WEBVTT - Special Coverage: US Cabinet Security Leak & Europe's Reaction

0:00:00.080 --> 0:00:02.160
<v Speaker 1>On another story that's gotten a lot of attention this morning,

0:00:02.240 --> 0:00:06.520
<v Speaker 1>this incredible headline that the Trump administration accidentally texted me

0:00:06.600 --> 0:00:09.760
<v Speaker 1>its war plans. Have to ask, Steven, have you inadvertently

0:00:09.800 --> 0:00:11.800
<v Speaker 1>ever been added to a group chat that you didn't

0:00:11.800 --> 0:00:12.960
<v Speaker 1>want to be in group chat?

0:00:13.240 --> 0:00:15.360
<v Speaker 2>I mean generally when anyone answered to any group chat,

0:00:15.360 --> 0:00:16.799
<v Speaker 2>I kind of eye roll and then mute.

0:00:16.840 --> 0:00:17.880
<v Speaker 1>It made it forever.

0:00:18.079 --> 0:00:22.120
<v Speaker 2>Had it been had it been me and not Jeffrey Goldberg,

0:00:22.120 --> 0:00:24.439
<v Speaker 2>perhaps things could have been very different. But it is

0:00:24.480 --> 0:00:26.720
<v Speaker 2>an incredible story in the Atlantic and his account of

0:00:26.760 --> 0:00:28.800
<v Speaker 2>how he was added to this group. He thought it

0:00:28.840 --> 0:00:31.440
<v Speaker 2>was a hoax, as we heard from him, but followed

0:00:31.480 --> 0:00:33.879
<v Speaker 2>it through and was only really able to clarify that

0:00:33.960 --> 0:00:37.440
<v Speaker 2>this was serious when after the strikes happen that we're

0:00:37.440 --> 0:00:41.280
<v Speaker 2>talking about actually happened. Of course, the questions now as

0:00:41.320 --> 0:00:45.600
<v Speaker 2>to the nature of the national security breach, why high

0:00:45.680 --> 0:00:49.760
<v Speaker 2>level officials are using this app, and certainly some interesting

0:00:49.800 --> 0:00:53.480
<v Speaker 2>commentary to to be digested by European leaders. Let's get

0:00:53.479 --> 0:00:55.520
<v Speaker 2>into it with our senior editor Bill Ferries and our

0:00:55.560 --> 0:00:59.480
<v Speaker 2>managing editor for European Economics and Government, Ben Sills. Bill

0:00:59.520 --> 0:01:02.880
<v Speaker 2>to christ how damaging is this league for the white eyes.

0:01:03.360 --> 0:01:06.399
<v Speaker 3>Well, for starters, it's just hugely embarrassing. I mean when

0:01:06.400 --> 0:01:10.480
<v Speaker 3>you look at you know, President Trump fought off accusations

0:01:10.520 --> 0:01:14.440
<v Speaker 3>that he was improperly storing classified material in at his

0:01:14.520 --> 0:01:18.160
<v Speaker 3>Florida resort for years, and he ran his original campaign

0:01:18.319 --> 0:01:23.240
<v Speaker 3>partly on criticism of Hillary Clinton's shoddy handling of classified

0:01:23.280 --> 0:01:27.240
<v Speaker 3>material and and her decision to use a private server

0:01:27.680 --> 0:01:31.759
<v Speaker 3>to look at State Department documents at home. So these

0:01:31.800 --> 0:01:35.520
<v Speaker 3>are folks who have really kind of you know, run

0:01:35.680 --> 0:01:42.280
<v Speaker 3>their political careers on their attention to classified regulations and

0:01:42.680 --> 0:01:46.480
<v Speaker 3>keeping secure documents safe. And so to have this have

0:01:46.600 --> 0:01:49.120
<v Speaker 3>this pop up on a you know, on a commercial

0:01:49.160 --> 0:01:54.960
<v Speaker 3>messaging app that includes a senior editor and an editor

0:01:55.000 --> 0:01:58.560
<v Speaker 3>who Trump has a kind of a negative reaction to. Anyways,

0:01:58.720 --> 0:02:01.880
<v Speaker 3>it's just it's hugelymbarrassing. But it also just raises very

0:02:01.920 --> 0:02:05.760
<v Speaker 3>practical questions about, you know, has this been occurring elsewhere?

