March 28, 2025

Friday, March 28, 2025. Annette’s Roundup for Democracy.

A few more issues about the Signal Call, in which war plans were made and military actions were being taken.

1. Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the United States Constitution, [The Congress shall have Power...] To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water.
2. There were no military leaders on the call. Where was the acting chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Christopher Grady?
3. The President claims he knew nothing about it. Scary.

SignalGate

The Israelis are mad.

Israel Supplied Intelligence in Airstrike Discussed in Signal Chat, Officials Say.

Yemenis clean debris in front of their shops after a US airstrikes in Sanaa, Yemen, March 16, 2025.

WASHINGTON—Israel provided sensitive intelligence from a human source in Yemen on a key Houthi military operative targeted in an attack described by national security adviser Mike Waltz in a Signal chat with senior Trump officials, two U.S. officials said.

Shortly after the U.S. strikes began, Waltz texted that a key target of the attacks, a Houthi missile expert, had been seen entering his girlfriend’s building, which he said had been destroyed.

Israeli officials complained privately to U.S. officials that Waltz’s texts became public, one U.S. official said.

Israel’s role in supplying information that helped track the militant highlights the sensitivity of some disclosures in the texts and raises questions about the Trump administration’s contention that no classified information was shared on the Signal chat, a publicly available nongovernmental app.

“The first target—their top missile guy—we had positive ID of him walking into his girlfriend’s building and it is now collapsed,” Waltz wrote.

Waltz didn’t describe the sources of the intelligence but said in another text that the U.S. has “multiple positive ID.” The U.S. also received intelligence about the targets struck in the attack from surveillance drones flying over Yemen, defense officials said.

Waltz’s post came in response to a question from Vice President JD Vance about the results of the strike that the national security adviser had initially reported in the chat. 

The messages shared by Waltz and other senior Trump officials were disclosed this week by the Atlantic magazine, whose Editor in Chief Jeffrey Goldberg was included in the Signal chat group, apparently by mistake.

In a Pentagon briefing two days after the March 15 strikes, Air Force Lt. Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, director of operations for the Joint Staff, told reporters that the U.S. had struck more than 30 targets, including Houthi command and control centers and a compound where “several senior Houthi unmanned aerial vehicle experts” had been located. While he said there had been dozens of military casualties, he didn’t mention the missile expert.

The identity of a person in Yemen who was supplying information in real-time about the strikes would likely be carefully protected.

Asked whether Israel had provided intelligence for the strike described by Waltz, National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes said, “No classified information was included in the thread.”

Echoing comments made by Waltz, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other senior officials about the Signal chat, he added, “the messages have no locations, no sources and methods, and no war plans. Foreign partners had already been notified strikes were imminent.”

The Israeli prime minister’s office and Embassy in Washington declined to comment. Media representatives for the Israel Defense Forces, Defense Department, Central Intelligence Agency, and office of Director of National Intelligence didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

After an initial wave of attacks, Waltz posted real-time information into the Signal chat. “VP. Building collapsed. Had multiple positive ID. Pete, Kurilla, the IC, amazing job,” he wrote at 1:48 p.m., naming the defense chief, the head of U.S. Central Command, Army Gen. Michael Erik Kurilla, and the intelligence community.

The text confused Vance: “What?” he replied six minutes later, perhaps because of the reference to “VP” at the start of the message. Waltz clarified at 2 p.m., saying he had typed too fast. He repeated that the Houthi missile expert was seen going into his girlfriend’s home and that the building was destroyed.

“Excellent,” Vance quickly responded.

The Biden administration sought last year to develop options to strike senior Houthi military and political leaders and approached the Israelis and Saudis for help, according to people familiar with the classified planning. It didn’t decide to carry out those strikes, but the work on those options appears to have given the Trump administration a start in developing targets for their March 15 strike on Houthi militants in Yemen.

Waltz has taken responsibility for initiating the Signal chat and inadvertently adding Goldberg to it. President Trump has defended him, calling him a “good man” who made a mistake. Hegseth also shared sensitive information in the chat, including when jet fighters took off and the approximate times of attack.

