The Trump Administration Accidentally Texted Me Its War Plans

Elect clowns, get a circus

So instead of quietly sitting on his accidental inclusion into the hot mailing list and waiting for a truly big one to come down the pipe, he spills the beans - and no doubt got ejected from the mailing list faster than you can say "Is this administration a data security disaster or what?!" - to write an article about how he got a two-hour advance notice of the US military bombing lousy targets in lousy Yemen.

Not smart...

Maybe he was afraid that if he kept lurking they’d eventually charge him with espionage.
- This is the most likely answer. Yes it would have been good to have inside access to the fascist War plan. Although we already know most of it just by virtue of them being fascists. But the fascists would have 100% come after him his family the company he works for etc etc etc once they realized their mistake. Charging him with Espionage and all sorts of other things. Making them disappear. Instead he gets to look like the good guy being responsible while pointing out the well known incompetence of fascists. Hurting them the one place that actually hurts, their image.
- Being a journalist is about taking huge risks to expose things like corrupt governments. Man got the golden ticket and threw it away once he verified it was real
- I guarantee you they are too stupid to realize as long as he didn't type anything.
  Have you seen boomers and gen x operate anything on a smartphone? If it doesn't 'just work' then all bets are off. It's as bad as gen z only understanding smartphone UIs.
and no doubt got ejected from the mailing list faster
I can tell you didn't read the article, since he left on his own once national secrets were being spilled.
He removed himself from the group, as he should have, once he realized it was real and not a PsyOp.
FTA:
"The Signal chat group, I concluded, was almost certainly real. Having come to this realization, one that seemed nearly impossible only hours before, I removed myself from the Signal group, understanding that this would trigger an automatic notification to the group’s creator, “Michael Waltz,” that I had left. No one in the chat had seemed to notice that I was there. And I received no subsequent questions about why I left—or, more to the point, who I was.
Earlier today, I emailed Waltz and sent him a message on his Signal account. I also wrote to Pete Hegseth, John Ratcliffe, Tulsi Gabbard, and other officials. In an email, I outlined some of my questions: Is the “Houthi PC small group” a genuine Signal thread? Did they know that I was included in this group? Was I (on the off chance) included on purpose? If not, who did they think I was? Did anyone realize who I was when I was added, or when I removed myself from the group? Do senior Trump-administration officials use Signal regularly for sensitive discussions? Do the officials believe that the use of such a channel could endanger American personnel?"
Why? It's not like they hide their agenda. Just read Project 2025

I'm sure he will tell us he magically declassified in his head so it's not treason.

While I have many questions, I will say that this administration sure does butt texts people a lot.

When a "reporter" supports genocide but not leaks about genocide.

And... This is over our highly compromised cell tower communications? Not through an app like signal? Not through some proprietary military app? We really just SMSing war plans..?

For real???

...

...what?!? This makes no sense. It is both Malice and incompetence.

Edit: okay there is mention of an invite to a signal group chat but it's unclear about the original message...

Edit2: y'all seriously lack basic reading comprehension skills and are out here telling me to read the article is adorable.

You should probably read the article before commenting on it.
- Oh I did read it. Twice, actually. Wild how reading comprehension works, right? The article mentions Signal for some of the messages, but it’s pretty fuzzy on how the whole mess started. That’s literally what I was pointing out. But hey, let me know what you find after your first read.
Paragraph 6, first sentence:
On Tuesday, March 11, I received a connection request on Signal from a user identified as Michael Waltz.
Next paragraph:
I accepted the connection request, hoping that this was the actual national security adviser, and that he wanted to chat about Ukraine, or Iran, or some other important matter.
Next paragraph:
Two days later—Thursday—at 4:28 p.m., I received a notice that I was to be included in a Signal chat group. It was called the “Houthi PC small group.”
Paints a a pretty clear picture. Author got a signal connection request, which he accepted. The article intuits that no communication between the author and the signal user ID'd as Michael Waltz between the connection request and the author's addition to the signal group.
Nothing I have read is ambiguous in how the communication occurred, so I'm at a loss at what you're seeing that says differently.
- You're reading into the article more than it actually says. Yes, it notes a connection request on Signal and later a group chat invite - but it never explicitly states that the connection request was the first contact. If that were clear, the article would have just said “the first message came through Signal.” It didn’t.
  The sequence is vague enough to raise the question. If you think that ambiguity is settled by implication, cool - but don’t conflate inference with certainty.
I think the people downvoting you are a little confused. Not only SMS but even direct phone calls can be intercepted and the owner would never be any the wiser, because the network for phones called SS7 and the access points, the "global titles", are so widespread around the globe that anybody and their grandmother can get one, imitate your Sim card's unique identifier "IMSI", and get your calls and texts routed to them. (If they have a spare $10,000 anyways)
This is why many communication options these days advertise that they are encrypted.
- Yep. And anyone whose been to DEFCON knows a guy who knows a guy with SS7 access.
- the people downvoting read the article and saw that the messages were sent from Signal
- This is why many communication options these days advertise that they are encrypted.
  Like Signal. You know, the app they were using, as was mentioned in the article, multiple times. You did read the article, right?
The irony of misreading an article then accusing other people of lacking reading comprehension.
You're an absolute moron.