Live data from Hacker News

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

theatlantic.com

231–240 of 1001 posts

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

#231
post #52

That is absolutely wild. How is this not on the front page?

To what end? How is this newsworthy any more? It has the President's blessing - that's all you need now. If literally storming your government building, threating your representatives and injuring police officers isn't punishable any more what is?

[flagged]

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

#232
post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that a plus? Maybe vs plain old SMS... But, it's a flagrant leak of classified info. Using a medium explicitly prohibited by policy. And likely now lost to time (Signal messages can be configured to auto-delete on a timer), when all of this sort of correspondence is legally required to be retained.

> How is that a plus? They could've used Telegram /s. It's popular with the crypto crowd after all.

They probably do also use Telegram https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveywinder/2025/03/22/russian-...

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

#233

Even worse, Trump wasn't aware of this leak (or denies knowledge of it) until questioned at a press conference earlier today. And instead of promising an investigation, the best he can do is throw some weak insults at The Atlantic. BUTTERY MALES indeed.

> Trump wasn't aware of this leak (or denies knowledge of it) until questioned at a press conference earlier today. Trump routinely denies knowledge of things he doesn't want to talk about, even things that he has previously demonstrated knowledge about. It's a standard deflection that he never gets called out on or significant pushback on the implications of his claimed lack of knowledge, so he keeps doing it.

Well I think it's very common for representatives to not directly reply after a certain incident, because they don't have all the details yet and they want to take time to form a proper response. Don't see how this is specific to Trump.

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

#235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Trump wasn't aware of this leak (or denies knowledge of it) until questioned at a press conference earlier today. Trump routinely denies knowledge of things he doesn't want to talk about, even things that he has previously demonstrated knowledge about. It's a standard deflection that he never gets called out on or significant pushback on the implications of his claimed lack of knowledge, so he keeps doing it.

Well I think it's very common for representatives to not directly reply after a certain incident, because they don't have all the details yet and they want to take time to form a proper response. Don't see how this is specific to Trump.

I didn't say being evasive immediately after an incident (either to gather facts or put together a strategy) was specific to Trump, I said feigning ignorance including of material he has previously demonstrated awareness when he doesn't want to talk about something is a repeated pattern for Trump.

Those are distinct, though potentially overlapping, behavioral patterns.

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

#236

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 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 t…

[flagged]

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

#237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I think it's very common for representatives to not directly reply after a certain incident, because they don't have all the details yet and they want to take time to form a proper response. Don't see how this is specific to Trump.

I didn't say being evasive immediately after an incident (either to gather facts or put together a strategy) was specific to Trump, I said feigning ignorance including of material he has previously demonstrated awareness when he doesn't want to talk about something is a repeated pattern for Trump. Those are distinct, though potentially overlapping, behavioral patterns.

Can you give some examples? Honestly interested

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

#238
post #195

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.

On the other hand, directly sharing war plans with the press is about as transparent as you can get.

[flagged]

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

#239
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…

[flagged]

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

#240
post #166

In 2023, Hegseth had his own critique of the Biden administration handling classified documents “flippantly”, remarking on Fox News that “If at the very top there’s no accountability”, then we have “two tiers of justice”. https://x.com/MattGertz/status/1904228588414464167 https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/24/journalist-t...

[deleted]
Post reply on HN