not my role to care about the possibility of threats or retaliation. We just have to come to work and do our jobs to the best of our ability. Unfortunately, in our society today—-we see this across corporate journalism and law firms and other industries--there's too much preemptive obeying for my taste. All we can do is just go do our jobs.

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

#206

Post by Philadelphia »

mindslight wrote: post #153
anigbrowl wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SO much for 'the most transparent administration in history', not that I bought into that claim in the first place. Seems like a violation of multiple public record-keeping laws.

But they are extremely transparent. All of their actions are clearly in furtherance of corruption, stealing, and helping Russia (and China) destroy the United States. Unfortunately we also live in the time with the largest mass media consumption (social media), all but guaranteeing their followers keep rationalizing their actions with a litany of talking points rather than understanding straightforward criticism said…

It's not just social media. What enabled things to get to this point was Fox News, which was created specifically to do that.

" In 1970, political consultant Roger Ailes and other Nixon aides came up with a plan to create a new TV network that would circumvent existing media and provide "pro-administration" coverage to millions. "People are lazy," the aides explained in a memo. "With television you just sit — watch — listen. The thinking is done for you." Nixon embraced the idea, saying he and his supporters needed "our own news" from a network that would lead "a brutal, vicious attack on the opposition." "

https://theweek.com/articles/880107/why-fox-news-created

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

#209

Post by iszomer »

pstuart wrote: post #160
maronato wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The obvious follow up is what else do they illegally delete? If they’re doing it so blatantly to plan for attacks that will eventually be public, contain no conspiracies or illegal activity, and will be used to dunk on Biden, then what else are they automatically deleting? Plus, if China/Russia/Iran/NK weren’t targeting US officials phones and Signal, now they certainly are.

> what else do they illegally delete? Likely everything they can. Rules are for fools in this admin.

[flagged]

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

#210

Post by dylan604 »

consteval wrote: post #136
cocacola1 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sort of surprised Democrats haven’t snapped yet.

A few of them held up signs and some were kicked out. Yes, actually - some of our legislatures were removed from the premises for silently protesting!

The individual kicked out was not silently protesting. At least get the facts straight
Post reply on HN