Colorado's DeGette calls for resignation of two Trump officials involved in Signal chat
Democratic U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette speaks at the Colorado Democratic Party watch party on Nov. 5, 2024. (Andrew Fraieli for Colorado Newsline)
U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette, a Denver Democrat, called for Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and National Security Advisory Michael Waltz to resign after release of the full transcript of a Signal chat that accidentally included a journalist.
Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, reported Monday that sensitive details of pending U.S. military action were sent in a group chat on Signal, an encrypted commercial messaging app, of senior Trump administration officials that Waltz accidentally added him to. The Atlantic on Wednesday published the full transcript of the conversation, which included minute-by-minute attack plans ahead of U.S. bombings in Yemen earlier this month. Administration officials had minimized the severity of the breach.
DeGette said 'at minimum' Hegseth and Waltz must resign, and she demanded Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe be investigated for perjury after denying on Wednesday that classified information was shared in the chat. DeGette said 'it may well be that all of these officials need to be fired.'
'The level of incompetence shown by the Secretary of Defense and National Security Advisor is staggering. This is a systemic failure by some of the highest-ranking officials in our government, and if the information shared on this unsecured platform fell into the hands of an adversary, it would have put American servicemembers' lives at risk,' DeGette said in a statement. 'There must be accountability, and their failure to take responsibility while gaslighting the public about what exactly happened demands answers.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
7 minutes ago
- New York Times
As Trump Prepares to Celebrates Army's Founding, His Critics Take to the Streets
President Trump prepared on Saturday to make a show of American military might with a parade of tanks, missiles and aircraft through the heart of the nation's capital, a celebration of the 250th anniversary of the United States Army that has already transformed into a test of wills and competing imagery, with demonstrators around the country decrying his expansion of executive power. On Saturday, central Washington was locked down, divided by a wall of tall, black crowd-control fences designed to assure that the parade, the first of its kind since American troops returned from the Gulf War in 1991, is an uninterrupted demonstration of history and American power. The event was scheduled to go on despite a forecast of thunderstorms. By design, military parades are part national celebration and part international intimidation, and Mr. Trump has wanted one in Washington since he attended a Bastille Day parade in Paris in 2017. Formally, the parade celebrates the decision by the Second Continental Congress on June 14, 1775, to raise a unified, lightly armed force of colonialists after the shock of the battles with British forces at Lexington and Concord. That army, which George Washington took command of a month later, ultimately expelled the far larger, better armed colonial force. But no celebration of history takes place in a political vacuum. And protesters in large cities and small towns from Seattle to Key West were planning to demonstrate against how Mr. Trump is making use of the modern force. His decisions over the past week to federalize the National Guard and call the Marines into the streets of Los Angeles, in support of his immigration roundups, has rekindled a debate about whether he is abusing the powers of the commander in chief. So the country was preparing for a split-screen show of force, before Mr. Trump presides over the parade and roughly 2,000 protests, under the slogan 'No Kings,' take place from Philadelphia to San Francisco to push back against what they see at authoritarian overreach. While the big-city rallies will attract attention, smaller events are being organized in rural areas, including three dozen in Indiana, a state Mr. Trump won last November by 19 points. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
New York Times
7 minutes ago
- New York Times
Washington's Last Military Parade Came at a Very Different Moment
It began with an F-117 stealth fighter flying by as thousands of U.S. troops began a 3.5-mile march from Capitol Hill. The last major military parade in the nation's capital was on June 8, 1991, just months after the end of Operation Desert Storm. It was called the National Victory Celebration, and its festivities were a celebration of American military might and technological prowess after U.S. and coalition forces had expelled the Iraqi army from Kuwait following roughly a month of airstrikes and a 100-hour ground war. Once the wedge-shaped black jet flew down the National Mall, more than a dozen Army and Navy helicopters followed, as did an OV-10 Bronco observation plane from the Marines. Hundreds of thousands of people cheered as more than 8,000 active-duty and reserve service members from the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Coast Guard along with a civilian contingent from the Merchant Marine made their way along the route from Capitol Hill down Constitution Avenue, over the Memorial Bridge across the Potomac River to the Pentagon. Early in the route, they marched under a huge yellow ribbon suspended over the road by cranes. On Saturday, troops and military equipment were set to again roll down the streets of Washington, this time for the Army's 250th birthday celebration. President Trump has boasted about plans for the 'amazing day,' which is also his 79th birthday. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Atlantic
26 minutes ago
- Atlantic
The Senator Who Failed America on Vaccines
