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

291–300 of 1001 posts

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

#291

Post by Braxton1980 »

impendingchange wrote: post #262
danso wrote: 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…

Almost as bad as a private email server being used for governmental business.

“People have gone to jail for 1/100th of what – even 1/1,000th of what Hillary Clinton did.” -Hegseth

“How is it Hillary Clinton can delete 33,000 government emails on a private server yet President Trump gets indicted for having documents he could declassify?” - Waltz

“Nobody is above the law. Not even Hillary Clinton – even though she thinks she is,” -Rubio

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

#292

Post by yencabulator »

amai wrote: post #45

Reminds me of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Taurus_leak „Among the topics the officials discussed in their conversation, conducted using standard commercial Cisco Webex video conferencing software, were the presence of UK and US military personnel in Ukraine and the potential use of Taurus missiles to blow up the Crimean Bridge.“

A thing using authorized channels that was spied on by a different state has practically nothing in common with this.

(Yes, it probably shouldn't have been an authorized channel, but it was.)

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

#293

Post by ttyprintk »

neverokay wrote: post #94
dzhiurgis wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> not exactly world war level apps. And what is?

A face to face meeting in a bunker. But seriously, we pondered the psychological damage of those who are drone operators. How is this different? There should be more ceremony when making decisions like this, not an afternoon group chat. Dress for it, look yourself in the face for it. Be present. I’ll just say one thing about this administration. It is often true that when one thing is wrong with a man, then it’s poss…

The smartest people who ever lived worked on mid-century Cold War strategy, which was non-partisan. Von Neumann, Thomas Schelling, etc. The Secretary of Defense is supposed to be the best possible communicator of those ideas to the President, at all hours of the day. You and I and everyone else in this thread know what crystal-forming pressure that meant for SECDEF in the 1960s. Nowadays, half of those potential qualities (for this President) come from just being seen on Fox News; he's already "dressed for it".

But Hegseth is such an average person. With charisma, he could aw-shucks his way past the media. Unlike McNamara, Hegseth is not charged with proving how important a competent SECDEF is. Maybe even demonstrating how arbitrary the standard can be given such an average person can just, well, phone it in.

While it's true that no sum of such average people will ever approach one John Von Neumann, it's not fair to blame an average person with some self-awareness for their every flaw. Which is why Hegseth's denials move the needle from "forgivable mistakes expected from Joe Blow" to "history-making example of Dunning-Kruger".

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

#294

Post by financetechbro »

This story lacks substance and is a perfect of example of medias complacency to the state in the name of “national security”… total BS. Ken Klippenstein has a great take on this reporting.

https://open.substack.com/pub/kenklippenstein/p/trump-admin-...

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

#295

Post by nanna »

Relatively minor side point, but still: for people who chastise "European freeloading", it's interesting to note that none of Signal group's members' usernames have the badge Signal gives users who pay for the service. Users like me, from Europe. Sure, they might all be paying but have opted out, but let's be honest that's unlikely.

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

#296

Post by frenchman_in_ny »

In the banking world, employees have been fined significant sums, or even forced from their jobs [0], for unauthorized use of messaging platforms. And here, it's barely a shrug. Unbelievable.

[0] https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/morgan-stanley-hit-...

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

#297

Post by esalman »

AbstractH24 wrote: post #270
esalman wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Move fast and break things bro

Why Silicon Valley and Washington DC should stay on different sides of the country

Agree. Washington DC in fact provides all the incentives silicon valley needs to flourish. It's just that silicon valley needs more self awareness and stay out of politics.

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

#298

Post by yencabulator »

kccoder wrote: post #221
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.

Trump's razor: The opposite of what he says is closer to the truth.

Addendum: Anything GOP accuses others of, they're doing.

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

#299

Post by mindslight »

Philadelphia wrote: post #206
mindslight wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 —…

For sure there is a much longer sweeping arc to the rabid anti-American performative politics of the modern Republican party. My point was that social media now means that people are saturated in more media consumption than ever, with the double punch of much of it being cast as coming from many other people they know.

For example, I feel that in the early 2000's, it would have been possible to get across the point that Breonna Taylor (Kenneth Walker) was really a 2nd amendment issue [0]. You may or may not care about 2A issues. I do care, although it's not a huge focus of mine. But they purport to care greatly, so it should be possible to engage on that, right? But now the reflexive emotional revulsion to the topic created by continual tribal priming (all day every day) is just too great.

[0] if a probable response to defending yourself in your home at night is government agents unleashing a state-sanctioned hail of bullets into your family, how has defending your home not been effectively prohibited?

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

#300

Post by nunez »

9dev wrote: post #254
nunez wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. When you get a clearance, it is inculcated upon you that you absolutely do not leak cleared information. If you THINK something cleared, it's best to treat it like it is. It's possible that there is some 10D chess happening here, but I wouldn't expect details like this to be approved for apps like Signal.

Can we stop with the nth-D chess nonsense? This administration proves day by day that no advanced tactics are going on, it’s literally just clueless idiots improvising because they’re way out of their league but are too self-absorbed to step back.

That was me reaching REALLY REALLY deeply to find _any_ reason why some of our most powerful leaders would make an obvious blunder like this.
Post reply on HN