As if the incompetence of the Trump administration weren’t glaring enough, Mike Waltz, National Security Advisor, decided to make it clear for those at the back. Former Transport Secretary Pete Buttigieg called it “the highest level of fuckup imaginable.” A lesson for us all, then. Whenever you’re next making a group chat to discuss Middle East war plans with the other senior members of cabinet, just remember to double check that you haven’t accidentally added a journalist.
On Monday, Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic ran the following headline: The Trump Administration Accidentally Texted Me Its War Plans. And that pretty much sums it up. Two weeks ago, Waltz mistakenly added Goldberg to a group chat on commercial encrypted messaging service Signal, called “Houthi PC small group.” The group included (because I presume it surely cannot still exist) Vice President JD Vance, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller, White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, and US Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff. In the group chat they discussed strikes in Yemen against Iran-backed Islamist terrorist Houthi rebels, who have been attacking ships in the Red Sea since the outset of the Israel-Gaza War threatening European international trade. Per Goldberg, this included clearly highly classified information detailing timings, weapons, and targets of imminent future attacks, provided by Hegseth.
So what does the administration do. Downplay, attack, and outright lie. Trump, in his usual fashion of ‘nothing is my fault’, entertained that he knew nothing about the leak, for far longer than a president should not know about such an incident, before playing it off as a “glitch” in an otherwise successful three months of success. The Democrats will be rubbing their hands together if the administration can make this into a quarterly thing! Waltz, far more to blame (indeed he took responsibility for Goldberg’s addition to the group), turned the tables on Goldberg, attacking him as a “loser” and “scum”, and like Trump, disparaged The Atlantic as failing (it is not). But most significantly, Gabbard and Ratcliffe, who on Tuesday were to testify before the House intelligence committee on general matters of international security issues, both lied that no classified information had been shared with the group, perjuring themselves.
Because they know that it’s not just the accidental addition of Goldberg for which they are in the wrong, but what his report uncovers, that the most senior national security officials in the country think it safe and reasonable to use Signal to share classified information, an app not permitted by the government for such action. Even then, the most worrying part, and the part that may not come fully to light (unless Kash Patel, FBI director, changes his mind and decides to open an investigation) is the extent to which private phones were being used for the transmission of this information. Signal itself is encrypted and would be hard to compromise – private phones, not so much. To think, Witkoff was in Moscow and Rubio was in the Middle East, though Witkoff maintains he had only a secure device with him, as is required. Relatively moderate Republican congressman and brigadier general Don Bacon told CNN:
“I will guarantee you, 99.99 percent with confidence, Russia and China are monitoring those two phones … They intentionally put highly classified information on an unclassified device. I would have lost my security clearance in the Air Force for this and for a lot less.”
So, what did Goldberg do? He released the messages in their entirety of course! Assured by the Director of National Intelligence’s sworn testimony no less, the content of the messages, which he had screenshotted, was not classified. And given that the details were largely operational in nature, whilst their leak in advance would significantly endanger American pilots in Yemen, their subsequent release would have little effect. Of course, clearly the content is clearly classified, but Goldberg has his defence if/when the administration comes after him. Here are Hegseth’s most damning messages, preceding the attack by two hours:
“1215et: F-18s LAUNCH (1st strike package)
“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)
“1410: More F-18s LAUNCH (2nd strike package)
“1415: Strike Drones on Target (THIS IS WHEN THE FIRST BOMBS WILL DEFINITELY DROP, pending earlier ‘Trigger Based’ targets)
“1536 F-18 2nd Strike Starts – also, first sea-based Tomahawks launched.
“MORE TO FOLLOW (per timeline)
“We are currently clean on OPSEC [operational security (ironic)]
“Godspeed to our Warriors.”
This week, it was also reported that Waltz’s contacts list of other officials, lobbyists, and journalists on Venmo is public, that, per Der Spiegel, email addresses, numbers, and some passwords of some Trump administration officials can be found among recent hacked data dumps accessible online, and that Hegseth has brought his wife, who does not have a sufficient (or likely any) security clearance, to highest level intelligence talks on at least two occasions.
