Pentagon inspector general opens investigation into Hegseth, Signal chat scandal
For example, the top two members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Republican Chairman Roger Wicker and Democratic Ranking Member Jack Reed, formally requested that the acting inspector general at the Department of Defense open an inquiry into the potential 'use of unclassified networks to discuss sensitive and classified information, as well as the sharing of such information with those who do not have proper clearance and need to know.'
Soon after, Republican Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma appeared on CNN's 'State of the Union' and rejected the suggestion that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth needed to resign, but added that it's 'entirely appropriate' for the Pentagon's inspector general to take a closer look.
As it turns out, officials at the Department of Defense agreed. NBC News reported:
The Pentagon Office of the Inspector General just announced a subject evaluation into allegations that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth used an unclassified commercially available messaging app — Signal — to discuss classified information about military actions in Yemen. ... In addition to looking at whether Hegseth complied with rules governing classified information, the inspector general will also look at whether rules about record retention were followed.
Time will tell what, if anything, the IG's scrutiny produces, but there's no denying that the publicly available information clearly paints an unflattering portrait of the beleaguered amateur Pentagon chief.
By now, the basic elements of the controversy are probably familiar: Top members of Donald Trump's national security team participated in an unsecured group chat about sensitive operational details of a foreign military strike — and they accidentally included a journalist, The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg, in their online conversation.
The final paragraph of Goldberg's piece read, 'All along, members of the Signal group were aware of the need for secrecy and operations security. In his text detailing aspects of the forthcoming attack on Houthi targets, Hegseth wrote to the group — which, at the time, included me — 'We are currently clean on OPSEC.''
'OPSEC' referred to 'operations security.' In other words, the defense secretary was certain that he and his colleagues — while chatting on a free platform that has never been approved for chats about national security and classified intelligence — had locked everything down and created a secure channel of communications.
Of course, we now know that Team Trump was most certainly not 'clean on OPSEC,' Hegseth's embarrassing boast notwithstanding.
What's more, while there was some discussion about whether the discussion included classified information, there's no denying the online chat included highly sensitive information about times and targets, much of which was put there by Hegseth himself.
'1215et: F-18s LAUNCH (1st strike package),' Hegseth told his colleagues in the chat. '1345: 'Trigger Based' F-18 1st Strike Window Starts (Target Terrorist is @ his Known Location so SHOULD BE ON TIME) — also, Strike Drones Launch (MQ-9s).' At one point, the defense secretary literally wrote, 'THIS IS WHEN THE FIRST BOMBS WILL DEFINITELY DROP.'
All of this comes against a backdrop of other damaging headlines about the former Fox News personality, including reports this week that he gave an important Pentagon job to his unqualified younger brother and included his wife in meetings in which sensitive information was discussed, despite her lack of a security clearance.
Earlier this week, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt declared, in reference to the 'Signalgate' fiasco, that 'this case has been closed.' It appears that the Pentagon's inspector general just opened it back up.
