keneci
News • Science & Tech • Comedy
JD Vance Opposed U.S. air strikes in Yemen, in leaked group chat with Waltz, Hegseth, Rubio, others
March 25, 2025
post photo preview

Vice President JD Vance expressed concerns about the timing of United States military airstrikes on the Houthis in Yemen, arguing that the operation would primarily benefit Europe, whose economy is more affected by Houthi attacks on shipping routes than that of the U.S. This was revealed in Signal group chat leaked by discredited notorious left-wing war hawk Jeffrey Goldberg.

Goldberg who is the editor-in-chief of the far-left media outlet The Atlantic, was apparently mistakenly added by National Security Adviser Michael Waltz, to a Signal group chat discussing planned military air strikes in Yemen, with Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, White House Chief of Staff (CoS) Susie Wiles and Deputy CoS for policy Stephen Miller.

In the group chat, Vance said he thought the administration was "making a mistake" and suggested delaying the air strikes on the Houthis, to do more messaging work and see where the economy stood. The vice president believes the attack would benefit Europe more than the U.S. He noted that only 3% of U.S. trade goes through the Suez Canal, compared to 40% of Europe's.

Vance, however, said he'd support the team's "consensus" on the matter, and keep his concerns to himself.

Hegseth acknowledged Vance's "loathing" of what he called "European freeloading," but agreed with Waltz, that the U.S. was the only military power capable of such an action and that delaying the strikes would risk leaks and indecisiveness.

Critics on social media slammed Waltz for his recklessness given how vital and sensitive his job is. However many conservatives praised Vance for his opposition to the air strikes, keeping to Trump 2024 presidential campaign's anti-war stance.

Speaking to the press Monday, Trump said he's not been briefed about the group chat leak, and slammed "failing" outlet The Atlantic.

"I don’t know anything about it. I’m not a big fan of The Atlantic. To me, it’s a magazine that’s going out of business. I think it’s not much of a magazine, but I know nothing about it. You’re saying that they had what? He asked.

"With the Houthis. You mean the attack on the Houthis? Well, it couldn’t have been very effective because the attack was very effective, I can tell you that. I don’t know anything about it. You’re telling me about it for the first time?" Trump added.

Responding to reporter's questions during his Indo-Pacific tour stop in Hawaii, Hegseth excoriated Goldberg.

"So, you’re talking about a deceitful and highly discredited so-called journalist who’s made a profession of peddling hoaxes time and time again to include the, I don’t know, the hoaxes of Russia, Russia, Russia! Or the fine people on both sides hoax. Or suckers and losers hoax. So, this is a guy that peddles in garbage. This is what he does," Hegseth said.

And added, "I would love to comment on the Houthi campaign because of the skill and courage of our troops. I’ve monitored it very closely from the beginning, and you see, we’ve been managing four years of deferred maintenance under the Trump administration [sic]. Our troops, our sailors were getting shot at as targets. Our ships couldn’t sail through. And when they did shoot back, it was purely defensively or at shacks in Yemen. President Trump said, “No more. We will reestablish deterrence. We will open freedom of navigation, and we will ultimately decimate the Houthis,” which is exactly what we’re doing as we speak from the beginning overwhelmingly."

As to Goldberg's claims that Hegseth also posted war plans in the group chat, he said, "I’ve heard it was characterized. Nobody was texting war plans. And that’s all I have to say about that. Thank you."

lk-xH0_6w_8C2T9yKc4RUOILSfSSV5xcgfHRKnAlhWHL__WNLBVAoBRQ4h5fEojUm0OP-eYUDI-ktUcH4ULxwLCa6xHv7vO_oKlTkB1aglAbmiKflP2LznBp7Zql57XCVw=w1280
aOoVocmisDKrYpluNxgkFl0axy5mDvdU2vYR1XUDkomP6SBFTov8gLsCjL6hJF8ZEg-WFsv4rEiEHsIWO9kd15xBF3SrylhG_wMzGWTTZGRO18UDrm009Gvr-Ko9xD_9Ew=w1280

Goldberg reports in part:

On Tuesday, March 11, I received a connection request on Signal from a user identified as Michael Waltz. Signal is an open-source encrypted messaging service popular with journalists and others who seek more privacy than other text-messaging services are capable of delivering. I assumed that the Michael Waltz in question was President Donald Trump’s national security adviser. I did not assume, however, that the request was from the actual Michael Waltz.