Many Democrats have excoriated the administration and some Republicans, including senior senators, have been notable critical of the security breach and have called for investigations. Mississippi senator Roger Wicker, chair of the armed services committee, along with the Democrat ranking member have called for an investigation by the defence department’s inspector general. (It is worth noting however, that the defence department currently has only an acting inspector general after Trump’s illegal midnight cull of inspectors general, who head oversight of federal departments.) Many lawmakers have noted that any other US citizen would have been arrested and charged under the Espionage Act by now, for less.
But the chat’s damaging content doesn’t just include the classified information. Vance along with Hegseth voice their mutual disdain for European “freeloading”, with Vance going so far as to express opposition to the strikes on account of their cost, with far less benefit to the US than Europe. He also disagreed with Trump’s messaging, in his view too unclear and inconsistent; he said:
“I think we are making a mistake … 3 percent of US trade runs through the suez. 40 percent of European trade does. There is a real risk that the public doesn’t understand this or why it’s necessary. The strongest reason to do this is, as POTUS said, to send a message. … I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now.”
Because, when the strongest reason to initiate a strike which Yemen reported killed 53 people, mostly civilians, is to send a message (and my interpretation is that he means a message to the American people and to European leaders, not to the Houthis), you go ahead with such an attack. Just as distasteful, but unmentioned in the current news, perhaps because its unsurprising from the Trump administration, is Waltz's reply to Ratcliffe’s text “A good start” with a fist, an American-flag, and a fire emoji. The appropriate response to the acknowledged death of non-combatants. They bankroll Israel’s genocide in Palestine; they deport of Venezuelans to a Salvadorian prison known for its human rights abuses; they arrest (abduct might be a better word) immigrant students on university campuses to supress their support for Gaza; they respond to Yemeni deaths with emojis. Are non-Americans not human to the administration? Americans should worry. If the administration gets its way, it will be up to them to decide who is and isn’t American.
But Republicans are worried. Just this week, in a special election, Republicans lost Pennsylvania State Senate District 36. Of course, special elections (this one triggered by the incumbent’s resignation for a better position as part of the team of Pennsylvania’s new Republican senator) come with many caveats, like low turnout, and voter apathy among the power holding party. But the 29.2% voter turnout is pretty high for a state-level US special election, and the scale of swing was significant. In 2018, Aument, the previous incumbent was elected with 66.4% of the vote during the anti-Trump blue wave, and in 2022 was elected unopposed. Just last year, the district voted for Trump by 15 percentage points, and the congressional district is rated R+15 by the Cook PVI. On Tuesday, Floridians will go to the polls in FL-01 and FL-06 (rated R+19 and R+15 respectively) to fill the house seats left by the resignations of Matt Gaetz of Mike Waltz to fill cabinet positions (though only Waltz succeeded in getting there). Both won their seats in 2024 with 66% of the vote, with FL-06 slightly less Trumpy and FL-01 slightly more. Until a recent Musky foray into the race, Democrats had out-fundraised their respective Republican hopefuls ten-to-one, in a sign of a competitive race. Even a Democratic loss by a single digit margin would worry most Republican congresspeople and might be the most potent weapon against the Trump administration that the Democrats can find. Such close races might make some Republicans in far less safe districts rethink some controversial votes. It matters far less that Elon Musk endorses and bankrolls a primary challenger against you if the Republican candidate will lose either way. Perhaps some will rediscover a spine. Perhaps not. But the party is clearly rattled. In a house currently split 218-213 (220-215 at the last election) every extra member counts. As a result, Trump has withdrawn his nomination of Elise Stefanik as ambassador to the UN, unable to afford losing another Republican house member until the seat is filled. Stefanik was elected to NY-21 (rated R+8) in 2024 with 62% of the vote. We will see on Wednesday whether that puts her at risk. It is important to note, that NY-21 is safe Republican in a normal election, and talk of losses here are accounting for the skewness of special elections. Republican opposition may not materialise – we will have to see.