Current and former officials say intelligence leaks could compromise foreign intelligence sources and make other nations reluctant to share such sensitive information. Trump officials have said in recent weeks that they have redoubled their efforts to prevent leaks of classified information.

The administration launched the strikes to stop the Houthis from attacking commercial and military ships transiting the Red Sea, once one of the busiest commercial waterways, and to deter them from continuing missile strikes aimed at Israel. The U.S. has conducted attacks in Yemen every day since the initial March 15 strikes discussed in the Signal chat. On Thursday, the Houthis fired at least two missiles toward Jerusalem, which Israel intercepted. (WSJ)

Our active and inactive military are mad.

Signal Chat Leak Angers U.S. Military Pilots

Men and women who have taken to the air on behalf of the United States expressed bewilderment after the leak of attack plans. “You’re going to kill somebody,” one pilot said.

A F/A-18 Super Hornet launching from the aircraft carrier Dwight D. Eisenhower in the Red Sea last year for operations against Houthi targets in Yemen.

The intelligence breach was bad enough, current and former fighter pilots said. But Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s refusal to acknowledge that he should not have disclosed sensitive information about when American fighter pilots would attack sites in Yemen, they said, was even worse.

On air bases, in aircraft carrier “ready rooms” and in communities near military bases this week, there was consternation. The news that senior officials in the Trump administration discussed plans on Signal, a commercial messaging app, for an impending attack angered and bewildered men and women who have taken to the air on behalf of the United States.

The mistaken inclusion of the editor in chief of The Atlantic in the chat and Mr. Hegseth’s insistence that he did nothing wrong by disclosing the secret plans upend decades of military doctrine about operational security, a dozen Air Force and Navy fighter pilots said.

Worse, they said, is that going forward, they can no longer be certain that the Pentagon is focused on their safety when they strap into cockpits.

“The whole point about aviation safety is that you have to have the humility to understand that you are imperfect, because everybody screws up. Everybody makes mistakes,” said Lt. John Gadzinski, a retired Navy F-14 pilot who flew combat missions from aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf. “But ultimately, if you can’t admit when you’re wrong, you’re going to kill somebody because your ego is too big.”

He and other pilots said that each day since Monday, when The Atlantic published an article about the chat disclosures, had brought a stunning new revelation. First came the news that Mr. Hegseth had put the operational sequencing, or flight schedules, for the F/A-18 Hornets targeting the Houthi militia in Yemen on March 15 in the unclassified Signal group chat, which included several other senior officials.

“We intentionally don’t share plans with people who don’t need to know,” said one Navy F/A-18 pilot, who has flown frequently in missions in the Middle East. “You don’t share what time we’re supposed to show up over a target. You don’t want to telegraph that we’re about to show up on someone’s doorstep; that’s putting your crew at risk.” He and several other current and former pilots spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid reprisals from the Pentagon and from allies of President Trump.

But then came Mr. Hegseth’s initial response to the disclosures. He attacked Jeffrey Goldberg, the Atlantic editor, as a “so-called journalist,” and sought refuge in a semantic argument, saying that he had never disclosed “war plans.”

So on Wednesday, The Atlantic published the actual text of what he had written, at 11:44 a.m. the day of the attack, in the group chat: “1215et: F-18s LAUNCH (1st strike package),” Mr. Hegseth texted, some 30 minutes before it happened. “1345: ‘Trigger Based’ F-18 1st Strike window Starts (Target Terrorist is @his Known Location so SHOULD BE ON TIME).”

This text was two hours in advance of the strikes.

Mr. Hegseth added: “1410: More F-18s LAUNCH (2nd strike package).” And then, “1536: F-18 2nd Strike Starts — also first sea-based Tomahawks launched.”

That text gave almost three hours’ notice.

On Wednesday, Mr. Hegseth called his disclosure a “team update” to “provide updates in real time, general updates in real time” to keep Trump national security officials informed.

But details of military operations are usually kept so secret that even the service members taking part in them are “locked down.” That sometimes means they are not allowed to speak to others who do not have a need to know, let alone tell people about the plans, the fighter pilots interviewed said. In aircraft carrier “ready rooms,” where flight squadrons spend their time when they are not in the air, crews burn instructions to destroy them.