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.

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.”

A message to the group, from “Michael Waltz,” read as follows: “Team – establishing a principles [sic] group for coordination on Houthis, particularly for over the next 72 hours. My deputy Alex Wong is pulling together a tiger team at deputies/agency Chief of Staff level following up from the meeting in the Sit Room this morning for action items and will be sending that out later this evening.”

The message continued, “Pls provide the best staff POC from your team for us to coordinate with over the next couple days and over the weekend. Thx.”

The term principals committee generally refers to a group of the senior-most national-security officials, including the secretaries of defense, state, and the treasury, as well as the director of the CIA

One minute later, a person identified only as “MAR”—the secretary of state is Marco Antonio Rubio—wrote, “Mike Needham for State,” apparently designating the current counselor of the State Department as his representative. At that same moment, a Signal user identified as “JD Vance” wrote, “Andy baker for VP.” One minute after that, “TG” (presumably Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, or someone masquerading as her) wrote, “Joe Kent for DNI.” Nine minutes later, “Scott B”—apparently Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, or someone spoofing his identity, wrote, “Dan Katz for Treasury.” At 4:53 p.m., a user called “Pete Hegseth” wrote, “Dan Caldwell for DoD.” And at 6:34 p.m., “Brian” wrote “Brian McCormack for NSC.” One more person responded: “John Ratcliffe” wrote at 5:24 p.m. with the name of a CIA official to be included in the group. I am not publishing that name, because that person is an active intelligence officer.

The principals had apparently assembled. In all, 18 individuals were listed as members of this group, including various National Security Council officials; Steve Witkoff, President Trump’s Middle East and Ukraine negotiator; Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff; and someone identified only as “S M,” which I took to stand for Stephen Miller. I appeared on my own screen only as “JG.”

That was the end of the Thursday text chain.

The next day, things got even stranger.

At 8:05 a.m. on Friday, March 14, “Michael Waltz” texted the group: “Team, you should have a statement of conclusions with taskings per the Presidents guidance this morning in your high side inboxes.” (High side, in government parlance, refers to classified computer and communications systems.) “State and DOD, we developed suggested notification lists for regional Allies and partners. Joint Staff is sending this am a more specific sequence of events in the coming days and we will work w DOD to ensure COS, OVP and POTUS are briefed.”

At this point, a fascinating policy discussion commenced. The account labeled “JD Vance” responded at 8:16: “Team, I am out for the day doing an economic event in Michigan. But I think we are making a mistake.” (Vance was indeed in Michigan that day.) The Vance account goes on to state, “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.”

The Vance account then goes on to make a noteworthy statement, considering that the vice president has not deviated publicly from Trump’s position on virtually any issue. “I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now. There’s a further risk that we see a moderate to severe spike in oil prices. I am willing to support the consensus of the team and keep these concerns to myself. But there is a strong argument for delaying this a month, doing the messaging work on why this matters, seeing where the economy is, etc.”

A person identified in Signal as “Joe Kent” (Trump’s nominee to run the National Counterterrorism Center is named Joe Kent) wrote at 8:22, “There is nothing time sensitive driving the time line. We’ll have the exact same options in a month.”

Then, at 8:26 a.m., a message landed in my Signal app from the user “John Ratcliffe.” The message contained information that might be interpreted as related to actual and current intelligence operations.

At 8:27, a message arrived from the “Pete Hegseth” account. “VP: I understand your concerns – and fully support you raising w/ POTUS. Important considerations, most of which are tough to know how they play out (economy, Ukraine peace, Gaza, etc). I think messaging is going to be tough no matter what – nobody knows who the Houthis are – which is why we would need to stay focused on: 1) Biden failed & 2) Iran funded.”

The Hegseth message goes on to state, “Waiting a few weeks or a month does not fundamentally change the calculus. 2 immediate risks on waiting: 1) this leaks, and we look indecisive; 2) Israel takes an action first – or Gaza cease fire falls apart – and we don’t get to start this on our own terms. We can manage both. We are prepared to execute, and if I had final go or no go vote, I believe we should. This [is] not about the Houthis. I see it as two things: 1) Restoring Freedom of Navigation, a core national interest; and 2) Reestablish deterrence, which Biden cratered. But, we can easily pause. And if we do, I will do all we can to enforce 100% OPSEC”—operations security. “I welcome other thoughts.”

