Speaker 1: On another story that's gotten a lot of attention this morning,
Speaker 1: this incredible headline that the Trump administration accidentally texted me
Speaker 1: its war plans. Have to ask, Steven, have you inadvertently
Speaker 1: ever been added to a group chat that you didn't
Speaker 1: want to be in group chat?
Speaker 2: I mean generally when anyone answered to any group chat,
Speaker 2: I kind of eye roll and then mute.
Speaker 1: It made it forever.
Speaker 2: Had it been had it been me and not Jeffrey Goldberg,
Speaker 2: perhaps things could have been very different. But it is
Speaker 2: an incredible story in the Atlantic and his account of
Speaker 2: how he was added to this group. He thought it
Speaker 2: was a hoax, as we heard from him, but followed
Speaker 2: it through and was only really able to clarify that
Speaker 2: this was serious when after the strikes happen that we're
Speaker 2: talking about actually happened. Of course, the questions now as
Speaker 2: to the nature of the national security breach, why high
Speaker 2: level officials are using this app, and certainly some interesting
Speaker 2: commentary to to be digested by European leaders. Let's get
Speaker 2: into it with our senior editor Bill Ferries and our
Speaker 2: managing editor for European Economics and Government, Ben Sills. Bill
Speaker 2: to christ how damaging is this league for the white eyes.
Speaker 3: Well, for starters, it's just hugely embarrassing. I mean when
Speaker 3: you look at you know, President Trump fought off accusations
Speaker 3: that he was improperly storing classified material in at his
Speaker 3: Florida resort for years, and he ran his original campaign
Speaker 3: partly on criticism of Hillary Clinton's shoddy handling of classified
Speaker 3: material and and her decision to use a private server
Speaker 3: to look at State Department documents at home. So these
Speaker 3: are folks who have really kind of you know, run
Speaker 3: their political careers on their attention to classified regulations and
Speaker 3: keeping secure documents safe. And so to have this have
Speaker 3: this pop up on a you know, on a commercial
Speaker 3: messaging app that includes a senior editor and an editor
Speaker 3: who Trump has a kind of a negative reaction to. Anyways,
Speaker 3: it's just it's hugelymbarrassing. But it also just raises very
Speaker 3: practical questions about, you know, has this been occurring elsewhere?
Speaker 3: Has there been a regular sharing of top secret material
Speaker 3: on these kind of systems, and who else has perhaps
Speaker 3: seen some of these things?
Speaker 1: Right? Hugely embarrassing, yes, for the US administration. But what
Speaker 1: does Europe think all this? Let's bring that question to
Speaker 1: Ben Sils. There's been a lot of criticism of Europe
Speaker 1: in that text exchange, including describing European countries as freeloading.
Speaker 1: How are these comments going to be read in Europe?
Speaker 4: I think they'll find them quite useful in Europe, to
Speaker 4: be honest, we know JD. Vance's views on Europe from
Speaker 4: his lacerating speech to the Munich Security Conference a few
Speaker 4: weeks ago, So there's nothing really surprising in here. I
Speaker 4: think that we're seeing in Europe. There's a debate about
Speaker 4: how far how fast European nations are prepared to go
Speaker 4: in terms of their funding for defense, and that's all
Speaker 4: about establishing a degree of independence from the US as
Speaker 4: quickly as possible. And these comments are going to be
Speaker 4: helpful for the more hawkish members, you know, participants in
Speaker 4: that conversation, to encourage the more cautious leaders, perhaps those
Speaker 4: who think there's still potential to salvage something from this
Speaker 4: relationship with the Trump White House. I think we'll encourage
Speaker 4: the more hawkish out of that debate, say come on,
Speaker 4: we've got we've got we've got to cough up, and
Speaker 4: we've got we've got to sort this out ourselves.
Speaker 2: Does it really go that much further? Than what we've
Speaker 2: heard from Trump administration officials already in terms of their
Speaker 2: attitudes towards Europe. The present themselves hasn't been shy of
Speaker 2: saying that Europe needs to step up.
Speaker 4: I don't think it goes further. I think I think
Speaker 4: it's just you know, when you hear people speaking frankly
Speaker 4: in what they believe to be a private group, you
Speaker 4: get a sense of the tone the languages really is
Speaker 4: really derogatory, really dismissive. And I think that in that
Speaker 4: respect it leaves the US looking extremely, extremely bad, extremely
Speaker 4: kind of kind of small mind. And I think in
Speaker 4: that respect, but in terms of the substance it doesn't
Speaker 4: go a lot than what we've seen before.