It's easy to forget that Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s assault on vaccines—including, most recently, his gutting of the expert committee that guides American vaccine policy—might have been avoided. Four months ago, his nomination for health secretary was in serious jeopardy. The deciding vote seemed to be in the hands of one Republican senator: Bill Cassidy of Louisiana. A physician who gained prominence by vaccinating low-income kids in his home state, Cassidy was wary of the longtime vaccine conspiracist. 'I have been struggling with your nomination,' he told Kennedy during his confirmation hearings in January. Then Cassidy caved. In the speech he gave on the Senate floor explaining his decision, Cassidy said that he'd vote to confirm Kennedy only because he had extracted a number of concessions from the nominee—chief among them that he would preserve, 'without changes,' the very CDC committee Kennedy overhauled this week. Since then, Cassidy has continued to give Kennedy the benefit of the doubt. On Monday, after Kennedy dismissed all 17 members of the vaccine advisory committee, Cassidy posted on X that he was working with Kennedy to prevent the open roles from being filled with 'people who know nothing about vaccines except suspicion.' The senator has failed, undeniably and spectacularly. One new appointee, Robert Malone, has repeatedly spread misinformation (or what he prefers to call 'scientific dissent') about vaccines. Another appointee, Vicky Pebsworth, is on the board of an anti-vax nonprofit, the National Vaccine Information Center. Cassidy may keep insisting that he is doing all he can to stand up for vaccines. But he already had his big chance to do so, and he blew it. Now, with the rest of America, he's watching the nation's vaccine future take a nosedive. So far, the senator hasn't appeared interested in any kind of mea culpa for his faith in Kennedy's promises. On Thursday, I caught Cassidy as he hurried out of a congressional hearing room. He was still reviewing the appointees, he told me and several other reporters who gathered around him. When I chased after him down the hallway to ask more questions, he told me, 'I'll be putting out statements, and I'll let those statements stand for themselves.' A member of his staff dismissed me with a curt 'Thank you, sir.' Cassidy's staff has declined repeated requests for an interview with the senator since the confirmation vote in January. With the exception of Mitch McConnell, every GOP senator voted to confirm Kennedy. They all have to own the health secretary's actions. But Cassidy seemed to be the Republican most concerned about Kennedy's nomination, and there was a good reason to think that the doctor would vote his conscience. In 2021, Cassidy was one of seven Senate Republicans who voted to convict Donald Trump on an impeachment charge after the insurrection at the Capitol. But this time, the senator—who is up for reelection next year, facing a more MAGA-friendly challenger—ultimately fell in line. Cassidy tried to have it both ways: elevating Kennedy to his job while also vowing to constrain him. In casting his confirmation vote, Cassidy implied that the two would be in close communication, and that Kennedy had asked for his input on hiring decisions. The two reportedly had breakfast in March to discuss the health secretary's plan to dramatically reshape the department. 'Senator Cassidy speaks regularly with secretary Kennedy and believes those conversations are much more productive when they're held in private, not through press headlines,' a spokesperson for Cassidy wrote in an email. (A spokesperson for HHS did not immediately respond to a request for comment.) At times, it has appeared as though Cassidy's approach has had some effect on the health secretary. Amid the measles outbreak in Texas earlier this year, Kennedy baselessly questioned the safety of the MMR vaccine. In April, after two unvaccinated children died, Cassidy posted on X: 'Everyone should be vaccinated! There is no treatment for measles. No benefit to getting measles. Top health officials should say so unequivocally b/4 another child dies.' Cassidy didn't call out Kennedy by name, but the health secretary appeared to get the message. Later that day, Kennedy posted that the measles vaccine was the most effective way to stave off illness. ('Completely agree,' Cassidy responded.) All things considered, that's a small victory. Despite Kennedy's claims that he is not an anti-vaxxer, he has enacted a plainly anti-vaccine agenda. Since being confirmed, he has pushed out the FDA's top vaccine regulator, hired a fellow vaccine skeptic to investigate the purported link between autism and shots, and questioned the safety of childhood vaccinations currently recommended by the CDC. As my colleague Katherine J. Wu wrote this week, 'Whether he will admit to it or not, he is serving the most core goal of the anti-vaccine movement—eroding access to, and trust in, immunization.' The reality is that back channels can be only so effective. Cassidy's main power is to call Kennedy before the Senate health committee, which he chairs, and demand an explanation for Kennedy's new appointees to the CDC's vaccine-advisory committee. Cassidy might very well do that. In February, he said that Kennedy would 'come before the committee on a quarterly basis, if requested.' Kennedy did appear before Cassidy's committee last month to answer questions about his efforts to institute mass layoffs at his agency. Some Republicans (and many Democrats) pressed the secretary on those efforts, while others praised them. Cassidy, for his part, expressed concerns about Kennedy's indiscriminate cutting of research programs, but still, he was largely deferential. 'I agree with Secretary Kennedy that HHS needs reform,' Cassidy said. Even if he had disagreed, an angry exchange between a health secretary and a Senate committee doesn't guarantee any policy changes. Lawmakers may try to act like government bureaucrats report to them, but they have limited power once a nominee is already in their job. Technically, lawmakers can impeach Cabinet members, but in American history, a sitting Cabinet member has never been impeached and subsequently removed from office. The long and arduous confirmation process is supposed to be the bulwark against potentially dangerous nominees being put in positions of power. Cassidy and most of his Republican colleagues have already decided not to stop Kennedy from overseeing the largest department in the federal government by budget. Now Kennedy is free to do whatever he wants—senators be damned.