A few minutes later, the “Michael Waltz” account posted a lengthy note about trade figures, and the limited capabilities of European navies. “Whether it’s now or several weeks from now, it will have to be the United States that reopens these shipping lanes. Per the president’s request we are working with DOD and State to determine how to compile the cost associated and levy them on the Europeans.”

The account identified as “JD Vance” addressed a message at 8:45 to @Pete Hegseth: “if you think we should do it let’s go. I just hate bailing Europe out again.” (The administration has argued that America’s European allies benefit economically from the U.S. Navy’s protection of international shipping lanes.)

The user identified as Hegseth responded three minutes later: “VP: I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It’s PATHETIC. But Mike is correct, we are the only ones on the planet (on our side of the ledger) who can do this. Nobody else even close. Question is timing. I feel like now is as good a time as any, given POTUS directive to reopen shipping lanes. I think we should go; but POTUS still retains 24 hours of decision space.”

At this point, the previously silent “S M” joined the conversation. “As I heard it, the president was clear: green light, but we soon make clear to Egypt and Europe what we expect in return. We also need to figure out how to enforce such a requirement. EG, if Europe doesn’t remunerate, then what? If the US successfully restores freedom of navigation at great cost there needs to be some further economic gain extracted in return.”

That message from “S M”—presumably President Trump’s confidant Stephen Miller, the deputy White House chief of staff, or someone playing Stephen Miller—effectively shut down the conversation. The last text of the day came from “Pete Hegseth,” who wrote at 9:46 a.m., “Agree.”

It was the next morning, Saturday, March 15, when this story became truly bizarre.

At 11:44 a.m., the account labeled “Pete Hegseth” posted in Signal a “TEAM UPDATE.” I will not quote from this update, or from certain other subsequent texts. The information contained in them, if they had been read by an adversary of the United States, could conceivably have been used to harm American military and intelligence personnel, particularly in the broader Middle East, Central Command’s area of responsibility. What I will say, in order to illustrate the shocking recklessness of this Signal conversation, is that the Hegseth post contained operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing.

The only person to reply to the update from Hegseth was the person identified as the vice president. “I will say a prayer for victory,” Vance wrote. (Two other users subsequently added prayer emoji.)

According to the lengthy Hegseth text, the first detonations in Yemen would be felt two hours hence, at 1:45 p.m. eastern time. So I waited in my car in a supermarket parking lot. If this Signal chat was real, I reasoned, Houthi targets would soon be bombed. At about 1:55, I checked X and searched Yemen. Explosions were then being heard across Sanaa, the capital city.

I went back to the Signal channel. At 1:48, “Michael Waltz” had provided the group an update. Again, I won’t quote from this text, except to note that he described the operation as an “amazing job.” A few minutes later, “John Ratcliffe” wrote, “A good start.” Not long after, Waltz responded with three emoji: a fist, an American flag, and fire. Others soon joined in, including “MAR,” who wrote, “Good Job Pete and your team!!,” and “Susie Wiles,” who texted, “Kudos to all – most particularly those in theater and CENTCOM! Really great. God bless.” “Steve Witkoff” responded with five emoji: two hands-praying, a flexed bicep, and two American flags. “TG” responded, “Great work and effects!” The after-action discussion included assessments of damage done, including the likely death of a specific individual. The Houthi-run Yemeni health ministry reported that at least 53 people were killed in the strikes, a number that has not been independently verified.

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?

Brian Hughes, the spokesman for the National Security Council, responded two hours later, confirming the veracity of the Signal group. “This appears to be an authentic message chain, and we are reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain,” Hughes wrote. “The thread is a demonstration of the deep and thoughtful policy coordination between senior officials. The ongoing success of the Houthi operation demonstrates that there were no threats to troops or national security.”

