CNN: Concerns about Hegseth’s judgment come roaring back after group chat scandal

“I know exactly what I’m doing,” Hegseth told reporters Tuesday.

By Wednesday, however, other defense officials were increasingly skeptical of that, especially after The Atlantic magazine revealed the details that Hegseth shared in the Signal chat about the pending strike on Houthi rebels in Yemen, including the timing and types of aircraft.

“It is safe to say that anybody in uniform would be court-martialed for this,” a defense official told CNN. “My most junior analysts know not to do this.”

But former national security and intelligence officials say it’s Hegseth who looks particularly bad given the level of detail he shared.

“The egregious actor here is Hegseth,” said one former senior intelligence official. “He’s in the bullseye now because he puts all this out on a Signal chat.”

Interviews with multiple current and former national security officials this week, including career military and civilian officials, reflect growing concerns about Hegseth’s leadership at the Pentagon.

Many of his orders are verbal and based on gut instinct rather than a deliberative, multi-layered process, people familiar with his methods said.

“He’s a TV personality,” one of the sources said. “[A general officer] makes a recommendation, and he’s like, ‘Yeah, yeah, go do it.’ [Former Defense Secretary] Lloyd Austin would never be like, ‘Yeah, yeah, go do it.’ 

Several DoD officials told CNN that Hegseth seems more preoccupied with appearances than with substance—wanting to appear more “lethal” than his predecessor and pulling resources from elsewhere in DoD to achieve that image.

….

“Of all the things they could be doing, the places they’re putting their focuses on first are really things that just don’t matter … This was literally a waste of our time,” a defense official told CNN of the content purge. “This does absolutely nothing to make us stronger, more lethal, better prepared.”

And Hegseth is outranked and outclassed by his predecessors:

Hegseth ultimately rose to the rank of Major before leaving the National Guard in 2021, and has the least experience of any Senate-confirmed defense secretary in recent history.

His immediate predecessor Austin, a four-star general, served for 41 years and commanded US Central Command; former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper served as the Secretary of the Army before being confirmed as SecDef; and former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, also a 40-year veteran and four-star general, commanded US Central Command as well before being confirmed as Trump’s first secretary of defense.

Concerns about Hegseth’s judgment come roaring back after group chat scandal

Here Are the Attack Plans That Trump’s Advisers Shared on Signal

The administration has downplayed the importance of the text messages inadvertently sent to The Atlantic’s editor in chief.

So, about that Signal chat.

On Monday, shortly after we published a story about a massive Trump-administration security breach, a reporter asked the secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, why he had shared plans about a forthcoming attack on Yemen on the Signal messaging app. He answered, “Nobody was texting war plans. And that’s all I have to say about that.”

At a Senate hearing yesterday, the director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, and the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, John Ratcliffe, were both asked about the Signal chat, to which Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor in chief of The Atlantic, was inadvertently invited by National Security Adviser Michael Waltz. “There was no classified material that was shared in that Signal group,” Gabbard told members of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Ratcliffe said much the same: “My communications, to be clear, in the Signal message group were entirely permissible and lawful and did not include classified information.”

President Donald Trump, asked yesterday afternoon about the same matter, said, “It wasn’t classified information.”

So if it wasn’t classified, and if the Trump administration is going to openly insult them and call them liars …

The statements by Hegseth, Gabbard, Ratcliffe, and Trump—combined with the assertions made by numerous administration officials that we are lying about the content of the Signal texts—have led us to believe that people should see the texts in order to reach their own conclusions. There is a clear public interest in disclosing the sort of information that Trump advisers included in nonsecure communications channels, especially because senior administration figures are attempting to downplay the significance of the messages that were shared.

And here it is:


Source:

Here Are the Attack Plans That Trump’s Advisers Shared on Signal