0:02:05.840 --> 0:02:10.560
<v Speaker 3>Has there been a regular sharing of top secret material

0:02:11.440 --> 0:02:14.440
<v Speaker 3>on these kind of systems, and who else has perhaps

0:02:14.520 --> 0:02:15.760
<v Speaker 3>seen some of these things?

0:02:16.320 --> 0:02:19.480
<v Speaker 1>Right? Hugely embarrassing, yes, for the US administration. But what

0:02:19.480 --> 0:02:22.080
<v Speaker 1>does Europe think all this? Let's bring that question to

0:02:22.120 --> 0:02:24.960
<v Speaker 1>Ben Sils. There's been a lot of criticism of Europe

0:02:25.000 --> 0:02:29.200
<v Speaker 1>in that text exchange, including describing European countries as freeloading.

0:02:29.560 --> 0:02:31.960
<v Speaker 1>How are these comments going to be read in Europe?

0:02:32.200 --> 0:02:34.320
<v Speaker 4>I think they'll find them quite useful in Europe, to

0:02:34.320 --> 0:02:37.320
<v Speaker 4>be honest, we know JD. Vance's views on Europe from

0:02:37.360 --> 0:02:41.000
<v Speaker 4>his lacerating speech to the Munich Security Conference a few

0:02:41.040 --> 0:02:43.920
<v Speaker 4>weeks ago, So there's nothing really surprising in here. I

0:02:43.960 --> 0:02:48.040
<v Speaker 4>think that we're seeing in Europe. There's a debate about

0:02:48.080 --> 0:02:53.400
<v Speaker 4>how far how fast European nations are prepared to go

0:02:53.480 --> 0:02:56.079
<v Speaker 4>in terms of their funding for defense, and that's all

0:02:56.120 --> 0:02:59.560
<v Speaker 4>about establishing a degree of independence from the US as

0:02:59.600 --> 0:03:02.240
<v Speaker 4>quickly as possible. And these comments are going to be

0:03:02.280 --> 0:03:05.080
<v Speaker 4>helpful for the more hawkish members, you know, participants in

0:03:05.120 --> 0:03:09.480
<v Speaker 4>that conversation, to encourage the more cautious leaders, perhaps those

0:03:09.480 --> 0:03:12.520
<v Speaker 4>who think there's still potential to salvage something from this

0:03:12.600 --> 0:03:15.600
<v Speaker 4>relationship with the Trump White House. I think we'll encourage

0:03:15.680 --> 0:03:17.520
<v Speaker 4>the more hawkish out of that debate, say come on,

0:03:17.600 --> 0:03:19.000
<v Speaker 4>we've got we've got we've got to cough up, and

0:03:19.040 --> 0:03:20.639
<v Speaker 4>we've got we've got to sort this out ourselves.

0:03:21.000 --> 0:03:23.360
<v Speaker 2>Does it really go that much further? Than what we've

0:03:23.400 --> 0:03:27.040
<v Speaker 2>heard from Trump administration officials already in terms of their

0:03:27.080 --> 0:03:30.240
<v Speaker 2>attitudes towards Europe. The present themselves hasn't been shy of

0:03:30.240 --> 0:03:32.280
<v Speaker 2>saying that Europe needs to step up.

0:03:32.840 --> 0:03:34.800
<v Speaker 4>I don't think it goes further. I think I think

0:03:34.840 --> 0:03:38.760
<v Speaker 4>it's just you know, when you hear people speaking frankly

0:03:39.200 --> 0:03:42.240
<v Speaker 4>in what they believe to be a private group, you

0:03:42.280 --> 0:03:45.120
<v Speaker 4>get a sense of the tone the languages really is

0:03:45.200 --> 0:03:49.360
<v Speaker 4>really derogatory, really dismissive. And I think that in that

0:03:49.480 --> 0:03:54.760
<v Speaker 4>respect it leaves the US looking extremely, extremely bad, extremely

0:03:54.840 --> 0:03:56.880
<v Speaker 4>kind of kind of small mind. And I think in

0:03:56.920 --> 0:03:59.440
<v Speaker 4>that respect, but in terms of the substance it doesn't

0:03:59.480 --> 0:04:02.040
<v Speaker 4>go a lot than what we've seen before.