William Martin, a spokesperson for Vance, said that despite the impression created by the texts, the vice president is fully aligned with the president. “The Vice President’s first priority is always making sure that the President’s advisers are adequately briefing him on the substance of their internal deliberations,” he said. “Vice President Vance unequivocally supports this administration’s foreign policy. The President and the Vice President have had subsequent conversations about this matter and are in complete agreement.”

community logo
Join the keneci Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
0
What else you may like…
Videos
Posts
Articles
SpaceX Starlink Internet Satellites

With Starlink internet, data is continuously being sent between a ground dish and a Starlink satellite orbiting 550km above. Furthermore, the Starlink satellite zooms across the sky at 27,000 km/hr! MORE VIDEOS ON KENECI NETWORK RUMBLE CHANNEL: https://rumble.com/c/Keneci

00:28:08
Elon Musk, DOGE Speak On Waste And Fraud

US Department of Government Efficiency Services (USDS) led by Elon Musk speak on the "mind-boggling" fraud and waste in UInited States federal government

00:00:45
January 17, 2025
SpaceX Launches Starship 7th Test Flight

SpaceX successfully executed its second-ever “chopsticks” catch of a Super Heavy booster (or Booster 14) using the “Mechazilla” launch tower on Thursday(Jan. 16), during the seventh uncrewed test flight of the company's 123-meter Starship rocket. However, the megarocket's upper stage(or Ship 33) was lost approximately 8.5 minutes into the flight in a “rapid unscheduled disassembly(RUD)” or explosion

00:10:30
Welcome to Keneci Network!

Join the conversations!

September 17, 2024
Charges Against Sean 'Diddy' Combs In Grand Jury Indictment

The rapper was charged with racketeering conspiracy, sex trafficking by force, fraud or coercion, and transportation to engage in prostitution in the indictment unsealed Tuesday(Sept. 17)

Combs-Indictment-24-Cr.-542.pdf
"Dear husband"

A Dubai princess took to social media to announce she's divorcing her husband who's worth $40B.

She claims the billionaire is busy with his "other [female] companions"

post photo preview
post photo preview
Trump Threatens Tariffs, After EU Hit Google With $3.5B Antitrust Violations

The European Union has fined Google $3.46 billion for abusing its dominant position in the digital advertising market, accusing the company of creating inherent conflicts of interest by controlling both the buy and sell sides of online advertising. In response, US President Donald Trump has threatened to initiate a Section 301 trade investigation, which could lead to retaliatory tariffs, calling the fine "unfair" and "discriminatory" against American companies.

The European Commission announced the $3.46 billion fine on Friday, stating that Google's control of both the buy and sell sides of the online advertising market created "inherent conflicts of interest." The investigation, which began in 2021, found that Google favored its own advertising services, violating EU competition laws Regulators have ordered Google to end its "self-preferencing practices" and resolve these conflicts of interest, with the company having 60 days to propose a remedy.

The Commission noted that structural remedies, such as a forced divestiture of parts of its adtech business, remain a possibility if Google's proposals are inadequate.

President Trump reacted swiftly on Truth Social, calling the fine "unfair" and "discriminatory" towards US companies. He claimed the $3.5 billion penalty was taking money that would otherwise go to "American Investments and Jobs" and stated, "Very unfair, and the American Taxpayer will not stand for it!" Trump explicitly threatened to start a Section 301 proceeding to "nullify the unfair penalties being charged to these Taxpaying American Companies."

A Section 301 investigation paves the way for Washington to impose import taxes under a fortified legal basis through the Commerce Department, and the president has a lot of latitude to issue tariffs over unfair trade practices under the provision. Section 301 is the same trade tool Trump used to justify tariffs on China starting in 2018.

Trump also referenced a previous $17 billion fine against Apple, suggesting it should be reversed He claimed the total fines against Google from the EU now amount to $16.5 billion, including the latest penalty.

The fine marks the fourth antitrust penalty for Google from the EU The investigation focused on Google's dominance in online display advertising, where personalized banners and text ads appear on websites. The EU has previously warned that past penalties and requirements have not effectively curbed anti-competitive practices.

Google has rejected the decision, calling it "wrong" and stating it would appeal, arguing that the fine is unjustified and that the required changes would harm European businesses.

The company maintains that providing services for both ad buyers and sellers is not inherently anticompetitive and that there are more alternatives available than ever before.