This article was originally published on MSNBC.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
27 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Police escort Texas Democrats to prevent new redistricting walkout as California moves to retaliate
AUSTIN, Texas — Texas Democrats who ended a walkout found themselves shadowed by law enforcement officers to keep them from repeating the protest that stalled Republican efforts to redraw congressional districts and fulfill President Donald Trump's desire to reshape U.S. House maps. Republicans in the Texas House forced returning Democrats to sign what the Democrats called 'permission slips,' agreeing to around-the-clock surveillance by state Department of Public Safety officers to leave the floor. However, Democratic Rep. Nicole Collier, of Fort Worth, refused and remained on the House floor Monday night. The Democrats' return to Texas puts the Republican-run Legislature in position to satisfy Trump's demands, possibly later this week, as California Democrats advance new congressional boundaries in retaliation. Lawmakers had officers posted outside their Capitol offices, and suburban Dallas Rep. Mihaela Plesa said one tailed her on her Monday evening drive back to her apartment in Austin after spending much of the day on a couch in her office. She said he went with her for a staff lunch and even down the hallway with her for restroom breaks. 'We were kind of laughing about it, to be honest, but this is really serious stuff,' Plesa said in a telephone interview. 'This is a waste of taxpayer dollars and really performative theater.' Collier, who represents a minority-majority district, said she would not 'sign away my dignity' and allow Republicans to 'control my movements and monitor me.' 'I know these maps will harm my constituents,' she said in a statement. 'I won't just go along quietly with their intimidation or their discrimination.' The tit-for-tat puts the nation's two most populous states at the center of an expanding fight over control of Congress ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. The battle has rallied Democrats nationally following infighting and frustrations among the party's voters since Republicans took total control of the federal government in January. Dozens of Texas Democratic lawmakers left for Illinois and elsewhere on Aug. 3, denying their Republican colleagues the attendance necessary to vote on redrawn maps intended to send five more Texas Republicans to Washington. Republicans now hold 25 of Texas' 38 U.S. House seats. They declared victory Friday, pointing to California's proposal intended to increase Democrats' U.S. House advantage by five seats. Many absent Democrats left Chicago early Monday and landed hours later at a private airfield in Austin, where several boarded a charter bus to the Capitol. Cheering supporters greeted them inside. Republican House Speaker Dustin Burrows did not mention redistricting on the floor but promised swift action on the Legislature's agenda. 'We aren't playing around,' Republican state Rep. Matt Shaheen, whose district includes part of the Dallas area, said in a post on the X social media platform. Even as they declared victory, Democrats acknowledged Republicans can now approve redrawn districts. Texas House Minority Leader Gene Wu said Democrats would challenge the new designs in court. Lawmakers did not take up any bills Monday and were not scheduled to return until Wednesday. Trump has pressured other Republican-run states to consider redistricting, as well, while Democratic governors in multiple statehouses have indicated they would follow California's lead in response. Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom has said his state will hold a Nov. 4 special referendum on the redrawn districts. The president wants to shore up Republicans' narrow House majority and avoid a repeat of the midterms during his first presidency. After gaining House control in 2018, Democrats used their majority to stymie his agenda and twice impeach him. Nationally, the partisan makeup of existing district lines puts Democrats within three seats of a majority. Of the 435 total House seats, only several dozen districts are competitive. So even slight changes in a few states could affect which party wins control. Redistricting typically occurs once at the beginning of each decade after the census. Many states, including Texas, give legislators the power to draw maps. California is among those that empower independent commissions, giving Newsom an additional hurdle. Democratic legislators introduced new California maps Monday. It was the first official move toward the fall referendum asking voters to override the independent commission's work after the 2020 census. The proposed boundaries would replace current ones through 2030. Democrats said they will return the mapmaking power to the commission after that. State Republicans promised lawsuits. Democrats hold 43 out of California's 52 U.S. House seats. The proposal would try to expand that advantage by targeting battleground districts in Northern California, San Diego and Orange counties, and the Central Valley. Some Democratic incumbents also get more left-leaning voters in their districts. 'We don't want this fight, but with our democracy on the line, we cannot run away from this fight,' said Democrat Marc Berman, a California Assembly member who previously chaired the elections committee. Republicans expressed opposition in terms that echoed Democrats in Austin, accusing the majority of abusing power. Sacramento Republicans said they will introduce legislation advocating independent redistricting commissions in all states. Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott launched the expanding battle when he heeded Trump's wishes and added redistricting to an initial special session agenda that included multiple issues, including a package responding to devastating floods that killed more than 130 people last month. Abbott has blamed Democrats' absence for delaying action on those measures. Democrats have answered that Abbott is responsible because he effectively linked the hyper-partisan matter to nonpartisan flood relief. Abbott, Burrows and other Republicans tried various threats and legal maneuvers to pressure Democrats' return, including the governor arguing that Texas judges should remove absent lawmakers from office. As long as they were out of state, lawmakers were beyond the reach of the civil arrest warrants that Burrows issued. The Democrats who returned Monday did so without being detained by law enforcement. The lawmakers who left face fines of up to $500 for each legislative day they missed. Burrows has insisted Democratic lawmakers also will pay pick up the tab for law enforcement who attempted to corral them during the walkout.
