Live data from Hacker News

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

theatlantic.com

211–220 of 1001 posts

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

#211
post #157

A normal govvie sending cleared materials to unapproved recipients over unapproved channels? 20 years in federal prison. A govvie with status doing the same? A slap on the wrist. Embarrassing.

A Trump cabinet member doing the same? Not even a slap on the wrist.

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

#212
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…

> 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.

The Signal chat group was called the “Houthi PC small group.” It appeared to be a short-term, mission-specific group rather than a long-term, open-ended group. Thus, it's unlikely that much more information would be gained in the future. Goldberg's inclusion in the chat was the main story here, not the specific details revealed to Goldberg, many of which he kept confidential.

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

#213
post #27

> Waltz set some of the messages in the Signal group to disappear after one week, and some after four. That raises questions about whether the officials may have violated federal records law: Text messages about official acts are considered records that should be preserved. I suspect that this was the point of their using Signal, to avoid preservation of records.

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.

Wait, you’re saying the Trump administration might be breaking a rule? Pretty wild accusation

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

#214
post #27

> Waltz set some of the messages in the Signal group to disappear after one week, and some after four. That raises questions about whether the officials may have violated federal records law: Text messages about official acts are considered records that should be preserved. I suspect that this was the point of their using Signal, to avoid preservation of records.

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 her e-mails."

> It’s best to understand that fascists see hypocrisy as a virtue. It’s how they signal that the things they are doing to people were never meant to be equally applied.

> It’s not an inconsistency. It’s very consistent to the only true fascist value, which is domination.

> It’s very important to understand, fascists don’t just see hypocrisy as a necessary evil or an unintended side-effect.

> It’s the purpose. The ability to enjoy yourself the thing you’re able to deny others, because you dominate, is the whole point.

> For fascists, hypocrisy is a great virtue — the greatest.

* https://mastodon.social/@JuliusGoat/109551955251655267

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

#216
post #185
post #182

How can we know this group chat was really comprised of government officials and not some bored teenagers? Signal allows you to set your profile name to anything you like.

From the article: > Brian Hughes, the spokesman for the National Security Council, responded two hours later, confirming the veracity of the Signal group. “This appears to be an authentic message chain, and we are reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain,”

Is there an official statement of this on a government website?

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

#217
post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 a…

> there's too much preemptive obeying for my taste.

From historian Timothy Snyder's book On Tyranny, chapter/lesson number one:

> Do not obey in advance.

* https://www.penguinrandomhouse.ca/books/558051/on-tyranny-by...

* https://timothysnyder.org/on-tyranny/

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

#218
post #11

Staggering display of incompetence and carelessness. And unfortunately, one that we’re unlikely to get much transparency about, in terms of how such an operational screwup was allowed to happen. > At 11:44 a.m., the account labeled “Pete Hegseth” posted in Signal a “TEAM UPDATE.” I will not quote from this update, or from certain other subsequent texts. The information contained in them, if they had been read by an a…

Don’t worry - this massive fuckup will surely spark numerous congressional investigations, resignations, and trigger serious reflection by the administration on their security protocols so they will comply with the necessary recordkeeping laws, confidentiality and proper handling of classified information in the future. Oh who am I kidding. Less than 8h later: “it’s just an oopsie right? No harm no foul- nothing to s…

Move fast and break things bro

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

#219
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…

Agreed.

Very similar to this case in Australia.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/feb/02/abc-agrees-to-...

The ABC had a public interest duty to publicise everything, instead they left 99% unread and returned the contents to the government.

Pathetic.

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

#220
post #80

304 votes, 75 comments 3 hours after posting and this is already being thrown all the way back to 134 rank on the front page with some 2-3 day old posts. This is very clearly hacker news: a case of opsec slipup in easily the worst fashion coming straight from the SecDef (or one representing the SecDef). A shame it is probably getting flamed and downvoted over partisan reasons, although I know there are many conservat…

>A shame it is probably getting flamed and downvoted over partisan reasons Is this the forum for this type of news? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html ... On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity. Off-Topic: Most stories about…

There was a post about George Foreman in the front page the other day so why not this one?
Post reply on HN