0:04:02.840 --> 0:04:05.680
<v Speaker 1>Bill, what has the current response from the White House been?

0:04:06.120 --> 0:04:08.560
<v Speaker 3>Well, it's interesting. I mean, you had Pete Haigs at

0:04:08.600 --> 0:04:12.520
<v Speaker 3>the Defense Secretary landing in Hawaii on a work trip

0:04:12.560 --> 0:04:15.960
<v Speaker 3>and he said, well, nobody quote, nobody was texting war plans.

0:04:16.560 --> 0:04:19.560
<v Speaker 3>But over at the National Security Council, the spokesman there,

0:04:19.600 --> 0:04:23.600
<v Speaker 3>Brian Hughes, basically said that the message appears to be authentic.

0:04:23.920 --> 0:04:28.080
<v Speaker 3>When you read Jeffrey Goldberg's story, you realize he leaves

0:04:28.080 --> 0:04:30.680
<v Speaker 3>a lot out or he says he left a lot out,

0:04:31.000 --> 0:04:34.520
<v Speaker 3>that there were details in that messaging group, very specific

0:04:34.600 --> 0:04:37.400
<v Speaker 3>details about the types of weapons that would be used,

0:04:38.000 --> 0:04:40.240
<v Speaker 3>how they're getting some of their information. There was the

0:04:40.320 --> 0:04:42.560
<v Speaker 3>name of a CIA agent who was going to be

0:04:43.279 --> 0:04:46.160
<v Speaker 3>included in some of the discussions that he left out.

0:04:46.360 --> 0:04:49.800
<v Speaker 3>So it goes a lot deeper. It appears to go

0:04:49.839 --> 0:04:52.359
<v Speaker 3>a lot deeper than what he just puts in the story.

0:04:52.800 --> 0:04:56.800
<v Speaker 3>So it's not just the derogatory comments about Europe and

0:04:57.160 --> 0:05:00.840
<v Speaker 3>kind of the shock about them having this discuss over Signal,

0:05:00.839 --> 0:05:04.320
<v Speaker 3>but it really gets into material that is normally only discussed,

0:05:04.880 --> 0:05:07.919
<v Speaker 3>for instance, in the tank, the secure room at the Pentagon,

0:05:08.320 --> 0:05:12.000
<v Speaker 3>or in other secure facilities around Washington. It's not something

0:05:12.040 --> 0:05:16.880
<v Speaker 3>that goes public. So the reaction is basically the public reaction,

0:05:17.480 --> 0:05:19.760
<v Speaker 3>I think is still going to unfold. There's going to

0:05:19.800 --> 0:05:22.919
<v Speaker 3>be a real question about whether someone like National Security

0:05:22.960 --> 0:05:26.200
<v Speaker 3>Advisor Mike Waltz keeps his job or not going forward.

0:05:26.279 --> 0:05:28.880
<v Speaker 3>He is the one, according to the article, that kind

0:05:28.920 --> 0:05:31.760
<v Speaker 3>of created this group on Signal.

0:05:32.120 --> 0:05:32.360
<v Speaker 4>Yeah.

0:05:32.360 --> 0:05:35.120
<v Speaker 2>Indeed, and also be interesting to monitor what the Republican

0:05:35.160 --> 0:05:37.400
<v Speaker 2>Party more broadly says about this as well. Of course,

0:05:37.440 --> 0:05:40.520
<v Speaker 2>they've always painted themselves as the Party of National Securities.

0:05:40.560 --> 0:05:42.400
<v Speaker 2>It doesn't look good from their point of view either.

