I listened to the whole hearing in real time while driving. While I couldn’t see her, Gabbard was clearly intimidated by the committee grandstanding. There were hairs to be split that she lost track of. I even commented to my stoker in real time that she fell apart. If you listen to all of her remarks, it becomes clear that she was talking about intelligence info.
Pretty much. He was definitely responsible with the information.
That’s the point I’ve been thinking about. There seems to be an assumption they were all using gov phones. Has that been confirmed?
It had no classified information on it with one exception. She sent something that after she sent it, it was changed to classified. Was she wrong for doing this absolutely. Dumb. However, let’s not forget the incident with Ivanka Trump’s use of personal email for official White House business. In neither of those cases were American service members lives at risk as in this Signal chat situation. Funny how Hegseth said accountability was back when he got the position.
I believe I saw where government phones can’t have the Signal app on them. I’m sure it has to do with security and the laws regarding the Presidential Records Act.
Just to be clear, using government phones wouldn't have changed the circumstances at all - other than they'd have been signing in with their CAC credentials and password. Almost all government phones are for unclassified use. They do allow extra encryption (and decryption) that they wouldn't have on their personal phones. This allows them to read and write encrypted emails on the Outlook apps. They do allow for passing along some sensitive unclassified information (called controlled unclassified - or CUI) like a social security number and things like that. It would have made no difference with the Signal app.
It's possible. I know they have Microsoft Teams on them, and I was invited and attended Teams meetings with government personnel before I retired from my last job. I know some attended those meetings using their government phones.
And the NSC who was directly involved in this whole bed sh*tting is going to investigate? How do we think that will turn out? They’re going to find a low level staffer to blame and then summarily fire that person. They haven’t even apologized for this crap. Arrogance at the highest levels. And these people are in the intelligence community. Kind of an oxymoron. I feel so much safer knowing they are guarding the country from our enemies.
Wrong. HRC said words to that effect, but she was absolutely lying. The State IG and FBI investigations found 100 emails contained information that should have been deemed classified at the time they were sent, including 65 emails deemed "Secret" and 22 deemed "Top Secret". An additional 2,093 emails were retroactively designated confidential by the State Department. Some of the "Top Secret" information was TS/SAP (SAP is Special Access Programs), which is information that is SAP because compromise of it could expose sources and methods, including intelligence personnel and informants, and could result in their capture or death. This is classified information on these emails, not classified documents. Only three of them actually had classified information. Classified information in unclassified email is still classified at their original level (see above) and must be protected the same whether marked or not. Dozens of government personnel were found to have accessed the classified information via those emails. Several were the people that introduced the classified information which ultimately ended up on HRC's unauthorized and unclassified email server.
#81.
True, it is worse to use personal cells because those are far easier for foreign intel access. Government phones have more security features than a personal cell, plus they're monitored by IT in that they can see unauthorized application usage and things like that.
You're a fool.
This is 100% correct. To me the #1 issue is if they are using personal devices. If they are using personal devices then everything else is moot. The second issue is if Waltz is a mole. If he even mistakenly added goldenberg to this group what else was he leaking to him? Why was goldenberg even in his contacts? Waltz might be looking at serious time behind bars.
If they were using personal cell phones and Witkoff was using one while in Russia Trump should demand their resignations immediately. With the amount of intel on those devices I'd be concerned that we are at risk of a surprise attack from Russia or China on the homeland.
Wrong. It'll never be moot to pass mission strike plan details, in advance of the strikes, via an unclassified application. Government phones don't allow for that either.
Of course they can. It happens every day. There wasn't a thing wrong with any line of questioning . The fact that the questioning was difficult does not make the manner in which it was said improper.
I didn't say it would. If they were actually using personal devices that's the end of the story because that's the worst possible thing they could have done.
No--she did not. This is the exact testimony from yesterday:
I might have been wrong about the classification level of strike mission plans. I said it was at least Secret but could be Top Secret. the DNI Classification guide says they're always Top Secret in advance of the strike. The details were in that Signal chat in advance of the attack, so it was Top Secret information. It's been a long time since I've seen a strike plan so I got the level sort of wrong when I said it could be Secret rather than Top Secret. It won't change anything, but the significance of this information being Top Secret is important.
You obviously may have listened but your comprehension skills are severely lacking.
Correct. Those are her words. But not all her words. Cotton u tried to get her back where she was. She was in meltdown. She constantly deferred questions about other agencies. She spoke only about intelligence.
I accept your admission that you may have been wrong.😄
At first I thought this was implying they were going after Goldberg for today's release - then I read the date of her post. ROFL
FWIW, here's a couple key snippets from CISA's guidance.
I get what you're saying -- about the information being classified or not. And I completely understand that it's operative.
But I don't take what CISA is saying here for discussions about cookie recipes and T-ball games. They did recommend adoption of a public messaging platform "for secure communications" by "highly targeted individuals...likely to possess information of interest to these threat actors."
Why would they do this at all?
That “yes or no” crap doesn't fly in my presence.
I don't think that's clear at all, @twenty02. They specifically reference "sensitive communications." Does that not imply official government business?
I am reading it. And I don't get the impression at all that it's merely in reference to non-sensitive information (ie, non government business). It clearly references sensitive information -- which implies government business.
