Several senior American national security officials transferred responsibility for sending possible secret information that appeared in a group about US military attacks in the right to the Minister of Defense, Beit Higseth.
Under the interrogation of the Democrats of the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Director of the CIA and the Director of National Intelligence Toulsi Gabbard denied that the conversation contains secret information.
“There were no secret or intelligence measures listed in this chat group at any time,” Gabbard witnessed under the oath. Ratcliffe was designed to deny him at different points during the audience on Tuesday (25).
But when clicking on whether the operational details were sensitive to the upcoming attacks against the fighters who directed Iran, which was claimed that Higsith, which he sent to the group was secret, the main intelligence officer referred to the Minister of Defense.
“With regard to data and allegations that there is an attack packaging, directive information or the Ministry of Defense (the Ministry of Defense), as I indicated, the Minister of Defense is the original classification body to determine whether there is a secret thing or not, and as media reports understood, the Minister of Defense said that information is not secret.”
When asked whether this information should be secret, Gabard told the committee: “I defend the Minister of Defense and the National Security Council in this case.”
It was a hidden extension of a member of Trump’s most controversial and least experienced office.
most A group conversation was reported on Monday (24) The Atlantic Ocean guarantees a general discussion of the foreign policy on March attacks.
But Higseth’s messages, which they claim included “the operational details of the upcoming Yemen attacks, including the targeted information, and the weapons that the United States will publish and the sequence of attacks”, attracted more attention.
Many current and old defense officers said that any discussion about the moment, targets, or arms systems to be used in the attack are always secret – due to the potential risks of US service members if these plans are revealed prematurely.
The reference, the encrypted messaging platform used by officers, is a commercial application that has not been approved for secret information.
At one time during the attendees on Tuesday, Republican Senator Tom Couton, Chairman of the Intelligence Committee, stopped from the stage to clarify that Gabbard and Ratcliffe distinguishes between military intelligence information that is confidential under the authority of the Minister of Defense and the information collected and controlled by the civil intelligence community, such as CIA.
“They have witnessed,” Cotton said.
“This is true,” said Ratcliffe and Gabbard. “I can once again confirm that with regard to the contacts that were related to me, there was no secret information,” Ratcliffe added.
From the theater, at least one Democrat, noting that Ratcliffe and Gabard have witnessed that there is no secret information in the exchange of text.
Higseth denied Monday night These war plans were discussed by the text, despite the previous recognition of the Trump government that the messages seemed authentic.
“No one was sending war plans -and this is all I should say on this issue,” Higseth told reporters when asked why these details were unintentionally asked with the Atlantic Jeffrey Goldberg.
He also criticized the Minister of Defense, who described him as “very deceived and derived.”
Trump told reporters on Tuesday This “there was no secret information, as I understood” I participated in the conversation in the mark, but refused to tell him who told him that the information was not secret.
On Tuesday, Gabbard refused to respond directly whether she was participating in this topic, citing the National Security Council review, but she answered direct questions based on her chat memories.
Ratcliffe and Gabard said they had not remembered any discussion about operating planning, although Gabbard later admitted “a discussion about goals in general.”
In the messages confirmed by the National Security Council at a later time as original, the Atlantic stated that Higseth sent “accurate information about weapons, targets and time packages.”
In the end, the conflict may depend on the interpretation of the Higseth Classification Authority as Minister of Defense. Higseth has the power to exclude this information, but Ratcliffe said on Tuesday that he does not know whether he had done so.
Nor Gabbard nor RATCLFEFE HegSeth was not criticized directly or by any explicit statement indicating that they blamed the controversy that now participated in the President’s office.
In particular, Ratcliffe tried to confirm that the signal was approved for use on US government computers – including CIA – without taking responsibility for HegSeth messages.
But at some point, he acknowledged that he was virtual, “pre -attack decisions must be made by secret channels.”
Meanwhile, Gabbard routinely claimed that he did not remember the details of what has been discussed on this topic.
However, some Republicans in Congress indicate their finger directly to Higseth.
And he said to CNN Republican Republican Don Bacon, a member of the Armed Services Committee in the House of Representatives and the General Gen. of the Air Force.