The timing of Trump's threat is notable, as it comes just a day after he hosted Google's CEO Sundar Pichai, co-founder Sergey Brin, Mark Zuckerberg and other tech leaders at a White House dinner to discuss artififical intelligence implications with First Lady Melania Trump. This confrontation adds tension to a recently agreed-upon US-EU trade deal aimed at reducing US tariffs on EU imports.

“The European Union must stop this practice against American Companies, IMMEDIATELY!” Trump wrote. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Read full Article
post photo preview
Trump Rebrands US Dept. Of Defense To Dept. Of War, Restoring Its Pre-1947 Name

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Friday, formally changing the name of the Department of Defense to the Department of War, a move he framed as a restoration of American military strength and a rejection of what he termed "woke" policies within the Pentagon.

The rebranding, which requires congressional approval for permanence, was announced in a ceremony in the Oval Office, where Trump, flanked by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine, stated the change was necessary because the U.S. "never fought to win" under the previous name, attributing past military stalemates to political correctness.

Hegseth declared the change was about "restoring the warrior ethos" and fighting "to win, not to lose," while Caine's remarks were not detailed in the provided sources.

"Really it has to do with winning. We should have won every war. We could have won every war, but we really chose to be very politically correct or wokey and we just fight forever," Trump said, flanked by Hegseth and Gen. Caine. "We had it, and we won World War I, we won World War II, we won everything before, and as I said, we won everything in between," Trump added. "And we were very strong. But we never fought to win. We just didn’t fight to win. We would have won every one of those wars quickly, but they went a route that I think was probably politically correct, but not correct for our nation. So I think the Department of War sends a signal." He also stated, "We won the first world war, second world war- everything before that and in between and then we decided to go woke and changed the name to 'Department of Defense', so we're going 'Department of War'"

Hegseth on his part said, "This name changing is not just about renaming, it is about restoring. Words matter... Restoring the warrior ethos, restoring victory and clarity, restoring intentionality... The War Department is going to fight decisively, not endless conflicts. It's going to fight to win, not to lose. We are going to go on offence, not just defence; maximum lethality, not tepid legality; violent effect, not politically correct. We are going to raise up warriors, not just defenders"  He also stated, "We won World War I and World War II not with the Department of Defence but with the War Department"

The Department of War was established by President George Washington in 1789 and served as the primary agency for the U.S. Army until 1947. In that year, President Harry Truman signed the National Security Act, which merged the Department of the Army (formerly the Department of War), the Department of the Navy, and the newly created Department of the Air Force into the National Military Establishment. This entity was renamed the Department of Defense in August 1949.

The recent rebranding is part of a broader effort by the Trump administration and Defense Secretary Hegseth to reverse policies deemed "woke" or politically correct, including reversing the renaming of military bases from Confederate names and renaming a Navy ship previously named after gay rights activist Harvey Milk.

The White House has already updated its social media and the Pentagon's website to reflect the new name, with the domain changing to "war.gov." The move has been met with enthusiasm from some on the right, but skepticism and scorn from others.

Read full Article
post photo preview
500th Falcon Landing: SpaceX Launches Starlink 10-57 Mission

SpaceX successfully launched the Starlink 10-57 mission on Friday, Sept. 5, deploying 28 Starlink satellites into low Earth orbit from Launch Complex 39A at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

The Falcon 9 rocket lifted off at 1232 UTC. The Falcon 9 first stage booster(B1069) landed about 8.5 minutes after liftoff on the 'Just Read the Instructions' drone ship in the Atlantic Ocean approximately 8.5 minutes after liftoff, completing its 27th flight, and marking the 500th successful recovery of Falcon, an orbital-class rocket, a significant reusability milestone for SpaceX.

"Falcon 9 touchdown on the Just Read the Instructions droneship, completing the 500th launch and landing of an orbital class rocket," SpaceX wrote on X.

B1069 had previously flown on missions including CRS-24, Eutelsat HOTBIRD 13F, and 22 prior Starlink missions. This landing was the 135th recovery for the "Just Read the Instructions" drone ship.

The Falcon 9 upper stage deployed the 28 satellites into a north-easterly trajectory in low Earth orbit(LEO), about one hour and four minutes after launch.

Starlink 10-57 was the 111th Falcon 9 mission for SpaceX in 2025 out of a total of 529 since 2010. The company's broadband megaconstellation now numbers more than 8,370 active satellites.

Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals