Chat Affair: Scandal over Military Plan Shared on Signal Also Poses Danger for Donald Trump

RND Chat Affair: Scandal over Military Plan Shared on Signal Also Poses Danger for Donald Trump Matthias Koch • 3 hours • 6 minutes read Technically, everything is relatively easy to explain. Someone was probably a bit distracted. Or had a clumsy, thick thumb. Inviting someone to a mobile chat group who shouldn't have been there can indeed happen. For precisely this reason, however, when it comes to security-related issues, American government officials are prohibited from using such a setting. A Scandal of Historic Dimension This case isn't just about the fact that a journalist was accidentally included in a debate about a secret military plan—the imminent bombing of Houthi targets in Yemen. The completely surprised man, editor-in-chief of "The Atlantic" magazine, fortunately acted responsibly and only later disclosed the incident. Those involved – especially National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, and Vice President J.D. Vance – will have to explain why they even used the globally accessible messaging service Signal, foregoing their government's specially encrypted systems. Five things make this affair a scandal of historic proportions. 1. This is not fake news Time and again, Donald Trump and his supporters have dismissed investigative reports from so-called mainstream media as fake news: Who knows? Some say this, others say that. Such attempts at obfuscation will not work in this case. Because the process has been proven, not just by the notes and screenshots of journalist Jeffrey Goldberg. The White House itself has admitted the incident. "The reported message flow appears to be authentic, and we are investigating how a number was inadvertently inserted into the chain," said Brian Hughes, spokesman for the National Security Council, on Tuesday night. 2. Hegseth Attacks – in a Vulnerable Way One possible strategy for the embarrassed group could be to admit the violation and hope that the furor soon subsides. But Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth makes things worse. After the report became public in the Atlantic, he promptly attacked its editor-in-chief. Goldberg, Hegseth lashed out at a meeting with journalists in Hawaii, is "a fraudulent and highly discredited so-called journalist who has made it his mission to repeatedly spread false information." Hegseth thus vindicates critics, even within his own party, who had warned against the nomination of the impulsive former television host for Secretary of Defense. In fact, the 44-year-old is proving not only professionally incompetent but also unsuitable in character. He has been plagued by allegations of sexual abuse and excessive alcohol consumption for many years. 3. The legal consequences are underestimated Donald Trump himself seemed to want to reassure himself and others on Tuesday night by pointing out that, ultimately, nothing serious had happened. In fact, the military considers the recent attack on Houthi targets in Yemen a successful strike against the Iran-backed militia, which has often used missiles to disrupt shipping in the Red Sea. The military strike initially remained secret only because of Goldberg's loyalty. If the information obtained by Goldberg had fallen into the wrong hands, it could have resulted in first strikes by the enemy – with consequences for the lives and limbs of American marines and pilots. For good reason, a mere abstract threat to national security is often sufficient to make a violation of US secrecy regulations punishable. The legal review has not even begun in this case. They could still lead to surprising results. "One must not underestimate the seriousness of the matter"; says Kevin Carroll, a lawyer specializing in these types of cases who previously worked as a CIA officer. "If these people were junior personnel in uniform, they would be court-martialed." 4. The Democrats are on the rampart – because of Hillary Trump cannot expect any leniency from Congress on this matter. The Democrats are already calling for hearings and investigations and will not let up so easily. "Heads must roll," they said on Tuesday night. There are historical reasons for the current unrest. Hillary Clinton's party has had a score to settle with the Republicans ever since their then-candidate was brought down in the final stages of the 2016 presidential election campaign by the so-called email scandal. During her time as Secretary of State, Clinton used a private email server at her home in Chappaqua instead of exclusively using government servers. This contradicted her own agency's guidelines. In June 2016, then-FBI Director James Comey declared that Clinton and her team had acted "extremely negligently." However, there was no evidence of deliberate conduct and, ultimately, no charges were filed. In neither case did the matter involve the secret preparation for military action now at issue. Trump and his supporters, meanwhile, had escalated their calls for the imprisonment of their opponent: "Lock her up." No one, the Republicans thundered at the time, is above the law. This principle, correct in principle, is now coming back to haunt them. Some Republicans already seem to suspect that they would be well advised to adopt a more defensive stance. "Everyone sends a text message to the wrong person sometimes; it's happened to me," says Republican Representative Don Bacon (Nebraska). "The inexcusable mistake is that in this case, the information was sent over an unsecured network in the first place." 5. Distanced from Trump: Vance is exposed The Signals affair is particularly embarrassing for Vice President Vance. He is exposed in several ways by the text messages documented by the Atlantic. Vance initially argued for postponing the attack on Houthi targets in Yemen if necessary: ​​"I think we're making a mistake." Economically, that would only do the Europeans a favor. Only 3 percent of US trade passes through the Suez Canal, but 40 percent of European trade does. The US, as Europe must recognize, has an anti-European vice president. Vance seems to be seriously trying to avoid anything that could even indirectly help the Europeans around the clock. His anti-European tight-lippedness will only increase suspicions about his wife Usha's upcoming hypocritical visit to Greenland. At the same time, it's noticeable that Vance, in a casual tone, allows himself something in the chat session that he always avoids in public: He distances himself from Trump. Regarding the military strike, which – unfortunately – is helpful for Europe, he writes: "I'm not sure the President realizes how much this contradicts his current message on Europe." Vance then writes: "I'm willing to support the team's consensus and keep these concerns to myself." Trump Can't Ignore All This Will Trump simply shrug off this extensively documented process? Then he'll lose his authority before his new administration has even completed its first 100 days. Once upon a time, Trump dominated only the reality TV show "The Apprentice." Those were halcyon days. Back then, the phrase "You're fired," which he repeatedly uttered, became his trademark. He should now fire his security advisor Waltz, who set up the illegal chat group and inadvertently brought Goldberg into it. He should also fire his Secretary of Defense Hegseth, who saw nothing wrong with communicating about the secret preparations for military action on a general channel. But Vance deserves special attention. Trump can't fire him; Vance, like him, is a representative of the United States elected on November 5th. Trump could, however, ask Vance to resign. Impeachment proceedings with the help of Congress are also an option. There is a politically threatening explanation for Trump from the chat channel meeting of Vance, Waltz, Hegseth & Co.: The bullying of the 78-year-old president, who would be 82 at the end of his term, may have already begun. Can Vance (40) already no longer wait to replace Trump? Does it form a kind of counter-circle? One thing is certain: All consultations conducted through official channels and systems, and registered and documented by the White House, remain visible and comprehensible to the President. But some around Trump seem to be deliberately seeking to evade this very system – even if it comes at the expense of their country's security. That's where the amateurishness turns into the malicious. The Republicans will feel the effects, even in the provinces: "Great again" is not a thing here.