The “signal chat” of Trump’s officials could have ended with lost American lives “: Senator Warner

Senator Mark Warner, a Democrat of Virginia, said on Sunday that if information from the signal chat of national security officials of the senior national security officials had been leaked, discussing plans to hit the hutis in Yemen, Americans may have lost themselves.

“Yesterday, yesterday, in Hampton Roads. I made two large municipalities, Virginia Beach and Chesapeake. There are people in the City Council who are friends or relatives of people who are in the [aircraft carrier USS Harry S.] Truman. These people said that if their friends or loved ones flew those planes and that information had been published and the hutis could change their defensive position, we could have lost American lives, “Warner, the classification democrat in the Senate’s Intelligence Committee, said in an interview with the Martha Raddatz co-amplifier in ABC News” this week. “

On Monday, Atlantic chief editor revealed that National Security Advisor Mike Waltz had inadvertently included him in the chat with Trump’s senior officials discussing plans for Yemen’s attack. The Trump administration has rejected the claims that the information included in the Chat was classified information.

Warner said: “There is no doubt, regardless of the agency, that this was classified … and those people who get objected and give them the benefit of the doubt, I think they are lying that they should know that this is classified.”

Republican representative Mike Turner, former president of the Chamber Intelligence Committee, and former NATO Supreme Commander James Stavridis also intervened in the “this week” signal chat.

Here are more prominent from the interviews of Warner, Turner and Stavridis:

Warner about whether the information was classified in the chat

Raddatz: “There have been very strong denials of the administration that there was something classified. So, simply, was this information classified or not?”

Warner: “Absolutely. It was of such a nature when you were doing the real battle plans and the moment, what kind of airplane were sent. If you had been a traditional military officer or a social worker of the CIA, and it was this careless and neglected with this classified information, you would be fired, no doubt.”

Warner in Bondi’s response

Attorney General Pam Bondi told Fox News that he believes that Signal is a safe way to communicate and that they cannot be pirate by foreign adversaries.

Raddatz: “That’s true?”

Warner: “The signal is safer than its normal cell phones. It is encrypted. But if Mrs. Bondi had analyzed any of the orientations of the intelligence community than the states explicitly do not use the signal for classified information.”

Raddatz: “Do you use a sign?”

Warner: “I use Signal to talk to someone because it is safer. Actually, encouragement to people to use Signal, but that still does not mean that it is safer, it can put classified information. In fact, in fact, if Mrs. Bondi knew something about her work, she will know that we have reports from China and Russia that try to break the signal.”

Turner about whether the information was classified in the chat

Raddatz: “So let me ask you specifically what I asked Senator Warner. Do you think this?

Turner: “Well, clearly, the issue that is being discussed, the state of the current military operations, must be and consider classified information. And it is surprising to find it in an unlacified way, find it in this way is surprising. However, it is not war plans and in the Atlantic and, and Goldberg certainly,” “

Raddatz: “But is that kind of word game in a way? They were attack plans. I mean, they said when, he said when the F-18 would be released, then, you know, war plans, attack plans?”

Turner: “They really were not attack plans. You know they were, they were in discussions about the current military operations. But in that, the Atlantic and Goldberg really did overvalue. You know, classified content.”

Raddatz: “Then you say it is possible, so you are saying that it is possible that Pete Heghseth says: when he wrote those messages, he was classified, and then, since he said: ‘Oh, it is not classified’, and everyone else had been declassified?”

Turner: “He would have been within his authority. It is something that the inspector general will see.”

Turner in Hegseth’s ability to declassify information

Raddatz: “So, then would you say that it is classified? Or not?”

Turner: “I would say that the White House is perhaps being legalistic and that the people who are discussing this information, certainly, have the ability to declassify the information. And as they made the decision to enter a declassified conversation, perhaps it was declassified. And that is something I think is going to”

Raddatz: “By – by Hegseth?”

Turner: “Maybe. And that goes to the question of – of perhaps what we are going to see in this general investigation of the inspector that the Senate Armed Services Committee has requested. Actually, they have asked those who analyze the use of the signal between the agencies, but the source of this information. Was they given them?

Turner in Mike Waltz and Pete Hegseth

Raddatz: “Do you think there should be some responsibility? And you have confidence in Secretary Hegseth and Mike Waltz in the future?”

Turner: “Absolutely. Absolutely. I think they are doing an excellent job. They are incredibly important for our national security. And certainly, there was no impact on this operation. It was a great operation and I think they are doing an excellent job.”

Stavridis on foreign implications in the signaling application

Raddatz: “Almirante, has had many important jobs over the years, including the upper military assistant for [former Secretary of Defense] Donald Rumsfeld. So, when you look at what happened with that signal application, do you think I could have put lives at risk? “

Stavridis: “I have no doubt that I could have done it. Every time you reveal tactical information, you don’t know where it ends. Potentially, Russia, China, could talk to Iran, which could talk to the hutis, absolutely, would put lives at risk.”

Raddatz: “Do you think there should be responsibility?”

Stavridis: “I think that depends on the commander in chief, the president. I believe that what should be immediately is an exhaustive public and transparent investigation. Where are those cell phones now? What other information, what other conversations were carried out on them?”