“It’s important to understand the degree that OPSEC is involved in every aspect of your life on an aircraft carrier,” said former Navy Capt. Joseph Capalbo, who commanded a carrier air wing and two F/A-18 squadrons, in a reference to operational security. “Red Sea ops are conducted in complete silence — no one is talking on the radio. Because everything can be heard by somebody.”

A former Air Force fighter pilot, Maj. Anthony Bourke, added: “When you disclose operational security, people can get killed.” He said that “these things are not taken lightly. I have never met anybody in the military who does not know this.”

Mr. Hegseth, a former Fox News weekend host, served as a National Guard infantryman.

Cmdr. Parker Kuldau, a former Navy F/A-18 pilot, called Mr. Hegseth’s disclosures, and subsequent response to them, “infuriating.”

“It’s so beyond what I would expect from anyone in the military,” said Commander Kuldau, who also flew combat missions in the Middle East. “The idea that the secretary of defense, who should know better, has done this, is just mind-boggling.”

Senior Defense Department officials and military analysts say that the Houthis possess air defenses, provided by Iran, that can target American warplanes.

“The Houthis have received several types of Iranian surface-to-air missiles designed to be capable of engaging fighter jets, including at high altitudes,” said Fabian Hinz, a military analyst at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

Indeed, Houthi rebels for the first time fired surface-to-air missiles at an F-16 fighter jet on Feb. 19, a senior U.S. official said. The missiles missed the fighter. The Houthis have shot down several slower-flying U.S. Air Force drones.

The Trump administration has insisted that none of the information on the chat was classified, and Mr. Hegseth and other officials have said it was not a “war plan.”

Sean Parnell, the Pentagon spokesman, said in response to a New York Times inquiry that the Signal chat “referenced by The Atlantic was not a forum for the official planning and execution of military operations — which also involved Joint Staff and Joint Force leadership.”

The chat included Vice President JD Vance; Secretary of State Marco Rubio; the national security adviser, Michael Waltz; and others, but not the acting chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Christopher Grady, the highest-ranking military official.

Mr. Parnell said that “military leadership are frequently not included in political meetings.”

Vice Adm. Kevin M. Donegan, a former F/A-18 pilot who served as commander of U.S. naval forces in the Middle East, also pushed back on the idea that aviators’ safety had ever been at risk from the disclosure of information on the March 15 attacks.

“Assuming the timeline and information reported is true, the likelihood of anything getting to anyone who could have done anything in such a short time was very low,” Admiral Donegan said. “In the end our planes did not get shot down and no U.S. service personnel were injured or died.”

But one former senior Defense Department official with military experience said Mr. Hegseth’s text describing launch times and the type of strike aircraft was, indeed, classified information that could have jeopardized pilots’ lives if it had been released or obtained.

A former Navy F/A-18 squadron commander also said that pilots flying combat missions would have considered the contents of Mr. Hegseth’s text classified information. Revealing the details in text was “extremely cavalier,” the former pilot said.

Had the Houthis learned the precise time of strikes and that they would be conducted by carrier-based attack planes in the northern Red Sea, they could have repositioned and prepared air defenses that have already shot down several remotely piloted American drones, the former Navy pilot said.

Although Mr. Hegseth has dismissed the risks to the Navy pilots flying those attack missions, videos released by U.S. Central Command tell a different tale.

Some of the F/A-18 Hornets shown taking off from the aircraft carrier U.S.S. Harry S. Truman in the Red Sea were armed with 500-pound and 1,000-pound bombs that could only be dropped well within range of the Houthis’ air defenses. (New York Times)

Some former military react.

Former military, Senator Mark Kelly.

Former military, Running for Governor of New Jersey, Mikie Sherrill.

Former military, former Representative Adam Kinzinger.

Judge orders Trump administration to preserve Signal chat on Yemen strikes.

The messages had been set to delete in violation of record-keeping requirements.

A federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to preserve the contents of the chat in which top national security officials used the Signal app to discuss military strikes in Yemen as they were taking place earlier this month.

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ordered the top cabinet officials named in a lawsuit by the government transparency group American Oversight to retain any messages sent and received over Signal between March 11 and March 15.