0:05:43.160 --> 0:05:45.320
<v Speaker 3>No, not at all. And the really interesting thing in

0:05:45.400 --> 0:05:48.039
<v Speaker 3>terms of the timing is that I believe it's today

0:05:48.120 --> 0:05:52.240
<v Speaker 3>in Washington, Tuesday, and Wednesday in Washington you have a

0:05:52.320 --> 0:05:56.279
<v Speaker 3>previously scheduled hearing with the heads of the different intelligence

0:05:56.320 --> 0:05:59.960
<v Speaker 3>agencies that includes Tulci Gabbert, the Director of National Intelligence.

0:06:01.000 --> 0:06:03.320
<v Speaker 3>This is obviously going to be front and center when

0:06:03.360 --> 0:06:07.200
<v Speaker 3>they talk about this meeting about worldwide threats. The first

0:06:07.279 --> 0:06:09.480
<v Speaker 3>question is going to be has the you know, the

0:06:09.800 --> 0:06:15.320
<v Speaker 3>Republican administration here in this case put out information that

0:06:15.400 --> 0:06:17.760
<v Speaker 3>we don't want our adversaries to know about. So that's

0:06:17.760 --> 0:06:19.360
<v Speaker 3>going to be very interesting to watch, going to be

0:06:19.440 --> 0:06:20.120
<v Speaker 3>must CTV.

0:06:20.240 --> 0:06:24.479
<v Speaker 1>I think, Ben, do you think this raises intelligence sharing

0:06:24.560 --> 0:06:28.200
<v Speaker 1>fears around Europe that intel shared with America might not

0:06:28.279 --> 0:06:28.840
<v Speaker 1>be safe?

0:06:29.279 --> 0:06:32.600
<v Speaker 4>One hundred percent? Yeah. I mean it's just shambolic and amateurs,

0:06:32.680 --> 0:06:37.159
<v Speaker 4>isn't it. And if you are charged with handling information

0:06:37.279 --> 0:06:40.680
<v Speaker 4>that could affect the well being of agents or allies

0:06:41.800 --> 0:06:45.600
<v Speaker 4>operating in kind of hostile situations, you're going to be

0:06:45.760 --> 0:06:48.599
<v Speaker 4>very worried about sharing that sort of information with them.

0:06:48.960 --> 0:06:52.520
<v Speaker 4>With officials who handle their own comms and such a

0:06:53.000 --> 0:06:54.880
<v Speaker 4>such a kind of cavalier fashion.

0:06:55.040 --> 0:06:58.040
<v Speaker 2>Ben For many in Europe, watching this unfold comes as

0:06:58.080 --> 0:06:59.839
<v Speaker 2>a bit of a side show to the bigger question

0:07:00.200 --> 0:07:03.839
<v Speaker 2>of tariffs. Were of course looking forward to the President's

0:07:04.160 --> 0:07:07.679
<v Speaker 2>announcements on the second of April. How will this feed

0:07:07.760 --> 0:07:10.760
<v Speaker 2>into the conversation around how Europe could be hit by

0:07:10.800 --> 0:07:11.720
<v Speaker 2>tariffs in the US.

0:07:12.240 --> 0:07:14.120
<v Speaker 4>That's a good question. I mean, I think that the

0:07:14.520 --> 0:07:22.520
<v Speaker 4>European response on tariffs has been reasonably measured, But measured

0:07:22.520 --> 0:07:26.320
<v Speaker 4>in this sense does mean if the US comes out

0:07:26.320 --> 0:07:30.800
<v Speaker 4>with a maximalist tariff policy, then the Europeans have got

0:07:30.920 --> 0:07:36.520
<v Speaker 4>similarly far reaching plans that they've already got drafted. So

0:07:36.960 --> 0:07:39.480
<v Speaker 4>they are kind of stiffening the sinews at this point,

0:07:39.560 --> 0:07:41.920
<v Speaker 4>bracing themselves to find out what exactly they're going to

0:07:41.960 --> 0:07:45.760
<v Speaker 4>get next week. But they've got a full range of

0:07:45.800 --> 0:07:49.240
<v Speaker 4>options lined up, and I think this will probably just

0:07:49.520 --> 0:07:52.840
<v Speaker 4>serve as one more reminder that they need to stand up,

0:07:52.880 --> 0:07:56.680
<v Speaker 4>stick together in order to push back against this administration.