logo
Foreign Spies to Team Trump: 👊🇺🇸🔥

Foreign Spies to Team Trump: 👊🇺🇸🔥

New York Times26-03-2025
If you're running the security directorate of a hostile nation, savor this moment. It's never been easier to steal secrets from the United States government. Can you even call it stealing when it's this simple? The Trump administration has unlocked the vault doors, fired half of the security guards and asked the rest to roll pennies. Walk right in. Take what you want. This is the golden age.
In its first two months, the Trump administration has made move after move that exposes the government to penetration by foreign intelligence services. It's not just the group chat about forthcoming military strikes that The Atlantic revealed on Monday — although that was, to be clear, as audacious and ridiculous a security breach as there has been in decades. The administration short-circuited the process for conducting background checks on top officials, turned tens of thousands of people with access to government secrets into disgruntled ex-employees and announced it was lowering its guard against covert foreign influence operations. It installed one of Elon Musk's satellite internet terminals on the roof of the White House, seemingly to bypass security controls, and gave access to some of the government's more sensitive systems to a teenager with a history of aiding a cybercrime ring, who goes by the nickname Big Balls.
In his first term, President Trump caused an uproar by revealing intelligence to the Russian ambassador that was routinely withheld from America's actual allies. This is something different: the erosion of America's ability to keep any secrets at all. The second Trump administration is treating security like just another stale Washington convention, an annoying impediment to its ambitions to move fast, break the bureaucratic state and replace it with an all-powerful executive. The bros in tech and finance don't have to deal with these creaky, fussy restraints. Why should the White House?
Major adversaries pray for this level of chaos, confusion and opportunity. A secretive Chinese network is trying to recruit fired U.S. government workers. The Naval Criminal Investigative Service states with 'high confidence' that foreign adversaries are trying to 'capitalize' on the Trump administration's mass layoffs. But the Chinese Ministry of State Security or the Russian Main Intelligence Directorate aren't the only ones who stand to profit from the Trump administration's disregard for even minimal operational security. Intelligence gathering has become easier for everyone.
So-called zero-click spyware is now sold to regimes and corporations around the globe. Apple has notified users in 150 countries that they've been targeted. A program from a single Israeli spyware maker, the NSO Group, has been deployed in Saudi Arabia, Spain, Hungary, India, Mexico and Rwanda. 'Now the junior varsity countries can come in and succeed,' says Frank Figliuzzi, the F.B.I.'s former assistant director for counterintelligence. 'You don't need to be very sophisticated.'
This should be the time to batten down the hatches. But the Trump administration has other priorities. Around 1,000 F.B.I. agents have been diverted from their regular duties to scrub the case files of Jeffrey Epstein. (Even in New York City — a hotbed of foreign intelligence activity — the F.B.I. field office is 'all hands on deck' on the Epstein review.) Meanwhile, the Justice Department stopped its investigations into the possible compromise of New York City's Mayor Eric Adams by foreign governments. A seven-agency effort to counter Russian sabotage and cyberattacks has been put on hold. Personnel from the bureau's counterterrorism division have been newly asked to pursue those who vandalize Teslas, while the new Joint Task Force Oct. 7 investigates 'illegal support of Hamas on our campuses.'
As for that mortifying incident in which a journalist was invited into a supposedly super-triple-extra-confidential conversation with top military and intelligence leaders, it's hard to know what's worse: not being aware who was in the group chat or conducting the chat on mobile phones. The participants — the intended participants, anyway — may have thought they were safe because their texts were encrypted by the Signal messaging app, prized by the secrecy-minded all over the world. But a chat is only as secure as the people using it. Just a few days ago, the Pentagon issued a warning that Russian hackers were tricking people into letting them join their Signal group texts. Steve Witkoff, a special envoy, accepted an invitation to join a chat anyway — and he did it from Moscow.
There's no way to make a phone completely unhackable. In SCIFs, the secure rooms where Washington officials conduct their most sensitive conversations, phones aren't even allowed in the door.
The people at the center of Signalgate — the national security adviser, Michael Waltz; the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth; the director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard; to name a few — all know this. They all served in the military. They no doubt heard innumerable lectures from counterintelligence experts about all the different ways an adversary can make off with sensitive data. But this is an administration that actively, proudly rejects expertise. It casts those who have it as the corrupt old guard, the real enemy, the 'deep state,' and it touts its own refusal to heed them as proof of its legitimacy and righteousness. By that view, the security establishment must be bent to the White House's will, and if the people at the top don't have the traditional qualifications for their positions, all the better. This is an administration that makes a weekend Fox News host the leader of the world's largest military, puts a conspiracy-minded podcaster in charge of the F.B.I., and has at its pinnacle a reality star turned president. Blunders like this are an inevitable consequence.
'Of course they have their WhatsApp groups and their Signal groups,' Matt Tait told me. Mr. Tait is a well-connected cybersecurity consultant and a former analyst at GCHQ, the British signals intelligence service. 'Fundamentally, they don't really trust the civil service that are working for them, and don't really see any of the constraints that traditionally people would follow as applying to them at all.'
In the coming days the administration's defenders may note, correctly, that much of what the federal government stamps secret barely qualifies as sensitive, and that administrations going back 20 years or more have used their personal devices to talk war and peace. But that does nothing to excuse the recent gaffe, which is why those involved are trying to distract us with claims that fall just this side of comedy. Mr. Waltz suggested that Jeffrey Goldberg, the journalist who was invited to the war planning chat, might have hacked his way in, as if that would make the security concerns better, not worse. Ms. Gabbard claimed the texts exchanged by the group — detailing the targets, timing and weapons system used in an ongoing U.S. attack — were somehow not classified at all, and therefore no secrets had really leaked.
So if you're running a foreign intelligence service, relax. You've got time. This fiasco could've been a wake-up call to the Trump team, an opportunity to overhaul their security procedures and maybe stop courting disaster on quite so many fronts. This administration has decided to go hard in the other direction. 'Nobody's texting war plans,' Mr. Hesgeth told reporters, after being exposed for doing just that. 'I know exactly what I'm doing.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Rubio says peace agreement "a long ways off" after Putin summit
Rubio says peace agreement "a long ways off" after Putin summit

Axios

time22 minutes ago

  • Axios

Rubio says peace agreement "a long ways off" after Putin summit

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Sunday that "we're not at the precipice" of a peace agreement after President Trump's Alaska summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin ended without a deal on Russia's war in Ukraine. The big picture: Trump, who Axios previously reported set a ceasefire as the goal of the talks, said "we didn't get there" after the meeting. Rubio on Sunday said both sides would have to make concessions, but refused to name any that Putin agreed to. Now, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, joined by several European leaders, will travel to Washington for a potentially difficult meeting with Trump on Monday. Driving the news: Rubio, who made appearances across the Sunday political show lineup, told ABC's Martha Raddatz a ceasefire was not the aim, arguing, "You're not going to reach a ceasefire or peace agreement in a meeting" without Ukraine present. If an agreement isn't reached, Rubio said, there will be consequences — but he emphasized the administration is trying to avoid such measures. Late last month, Trump threatened to shorten Putin's deadline to agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine or face heavy sanctions, which he said would include "secondary sanctions and tariffs." Yes, but: Rubio on Sunday argued that if the U.S. levies additional sanctions, the "talking stops." "If this morning the president woke up and said, 'I'm putting these terrible ... strong sanctions on Russia,' that's fine — [it] may make people feel good for a couple hours," he said on Fox's "Sunday Morning Futures." "But here's what you're basically saying ... talks are over for the foreseeable future." He reiterated that view on NBC's "Meet the Press," saying that he doesn't believe new sanctions would force Putin to accept a ceasefire. "We may very well wind up in that place," he said of new sanctions. "I hope not. Because that means that peace talks failed." The other side: Democrats on Sunday blasted the president over the meeting, which began with a red carpet rollout, and denounced the lack of immediate consequences for Russia. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) described the summit as a "great day for Russia" in an interview with NBC's Kristen Welker, saying Putin left with "his photo op with zero commitments made and zero consequences." His Democratic colleague, Sen. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), said on ABC's "This Week" that Trump "got played" by Putin and that "[a]ll the threatened sanctions ... apparently have been set aside." Van Hollen called for the Senate to move ahead on bipartisan legislation that would impose new sanctions on Russia. Catch up quick: Trump, in a Truth Social post after the summit, said the meeting — and a subsequent phone call with Zelensky and European leaders — went "very well." He wrote that it "was determined by all" that a peace agreement, rather than a "mere Ceasefire Agreement" would be the best solution. Zelensky had been adamant that there must be a ceasefire before peace talks, Axios' Barak Ravid reports. The terms that Putin laid out in the summit included that Ukraine cede two of the four regions to which Russia has laid claim and freeze the front lines in the other two, Axios' Barak Ravid and Dave Lawler reported, citing two sources briefed on a call U.S. officials held with other allied leaders. Flashback: Zelensky's Monday trip to Washington comes around six months after Trump's February Oval Office meeting with the Ukrainian leader boiled over into a heated argument. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte are all expected to attend the meeting with Zelensky. Friction point: On CBS News' "Face the Nation," Rubio denied that those leaders were joining Zelensky as backup to protect him from being bullied into a deal. "This is such a stupid media narrative; that they are coming here tomorrow because Trump is going to bully Zelensky into a bad deal," he said. "We invited them to come," he added. "The president invited them to come."

GM's quarterly results illustrate the folly of tariffs
GM's quarterly results illustrate the folly of tariffs

The Hill

time22 minutes ago

  • The Hill

GM's quarterly results illustrate the folly of tariffs

General Motors, a cornerstone of American industry, is suffering the consequences of President Trump's unconstitutional 25 percent tariffs on imported vehicles and auto parts. In the second quarter of 2025, GM suffered a $1.1 billion tariff blow to its operating income, slashing the company's profit margin from a healthy 9 percent to just 6.1 percent. Net income plunged by 36.1 percent from the prior quarter and by a staggering 40.7 percent compared to a year ago. Although the estimated tariff impact for the full year of $4 billion to $5 billion is less than 3 percent of GM's overall revenue, that cost represents more than half of the typical annual income for the company over the past decade. The consequences extend far beyond GM's balance sheet. Tariffs, paid by importers to the federal government, are partly absorbed by companies and partly passed to consumers. We've especially seen this in import-sensitive sectors including furnishings, appliances, clothes and toys. Men's shirts and sweaters, for instance, rose 4.9 percent in June alone. When businesses 'eat' the cost, as GM tried to do last quarter, the fallout is no less severe. Diminished earnings mean less capital for investment in better technology or expanded operations, slowing broader economic growth, fewer resources for pay raises or new jobs — hardly the boon for workers that tariff advocates promise. The data confirms this. Nationwide, 14,000 manufacturing jobs disappeared in the past two months, erasing all gains in 2025. In June, real average weekly earnings dropped by 0.4 percent, an annualized loss of nearly 5 percent. Shareholders are also feeling the pinch. Stock valuations track a company's expected future earnings. Since 2012, GM's stock price increased by more than 200 percent. GM's price-to-earnings ratio today stands at 6.83, almost identical to 2012 levels. Stock prices increased alongside earnings. A sustained $5 billion annual hit, wiping out over half of GM's annual net income, could erase more than $20 billion in market capitalization if valuations adjust. With tariffs eroding profits, is it any wonder that GM's stock has slid 8 percent since its post-2024 election peak and now languishes 13 percent off its 2021 highs? This affects millions of middle-class Americans and retirees with pensions and savings invested. More broadly, lower dividends and diminished returns discourage investment, starving companies of the capital needed to expand. The result: slower growth, fewer jobs and weaker wage gains. GM, to its credit, is fighting to offset 30 percent of this burden by boosting U.S. production, cutting costs and increasing domestic content to comply with the USMCA trade agreement's labyrinthine rules. Yet even if successful, the net impact of $2.8 billion to $3.5 billion will devour a significant slice of GM's already thin margins. Profit margins at GM — as in most other sectors — are far less than conventional wisdom. GM's net profit margin over the past decade has averaged less than 5 percent. In other words, a $30,000 vehicle yields less than $1,500 in profit. GM's plans to shift some production to U.S. plants and rework supply chains is a testament to private enterprise's resilience. But make no mistake: These shifts sacrifice efficiency for compliance. Restructuring operations in a free market in pursuit of efficiency yields more profit, consumer benefit and economic growth. Doing so under duress to escape arbitrary tariffs may result in survival, but without these benefits. Resources that could have fueled innovation or lowered prices are now squandered on navigating artificial trade barriers. As an important sidenote, roughly half the tariff's cost stems from GM's South Korean operations, a stark reminder of the folly of taxing trade with allies. Rather than strengthening ties with democratic partners through bold free-trade agreements, these tariffs risk pushing nations like South Korea toward China, America's chief adversary. Far from economic strategy, it is geopolitical shortsightedness. Politicians sometimes prefer tariffs to other forms of taxation because they are less visible than taxes on income or sales. This makes it easier to dodge accountability by blaming 'greedy' corporations. For this reason, Trump called Jeff Bezos to deter Amazon from listing tariff costs on purchases. The White House press secretary labeled this a 'hostile and political act by Amazon.' Regardless, protectionism is not cost-free. Sustained tariffs will raise prices, shrink profits, erode real wages and slow economic growth. GM's quarterly results are a warning.

Zelensky Ally Says He Hopes JD Vance Not at Trump Meeting
Zelensky Ally Says He Hopes JD Vance Not at Trump Meeting

Newsweek

time23 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

Zelensky Ally Says He Hopes JD Vance Not at Trump Meeting

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's upcoming return to the White House will likely go smoother if Vice President JD Vance does not attend, a senior Ukrainian official has said. The Ukrainian leader's now-infamous trip to the White House in late February saw Zelensky berated by President Donald Trump and the vice president in front of the world's cameras. The visit was a dip in already strained relations between Kyiv and the Trump administration, a hideous diplomatic moment Ukrainian officials have been keen to rectify as U.S. efforts to reach a deal to end the fighting grind on. It will be better for the Ukrainian delegation if Vance is not present for Monday's meeting, Oleksandr Merezhko, the chair of Ukraine's parliamentary foreign affairs committee and a member of Zelensky's Servant of the People party, told Newsweek. The February Oval Office meeting saw Vance "provoking" the Ukrainian leader, Merezhko said. Vice President JD Vance, right, speaks with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, left, as President Donald Trump listens in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., on February 28, 2025. Vice President JD Vance, right, speaks with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, left, as President Donald Trump listens in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., on February 28, 2025. AP Photo/ Mystyslav Chernov, File) In among various barbed exchanges, Vance told Zelensky: "Offer some words of appreciation for the United States of America and the president who's trying to save your country." Zelensky "learned his lesson" from February, and will aim to strike a diplomatic and respectful tone, Merezhko said. The Trump administration is less likely to "bully him again" if the Ukrainian leader is joined by Ukraine's European allies, Merezhko added. A number of Europe's heads of state have confirmed they will make the journey to Washington for the meeting at the White House with Zelensky, including British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and French President Emmanuel Macron. Finnish President Alexander Stubb may attend, Politico reported on Sunday. The Finnish leader has bonded with Trump over a shared love of golfing while leading a country with a significant land border, and apprehension toward, Russia. Also expected to attend are Ursula von der Leyen, the head of the European Commission, and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, who has pieced together a close relationship with Trump while corralling Europe toward unity. Europe has jostled hard to maintain relevance in U.S.-brokered peace talks over Ukraine, looking on with nervousness at the apparent reluctance of the current administration to punish Russia or leverage significant concessions from Moscow despite its threats to do so. European leaders met virtually with Zelensky and Trump ahead of the Republican's summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday, reiterating that Ukraine should be involved in negotiations and that international borders should not be changed by force. The issue of which territory Russia and Ukraine will control in a ceasefire agreement has been one of the biggest obstacles to a deal to end the fighting. Russia annexed Crimea, the peninsula to the south of mainland Ukraine, in 2014, and backed separatists in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of eastern Ukraine that are collectively known as the Donbas, Ukraine's industrial heartland. In fall 2022, after Moscow launched its full-scale invasion in the February, Russia declared Donetsk and Luhansk as annexed territory now part of Russia, along with the southern Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions. While Russia controls the vast majority of Luhansk, Ukraine retains its grip on about a quarter of Donetsk and of much of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia. Russia's claim to these regions is not internationally recognized. The Kremlin has positioned its territorial demands as a key sticking point in negotiations. Kyiv has repeatedly said it will not reward Russia's invasion with territory, and to cede these areas would go against the country's constitution. After the Anchorage summit, Trump told European leaders that he backed a plan in which Ukraine would cede territory it still controlled to Russia, The New York Times reported, citing two senior European officials. Reuters reported that Russia had said it would offer slivers of land it currently controls in Ukraine in exchange for Kyiv ceding chunks of land in the east that Russia does not currently control, citing sources briefed on the Kremlin's thinking. Under the proposal, Ukraine would fully withdraw from Donetsk and Luhansk, with the current front lines in the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions to the south frozen in place, according to the report. Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, said on Sunday that despite the Alaska summit yielding no deal, Ukraine would have "Article 5-like" protections to ward off any future attempt by Russia to attack its neighbor. Article 5 is the provision in NATO's founding treaty that means that an attack on any member country in the alliance is treated as an attack on all. It is not clear how the arrangement Witkoff referred to would work. Ukraine has consistently said it needs security guarantees, and not to be bound by any limits on the size of its military. Kyiv also wants to be on the path to NATO and European Union membership. Russia wants Ukraine to be a neutral state. Expectations are low for the Monday meeting, Merezhko said. "You cannot reconcile them," he said, referring to the Ukrainian and Russian demands. "Now it is really up to President Zelensky to get it done," Trump told Fox News following the Alaska summit. "I would also say the European nations have to get involved a little bit."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store