The Hill
27 minutes ago
- The Hill
Generational cracks on Israel grow on the right
The Movement is a weekly newsletter tracking the influence and debates steering politics on the right. Sign up here or in the box below. Dramatic shifts in public opinion on Israel that have emerged as the war in Gaza drags on are not just affecting the left side of the political spectrum. Cracks are propagating in a Republican Party and right wing that have been historically supportive of the country. Skepticism of Israel from younger Republicans is increasing as the party debates the meaning of 'America First,' a dynamic that's being reflected on some of the biggest conservative stages and megaphones even as other Republicans double down on their Israel support. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) is going further than even many of her progressive colleagues in accusing Israel of 'genocide' in Gaza. Turning Point USA, the largest conservative youth group in the country, hosted a major debate at its summer conference on how much support the U.S. should give Israel — with attendees cheering both sides. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who has often been the sole GOP vote against pro-Israel measures in the House as he takes a staunch noninterventionist stance on foreign policy, told me he senses a shift on the right. 'I think people are being more vocal now,' Massie said. 'They're probably saying things they thought before but were afraid to say, and now that more people are saying them, it's sort of a cascade effect.' Massie said he's seen that change in support for Israel reflected in internal polls in his district that he's conducted for the last decade. Public surveys show the same thing. A March Pew poll found that 53 percent of surveyed U.S. adults had an unfavorable view of Israel, up from 42 percent in 2022. That negative view is most pronounced among Democratic adults, whose unfavorable views of Israel went up to 69 percent — a dynamic that is dramatically reshaping how Democratic lawmakers are approaching Israel. But there was also a stark shift among Republicans under the age of 50, whose unfavorable views of Israel shot up from 35 percent in 2022 to 50 percent in 2025. Rep. Randy Fine (R-Fla.), who is Jewish and is one of the most vocal defenders of Israel in Congress, said the increasing skepticism of Israel among younger Republicans is due to 'Muslim propaganda.' 'Conservatives generally have a big heart, so those things are going to have some impact on public polling,' Fine told me in a phone interview, going on to deny widespread reports of starvation in Gaza. 'The only people starving in Gaza are the hostages.' The division, though, is not yet large enough to challenge the overwhelming Republican support for Israel. Morton Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America, said that aside from Massie and Greene, Republicans on Capitol Hill have remained 'extremely strong on Israel' and argued that President Trump has been 'stronger on Israel than any president we've ever had.' The Trump administration has notably cited antisemitism on college campuses amid protests of Israel as a basis for cracking down on colleges and universities. A large bipartisan group of congressional lawmakers traveled to Israel with the American Israel Education Foundation, a group affiliated with the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) also traveled to Israel this month. AIPAC spokesperson Marshall Wittmann sent me this comment: 'Reps. Greene and Massie's views and votes on Israel are more aligned with Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez [D-N.Y.], Rashida Tlaib [D-Mich.] and Ilhan Omar [D-Minn.] than any of their Republican House colleagues, who overwhelmingly stand with the Jewish state. Only a few weeks ago, the House resoundingly rejected an anti-Israel amendment offered by Rep. Greene by a vote of 422-6. These extremists are in a distinct minority because they would betray an American ally that shares our values and interests.' Massie and Greene have largely argued against U.S. support for Israel from a noninterventionist, 'America First' perspective. 'They're not a poor country. They don't need our handouts,' Massie said. 'I've been making the economic case, and recently started making the moral case that we shouldn't be sending them the money because their bombing of Gaza's led to tens of thousands of civilian deaths.' Asked about that interpretation of 'America First,' Fine pointed to the hundreds of thousands of American citizens who live in Israel. 'Saying that they should all die doesn't sound like a very America First position.' A chunk of the anti-Israel messages circulating in right-wing circles online are clearly antisemitic — a charge that has also been lobbed at elected Republican critics of Israel. 'I always say, neither party has a monopoly on antisemitism,' Fine said of criticism of Israel from within the GOP. 