Also on Tuesday, Wisconsin will go to the polls to vote for a 10-year tenure on the state supreme court. Yes, you heard that right! The Wisconsin supreme court, like many state supreme courts, are elected, and whilst nominally non-partisan, everyone knows who the Democrat and Republican- I mean liberal and conservative candidates are. The partisan composition of the supreme court will be decided by this election, having been 4-3 in favour of the liberals before the election was triggered by a resignation, and they are expected to soon consider both a case on abortion law in the state, and a lawsuit demanding congressional redistricting. Wisconsin currently sends 6 Republicans and 2 Democrats to the House of Representatives, such a distribution down to a map purposefully and maliciously gerrymandered by REDMAP and forced through by the Republican state legislature in 2010, brazen and unabashed, that concentrates the swing state's Democratic support into just two seats rated D+19 and D+25. (Their state legislature's districts were struck down last year and had a sizable effect on election outcomes this year: in 2018, Democrats won 36 of 99 state assembly seats with 53% of the vote; in 2024, they won 45 seats with 49% of the vote.) The race is the most expensive supreme court race in American history, projected to surpass $100 million, and with Brad Schimel, the conservative candidate, funded largely by Elon Musk (whose support began shortly after Musk brought a lawsuit against a Wisconsin law which blocks a Tesla dealership in the state), Crawford, the liberal candidate, is running the race primarily as an anti-Elon referendum.
For now, fighting those house and court seats hard has got to be the Democrats’ greatest priority. And they should introduce articles of impeachment against Hegseth. Speaker Mike Johnson would never allow them to reach committee stage, but that wouldn’t stop Democrat representatives making noise and lots of it. The Republicans never stopped going on about Hilary Clinton’s emails after all. This is a whole nother league.
Born in Buenos Aires on the 17th December 1936, Bergoglio worked as a janitor and a bouncer, and at a food-hygiene lab in his adolescence. There, he worked under Esther Ballestrino, a political activist, and once helped her smuggle communist books from her house after she feared it would be searched. As Archbishop of Buenos Aires, he worked to engage with those who lived in slums in the city and greatly increased the church's presence there. As Ordinary for the Eastern Catholics in Argentina he also served their community, and he did so diligently, according to the Major Archbishop of Kyiv, as he did his many appointments. "[He] took care of our Church in Argentina,” said Shevchuk.
Appointed to the College of Cardinals by John Paul II, Bergoglio continued in his humble way, living in a modest apartment, commuting by bus, and cooking for himself. At the 2005 conclave, it is said it came down to just he and Ratzinger, so come 2013 and a new conclave, at seventy-six, old for a pope but younger than Ratzinger had been, he was a favourite.
Following his election, he lived for a while in the room he was randomly assigned at the beginning of conclave in the Domus Sanctae Martae, a building usually used to host guests to the Vatican. He declined to take up residence at the Apostolic Palace for the remainder of his papacy – “I must live my life with others,” he reasoned. Faithful to his Jesuit vows of poverty, he refused much of the luxury that he could have enjoyed throughout his papacy, and worried not about aesthetics and traditions associated with the papacy, in stark and welcome contrast to his predecessor, instead choosing to focus on works and piety.
As pope he was revolutionary in many ways. In his openness to women in the church (he appointed Raffaella Petrini as President of the Governorate of the Vatican City State, the Vatican’s head of government, a position of significant executive power), the LGBT community ("If a person is gay and seeks God and has goodwill, who am I to judge?"), inter-religious dialogue, and to married priests, especially older priests and in areas where priests are in short supply, he looked like an empathetic leader in a modern world. As archbishop he taught “not be rigid in administration of the Eucharist,” and as pope, in ‘Amoris Laetitia’, he advocated a more nuanced approach towards divorced and remarried Catholics. He also found progressive allies in his criticism of capitalism and his advocation for climate justice, refugees, the poor, mercy, and love, the latter two being regularly invoked as the better focus when members of the church are lost or “obsessed” with issues of contraception, abortion, and sexuality, and for his views on atheism ("The issue for those who do not believe in God is to obey their conscience"). And more recently, he was praised for his rebukes of Donald Trump for his treatment of immigrants (while visiting the US-Mexico border, "A person who thinks only about building walls … and not building bridges, is not Christian.") and of JD Vance for his attempted theological justification of his and the President’s treatment of immigrants ("Christian love is not a concentric expansion of interests that little by little extend to other persons and groups.”).
[international response]
His funeral will be pared down so as to be more in line with the ceremony afforded to bishops and he will be buried outside the Vatican in Rome in the Basilica Santa Maria Maggiore on [day].