Benjamin Sparks, a lawyer representing American Oversight, raised concerns that "these messages are in imminent danger of destruction" due to settings within Signal that can be set to delete messages automatically -- prompting Judge Boasberg to order the Trump administration file a sworn declaration by this Monday to ensure the messages are preserved.

The lawsuit -- which names Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and the National Archives as defendants -- asked a federal judge to declare the use of Signal unlawful for government use and order the cabinet members to preserve the records immediately, as Signal's deleting of messages violates governmental record-keeping requirements.

The use of the Signal group chat was revealed Monday by The Atlantic Editor-in-Chief Jeffrey Goldberg, who said he was inadvertently added to the chat as top national security officials, including Hegseth and National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, were discussing the military operation.

According to screenshots of the Signal messages published by The Atlantic, the messages were set to disappear after a certain timeframe. Originally, the messages were set to disappear after one week. Then, according to screenshots of the messages published by the magazine, on March 15 -- after Hegseth sent the first operational update -- the messages were set to disappear after four weeks.

Judge Boasberg declined, for now, to order administration officials to disclose if Signal had been used by the Trump administration in a wider context.

"I don't think at this point that that's something that I would be prepared to order," he said.

Boasberg earlier this month temporarily blocked Trump's use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport more than 200 alleged migrant gang members to El Salvador without due process, leading the White House to call for his impeachment and publicly attack him as a "Democrat activist" and a "radical left lunatic."

On the heels of Trump accusing Boasberg on social media of "grabbing the 'Trump Cases' all to himself," the judge began Thursday's hearing by providing a detailed description of the D.C. District Court's automated system for assigning cases, including how each judge is allotted "electronic cards" to ensure cases are fairly distributed.

"That's how it works, and that's how all cases continue to be assigned in this course," Judge Boasberg said.

Lawyers for the Department of Defense, prior to Thursday's hearing, filed a declaration stating that they have requested that a copy of the Signal messages in question be forwarded to an official DOD account so they can be preserved.

A second declaration, from a lawyer for the Treasury Department, stated that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, along with Bessent's chief of staff, has retained all messages beginning with Mike Waltz's messages on March 15.

Trump and other top administration officials have downplayed the use of the Signal to discuss the attack, saying classified information was not shared in the chat, despite the exchange including information on the weapons systems being used and the timing of the strikes. (ABC News).

---

He is the most disliked Vice President in American history, but JD Vance is off to Greenland.

No one was willing to meet with his wife who had previously announced as head of this delegation standing in for American aggression, so . . .

Don’t expect her husband will create any good will towards America there either.

JD Vance to Lead High-Powered U.S. Visit to Greenland

Amid President Trump’s push to take over the world’s largest island, the administration says it is sending the vice president to visit a military base there.

The Trump administration seems like it just doubled down on Greenland.

Vice President JD Vance announced on Tuesday that he was headed to the island later this week, taking over a controversial visit that officials in Greenland have made very clear they don’t want at all.

Originally, the Trump administration said that Usha Vance, the second lady, and Michael Waltz, the national security adviser, would make the trip to Greenland, a semiautonomous territory of Denmark that President Trump wants for the United States.

Officials from Denmark and Greenland immediately branded the move “aggressive” and part of the president’s plan to get the island, as he recently put it, “one way or the other.”

The White House then issued a statement on Tuesday afternoon changing up the visit. The new itinerary is for Mr. and Ms. Vance to visit Pituffik Space Base, an American military installation high above the Arctic Circle, “to receive a briefing on Arctic security issues and meet with U.S. service members.”

In a post on X, Mr. Vance said he would “just check out what’s going on with the security there of Greenland.”

Anti-Trump sentiment has been rising steadily on the island, and activists were already preparing to protest the arrival of the American delegation, starting at the international airport in the capital, Nuuk. But now it seems that the Vances might not even set foot in Nuuk.

The United States has a longstanding defense agreement with Denmark to station troops in Greenland, and American officials can visit the base at will. Foreign-policy analysts said on Tuesday night that they expected the Vances to travel directly to the space base, which is nearly 1,000 miles north of Nuuk, and avoid the cauldron that is brewing in the capital.

Greenland officials have emphasized that they never invited the Americans in the first place but they have little control over who visits the American base.

