Fox News Journo Destroys Trump Excuses On Signalgate — Put Forces ‘Directly And Immediately At Risk’
Fox News Chief National Security Correspondent Jennifer Griffin flayed every Trump administration excuse about Signalgate in a deeply-sourced and unflinching report.
The political media world was stunned Monday when Jeffrey Goldberg dropped a blockbuster report that revealed he was (apparently inadvertently) included in a Signal text chain in which the Principals Committee discussed plans to strike Houthi rebels in Yemen — strikes that shortly came to pass.
In media appearances and Congressional hearings, the Trump administration’s responses have included the claim that the information on the texts was not classified, that they weren’t “war plans” but rather merely “attack plans,” that Goldberg somehow tricked Waltz, or even hacked his way in, or that a lower-level staffer is “somehow” responsible.
Griffin filed a report on the story on Wednseday night’s edition of Fox News Channel’s Special Report. summarizing the text controversy and reporting on Congressional reactions from the Pentagon.
But Griffin dove considerably deeper in a damning post on X/Twitter in which Defense insiders took a sledgehammer to President Donald Trump’s national security team and their rationalizations:
There is a debate about whether the operational details Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth shared in the Signal Group Chat were “classified” or not. So I surveyed a range of current and former US defense officials who agreed “war plans” is not the right term but what was shared may have been FAR MORE sensitive given the operational details and time stamps ahead of the operation, which could have placed US military pilots in harms way.
What Hegseth shared two hours ahead of the strikes were time sensitive “attack orders” or “operational plans” with actual timing of the strikes and mention of F18s, MQ9 Reapers and Tomahawks. This information is typically sent through classified channels to the commanders in the field as “secret, no forn” message. In other words the information is “classified” and should not be shared through insecure channels.
“Attack orders” or “attack sequence” puts the joint force directly and immediately at risk, according to former senior defense official #1. “It allows the enemy to move the target and increase lethal actions against US forces.”
This kind of real time operational information is more sensitive than “war plans,” which makes this lapse more egregious, according to two former senior US defense officials.
“This information was clearly classified,” according to former senior defense official #1.
The Defense Secretary can retroactively declassify information after the fact, but the fact that this was shared in real time before the strike took place makes it unlikely to have been declassified when it was being shared and seen by the journalist for The Atlantic who was inadvertently included in the Signal chat.
According to a second former senior US defense official, when Hegseth says he didn’t release “war plans” that is pure semantics. These were “attack plans.” “If you are revealing who is going to be attacked (Houthis – the name of the text chain), it still gives the enemy warning. When you release the time of the attack – all of that is always ‘classified’.”
Griffin’s reporting got an on-air shoutout from correspondent Ashley Strohmeier near midnight, who told Trace Gallagher “Jennifer Griffin spoke with multiple U.S. defense officials who said attack plans are actually much more sensitive than war plans.”
Watch above via Fox News Channel’s Special Report.