Speaker 1: Bill, what has the current response from the White House been?
Speaker 3: Well, it's interesting. I mean, you had Pete Haigs at
Speaker 3: the Defense Secretary landing in Hawaii on a work trip
Speaker 3: and he said, well, nobody quote, nobody was texting war plans.
Speaker 3: But over at the National Security Council, the spokesman there,
Speaker 3: Brian Hughes, basically said that the message appears to be authentic.
Speaker 3: When you read Jeffrey Goldberg's story, you realize he leaves
Speaker 3: a lot out or he says he left a lot out,
Speaker 3: that there were details in that messaging group, very specific
Speaker 3: details about the types of weapons that would be used,
Speaker 3: how they're getting some of their information. There was the
Speaker 3: name of a CIA agent who was going to be
Speaker 3: included in some of the discussions that he left out.
Speaker 3: So it goes a lot deeper. It appears to go
Speaker 3: a lot deeper than what he just puts in the story.
Speaker 3: So it's not just the derogatory comments about Europe and
Speaker 3: kind of the shock about them having this discuss over Signal,
Speaker 3: but it really gets into material that is normally only discussed,
Speaker 3: for instance, in the tank, the secure room at the Pentagon,
Speaker 3: or in other secure facilities around Washington. It's not something
Speaker 3: that goes public. So the reaction is basically the public reaction,
Speaker 3: I think is still going to unfold. There's going to
Speaker 3: be a real question about whether someone like National Security
Speaker 3: Advisor Mike Waltz keeps his job or not going forward.
Speaker 3: He is the one, according to the article, that kind
Speaker 3: of created this group on Signal.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Indeed, and also be interesting to monitor what the Republican
Speaker 2: Party more broadly says about this as well. Of course,
Speaker 2: they've always painted themselves as the Party of National Securities.
Speaker 2: It doesn't look good from their point of view either.
Speaker 3: No, not at all. And the really interesting thing in
Speaker 3: terms of the timing is that I believe it's today
Speaker 3: in Washington, Tuesday, and Wednesday in Washington you have a
Speaker 3: previously scheduled hearing with the heads of the different intelligence
Speaker 3: agencies that includes Tulci Gabbert, the Director of National Intelligence.
Speaker 3: This is obviously going to be front and center when
Speaker 3: they talk about this meeting about worldwide threats. The first
Speaker 3: question is going to be has the you know, the
Speaker 3: Republican administration here in this case put out information that
Speaker 3: we don't want our adversaries to know about. So that's
Speaker 3: going to be very interesting to watch, going to be
Speaker 3: must CTV.
Speaker 1: I think, Ben, do you think this raises intelligence sharing
Speaker 1: fears around Europe that intel shared with America might not
Speaker 1: be safe?
Speaker 4: One hundred percent? Yeah. I mean it's just shambolic and amateurs,
Speaker 4: isn't it. And if you are charged with handling information
Speaker 4: that could affect the well being of agents or allies
Speaker 4: operating in kind of hostile situations, you're going to be
Speaker 4: very worried about sharing that sort of information with them.
Speaker 4: With officials who handle their own comms and such a
Speaker 4: such a kind of cavalier fashion.
Speaker 2: Ben For many in Europe, watching this unfold comes as
Speaker 2: a bit of a side show to the bigger question
Speaker 2: of tariffs. Were of course looking forward to the President's
Speaker 2: announcements on the second of April. How will this feed
Speaker 2: into the conversation around how Europe could be hit by
Speaker 2: tariffs in the US.
Speaker 4: That's a good question. I mean, I think that the
Speaker 4: European response on tariffs has been reasonably measured, But measured
Speaker 4: in this sense does mean if the US comes out
Speaker 4: with a maximalist tariff policy, then the Europeans have got
Speaker 4: similarly far reaching plans that they've already got drafted. So
Speaker 4: they are kind of stiffening the sinews at this point,
Speaker 4: bracing themselves to find out what exactly they're going to
Speaker 4: get next week. But they've got a full range of
Speaker 4: options lined up, and I think this will probably just
Speaker 4: serve as one more reminder that they need to stand up,
Speaker 4: stick together in order to push back against this administration.