Initially, the plan was for Ms. Vance and one of her sons to watch a dog sled race, a cherished Greenland tradition, in Sisimiut, one of Greenland’s bigger towns. But the organizers of the race made a pointed statement on Sunday that while the race was open to the public, they had not asked the Vances to attend.

A spokeswoman for Ms. Vance denied that, saying she had received “multiple invitations for her attendance to the Greenland national dog sled race.” Still, the White House announced on Tuesday that she would no longer be going to the race.

U.S. administration officials had originally planned for Mr. Waltz to visit the space base, which is an important piece of the United States’ missile defense. But with Mr. Waltz now embroiled in a controversy over his use of a mobile messaging application to discuss sensitive war plans, his participation seems up in the air.

As the news broke on Tuesday night that Mr. Vance would be arriving, Greenland’s government wasn’t pleased. Politicians there are embroiled in delicate talks over who will form the island’s next administration. Earlier this month, the island held parliamentary elections, but the outcome was mixed, with no party winning a clear majority.

“We’ve asked for peace and quiet and no international visits while negotiations are ongoing, and that should be respected,” said Pipaluk Lynge-Rasmussen, a leading member of the departing ruling party.

Some political analysts in Denmark said that the decision to send Mr. Vance was an “escalation.”

“They choose to double down on it — massively escalate, in fact — this provocative show of force by sending JD Vance,” said Lars Trier Mogensen, a political commentator in Copenhagen. “That is many times more significant than either Mike Waltz or Usha Vance.”

“In Denmark, people are starting to see this as a kind of hybrid warfare,” he added, pointing to comparisons with Crimea, the region annexed by Russia in 2014, where lines between diplomacy and provocation were deliberately blurred.

But others saw the decision to visit the American base and ditch the dog sled race as perhaps less provocative.

“If the visit to Nuuk has been canceled, the Trump administration may be stepping back by avoiding imposing itself on civilian Greenland,” said Ulrik Pram Gad, a researcher at the Danish Institute for International Studies. “Focusing solely on the military base brings the conversation back to security.” (New York Times.)

---

The Elise Stefanik case.

The good news is Trump was scared.

As you undoubtedly heard, Trump, fearful of losing the majority in the House, pulled back the nomination of Representative Elise Stefanik as UN Ambassador.

With Stefanik returning to the House, does that mean we will see more or less of her? Steel yourself for the worse, though seeing Elise Stefanik in any capacity is always horrible.

Fallout coming for House GOP over Trump's rug pull on Stefanik

President Trump's dramatic rug pull of Rep. Elise Stefanik's (R-N.Y.) UN ambassador nomination has given House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) a new series of headaches.

Why it matters: Johnson has to reassure GOP lawmakers after their president said he's nervous about a Trump +20 district.

He also must reintegrate Stefanik, who was planning to bolt town next week, into a leadership lineup that's full.
Stefanik was crushed and scrambled to reverse Trump's decision before he announced it on Truth Social, according to people familiar with the matter.

But for Trump, the margins were too close for comfort.
Driving the news: In explaining his decision, Trump undercut the NRCC line that there was no risk of the GOP losing any special elections this year.

"With a very tight Majority, I don't want to take a chance on anyone else running for Elise's seat," Trump said on Truth Social.

Republicans are "afraid they will lose the special election to replace her," Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said Thursday.

What we're hearing: Stefanik's congressional staff has mostly resigned. She surrendered her slot on the House Intelligence Committee and had one foot out of Washington. Her Instagram was a showcase of that extended goodbye.

She'll have to slink back to the House and reintegrate herself into Johnson's leadership structure, even as Trump dangled the possibility of joining his administration down the line.

Inside the White House, there's a view that under Trump there isn't necessarily a need for an ambassador to the United Nations, according to a person familiar with the matter.

In a first, Democrats were tripping over themselves to agree with Trump.

"Republicans and Donald Trump knew they were on track to lose the special election because of their deeply unpopular, disastrous agenda," said DCCC spokesperson Courtney Rice.
"A few weeks ago, they were too scared to face voters at town halls. Now, they are so scared they can't even face voters at the polls." (Axios).

---