'I think their voices have been amplified in recent months. But you know, for every one elected Republican antisemite, there are hundreds who stand with Israel.' Massie said of the antisemitism attacks: 'I think they're wearing the word out. … It's ridiculous that you would say somebody's antisemitic based on a vote on legislation.' Still, the Kentucky congressman doesn't expect to see many other elected Republicans to pipe up with Israel criticism. 'Everybody else is still afraid of, basically, Trump and AIPAC,' Massie said. In case you missed it, I chatted with Greene about her decision to dub Israel's actions in Gaza a genocide earlier this month. Welcome to The Movement, a weekly newsletter looking at the influences and debates on the right in Washington. I'm Emily Brooks, House leadership reporter at The Hill. Tell me what's on your radar: ebrooks@ Not already on the list? Subscribe here FROM BANNON GUEST TO BLS PICK President Trump's nomination of Heritage Foundation economist E.J. Antoni to head the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) — coming after Trump fired the agency's previous head after accusing her of rigging jobs numbers — is kicking off widespread skepticism and concerns about politicization of critical data that will define Antoni's upcoming Senate confirmation. Antoni is largely a product of the conservative movement. Before Heritage, he was an economist at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, the major conservative think tank in the state that also produced now-Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts. His profile on the site boasts of his work being featured in a litany of conservative outlets and organizations. One of Antoni's most notable boosters was Steve Bannon, the former senior adviser to Trump who has maintained a prominent perch on the right through his ' War Room ' show. Antoni had appeared on Bannon's show. But the selection of the ideological Antoni — and some of his suggestions for the agency — have raised eyebrows. Antoni told Fox News before his nomination that 'the BLS should suspend issuing the monthly jobs reports, but keep publishing more accurate, though less timely, quarterly data,' since BLS data is often subject to revision. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent later told Bloomberg TV that he did not support the idea of suspending the monthly job reports, while defending Antoni's qualifications. 'I was there when E.J. was interviewed, and he is incredibly qualified,' Bessent said. 'I think the most important thing here is that we get back to the integrity of the numbers, because it just became OK — just like so many things in our government — for it to get sloppy.' Go in depth on Antoni: Trump stuns Wall Street, Washington with controversial BLS nominee, from my colleague Tobias Burns … 'Underlying motives': Why Trump's BLS pick is in for a fight, from Politico's Nick Niedzwiadek and Sam Sutton … The Partisan Economist Trump Wants to Oversee the Nation's Data, from The Wall Street Journal's Paul Kiernan. EARMARKS BATTLE SET TO HEAT UP With the Sept. 30 government funding deadline rapidly approaching, get ready for a big internal GOP battle over earmarks — or community project finding, as they're known in their newest form — when Congress returns. 'The return of earmarks to the annual appropriations bills has sparked a battle among Republicans on Capitol Hill, pitting fiscal hawks against members of the Appropriations Committees and their allies,' my colleague Alex Bolton reports. The dynamic is set to complicate Republicans' path to avoiding a government shutdown, which is already tricky given they will need Democratic support in the Senate to do so. Republican appropriators and beyond are working hard to try to steer funding to their home states, but that is set to clash with fiscal hawks who balk at any increased government spending — a sentiment that has become a core part of the GOP. ON MY CALENDAR Thursday, Aug. 21: The American Enterprise Institute hosts an event on 'The Power of Presence: Sustaining Progress in Reducing Chronic Absenteeism' at 3 p.m. Monday, Aug. 25, to Thursday, Aug. 28: State Policy Network annual meeting in New Orleans. THREE MORE THINGS Last week in The Movement, I wrote about whether Trump's takeover of D.C. police could lead to conservatives getting more interested in cities they have historically loved to hate. Jack Posobiec, activist and editor at Human Events, had an interesting take separating conservatives into two camps, 'ruralcon' and 'citycon.' 'For decades, the American Right has been dominated by the image of the rural conservative — the pickup-driving, small-town patriot with deep roots in red-state soil. You can't help but love this guy,' he wrote. 'But there's a new archetype emerging on the New Right: the citycon — the disaffected conservative trapped behind enemy lines in a blue-state metropolis.' Right-wing provocateur Laura Loomer had a deposition as part of her defamation lawsuit against comedian Bill Maher that was ' uncomfortably revealing,' as The Bulwark's Will Sommer put it, with NSFW 'did-she-really-say-that' digs at Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). Are the Epstein files finally coming? House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) said the Department of Justice will start turning over documents related to its investigation of the sex offender on Friday — a few days later than the Tuesday deadline set in the panel's subpoena that it issued pursuant to a Democratic-led motion in a subcommittee last month. WHAT I'M READING
Los Angeles Times
27 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Letters to the Editor: Trump is in over his head with peace talks, and he doesn't even know it
To the editor: 'If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.' President Trump was a developer, so every negotiation looks like a property deal, thus his insistence on a land swap to end the war ('After welcoming Putin, Trump appears to adopt his goal, agreeing to cede land for peace,' Aug. 16). Thus he sees international diplomacy as just another golf course deal, but bigger. He doesn't appreciate that there are actual people on this property for whom it is not only their home, but also their nation. Do they get traded to Russia along with the land like serfs, or deported like inconvenient residents in his own country? What's worse than being in over your head? Not even being aware that you're in over your head. I weep for what this incompetence is about to do to the brave Ukrainians who have sacrificed so much. Robert Huber, Yorba Linda .. To the editor: Watching our president roll out the red carpet to a Russian dictator currently facing an arrest warrant over war crimes against a free country was astonishing. The fact that Trump consistently spews hatred for the 'radical left' in California (the biggest tax contributor of all the states) shows how twisted the Republican 'own the libs' philosophy has become. No wonder Vladimir Putin was so joyful as he rode away in the presidential limousine: Trump legitimized him on the world stage, and he didn't have to concede a thing. Ken Jacobs, Santa Monica .. To the editor: Trump is a bully and is capable of significant accomplishments only if he can call all of the shots. He does as he likes in Washington because the GOP is thoroughly intimidated. The fact that he went to negotiate with Putin without Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is a perfect example of Trump's hubris and his unfitness to lead this country. He apparently thought that whatever deal he made with Putin would be gratefully received by Ukraine. The shelling continues. Doug Tennant, Laguna Niguel .. To the editor: The Trump/Putin 'peace' conference is easy to understand when one acknowledges that it is a meeting of two unprincipled leaders: Putin, who needs to win the war in Ukraine to serve his egotistical desires of a greater Russia, and Trump, who wants a propaganda victory and a Nobel Peace Prize. Seemingly, neither is concerned about the loss of 1 million Russian soldiers or the destruction of Kyiv. Democratic principles and national sovereignty are of no consequence to either. Robert Shapiro, Laguna Woods .. To the editor: The Oval Office apparently has a bust of Winston Churchill, whom the president has said that he greatly admires. Does anyone else see the irony of Trump emulating Neville Chamberlain more than his successor, Churchill? The Los Angeles Times states that Trump 'agreed with Putin's demand that Ukraine make territorial concessions to end the conflict.' This approach is far closer to Chamberlain's policy of appeasement of Adolf Hitler than it is to the dogged resistance to tyranny displayed by Churchill. Larry Harmell, Los Angeles .. To the editor: Ukrainians have learned to be realists, but could not help but feel a little hope that Trump's meeting with Putin might end with some positive results for them ('After Trump greets Putin with red carpet treatment, Ukrainians feel betrayed,' Aug. 16). After all, Trump told the world that he was trying to end the war. Even those of us who have little faith in Trump's dealings with Putin were hoping for a miracle. Many Americans feel great sympathy for the Ukrainian people and their president. With Trump's recent popularity in decline, if truth be told, a larger percentage of Americans are probably more supportive of Ukraine's brave leader. It is hard to say at this point if any of the symbolism in the meeting would eventually yield positive results for the Ukrainians: the choice of location, the mysterious handshake between Trump and Putin, the secrecy regarding the future of talks between the two men, the abandoned luncheon, the brevity of the visit. These observations did not bode well for Ukraine's future, but there is no doubt that Trump will try to turn it into a winning situation for his diplomacy. Lynn Lorenz, Newport Beach
