It wasn't a 'hoax,' or a 'nothing-burger, or a 'no big deal.'
It was a security violation, an exercise in arrogance from people who were/are manifestly unqualified-for-their-positions they hold. The most disquieting aspect of all of this for me is how much and quickly this has become just another day in the Trump White House.
There are lots of opinions on the WiskiLeaks Houthi Small Group Signal Chat and Cat Rodeo. Most of them are badly mis and uninformed.
As someone who worked in and for the Department of Defense for over forty-three years, we have some serious issues to confront as a nation, and quickly.
 |
IYKYK |
SUBJECT: Unauthorized Disclosure by Pete Hegseth via Signal ChatDATE OF ASSESSMENT: March 26, 2025
REFERENCE GUIDE:
• Department of Defense Manual 5200.01 Volume 1 (DoDM 5200.01 Vol. 1): Outlines protection of classified operational information.
• 18 U.S. Code § 798: Criminalizes unauthorized disclosure of classified information related to national defense and intelligence activities.
1. CLASSIFICATION VIOLATIONS ANALYSIS:
A. Hegseth Text: “TIME NOW (1144et): Weather is FAVORABLE. Just CONFIRMED w/CENTCOM we are a GO for mission launch.”
Violation Reference: EO 13526, Section 1.4(a): “Information shall be classified if it pertains to military plans, weapons systems, or operations.”
Explanation: Mentioning the precise confirmation by CENTCOM directly exposes real-time military decision-making processes. This disclosure significantly compromises the security of operational timing, enabling adversaries to anticipate and counter U.S. military actions.
B. Hegseth Text: “1215et: F-18s LAUNCH (1st strike package)”
Violation Reference: DoDM 5200.01 Vol. 1, Enclosure 3: “Specific timelines of military operational deployment and weapon system engagement are classified to protect operational effectiveness.”
Explanation: Mentioning F-18s explicitly reveals precise aircraft types and exact launch schedules, thereby providing adversaries essential information needed to prepare defenses or evade U.S. military strikes, critically undermining operational security.
C. Hegseth Text: “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))”
Violation Reference: EO 13526, Section 1.4(c): “Information related to intelligence activities, intelligence sources, or methods must be protected from unauthorized disclosure.”
Explanation: Revealing specific details about the target’s known location and mentioning the deployment of MQ-9 strike drones exposes critical intelligence gathering and targeting methods. This jeopardizes sensitive intelligence capabilities and sources.
D. Hegseth Text: “1410: More F-18s LAUNCH (2nd strike package)”
Violation Reference: DoDM 5200.01 Vol. 1, Enclosure 3: “Detailed operational sequences including specific timing for follow-up military actions are considered classified.”
Explanation: Mentioning additional F-18 strike packages and their precise launch times discloses classified tactical sequences, providing adversaries with clear operational patterns that can be exploited strategically to counter or mitigate U.S. strikes.
E. Hegseth Text: “1415: Strike Drones on Target (THIS IS WHEN THE FIRST BOMBS WILL DEFINITELY DROP, pending earlier ‘Trigger Based’ targets)”
Violation Reference: EO 13526, Section 1.4(g): “Classify information revealing vulnerabilities or specific capabilities of military systems, installations, or infrastructures.”
Explanation: Disclosing the exact moment when drone bombs will definitely drop explicitly reveals critical operational capabilities, timelines, and vulnerabilities, enabling adversaries to prepare countermeasures and potentially neutralize strike effectiveness.
F. Hegseth Text: “1536 F-18 2nd Strike Starts – also, first sea-based Tomahawks launched.”
Violation Reference: DoDM 5200.01 Vol. 1, Enclosure 3: “Deployment details of strategic weapon systems, including cruise missiles, are classified.”
Explanation: Announcing the precise timing and use of strategic Tomahawk missiles from sea-based platforms explicitly reveals classified strategic assets and operational timelines. Such information significantly undermines mission security and operational surprise.
G. Hegseth Text: “MORE TO FOLLOW (per timeline)”
Violation Reference: EO 13526, Section 1.4(a): “Military plans, operational schedules, and subsequent actions are classified.”
Explanation: Mentioning the existence of additional classified operational details explicitly acknowledges further strategic planning. This information allows adversaries to anticipate further classified activities, thereby enhancing their defensive posture.
H. Hegseth Text: “We are currently clean on OPSEC”
Explanation: This statement falsely claims compliance with operational security despite evident breaches, indicating either misunderstanding or intentional misrepresentation of actual security posture.
I. Hegseth Text: “Godspeed to our Warriors.”
Explanation: Non-sensitive statement expressing support; no violation.
2. CONCLUSION AND DETAILED ARGUMENT:
The detailed disclosure by Pete Hegseth constitutes classified war plans due to explicit revelations of operational timings, aircraft types, targeting intelligence, weapon system deployments, and strategic sequencing. Each element directly aligns with categories protected by EO 13526 and DoDM 5200.01 Vol. 1, designed specifically to prevent enemy anticipation and operational compromise. The comprehensive nature of these disclosures significantly threatens mission integrity, operational surprise, and national security.
3. RECOMMENDATIONS:
Immediate investigation, comprehensive training, and potential legal accountability should be pursued under the guidelines of EO 13526, DoDM 5200.01 Vol. 1, and 18 U.S. Code § 798.
-bill kenny