'Were You Using Your Private Phone Or Public Phone For The Signal?': Jack Reed Grills Tulsi Gabbard

2 days ago

At today's Senate Intelligence Committee hearing, Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) grilled top Trump Administration intel officials about the leaked group chat about Yemen war plans.

Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:

https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript

Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com

Transcript

00:00made the point that there was no classified information contained in any

00:04of these discussions that were reported in the Atlantic Monthly, is that correct?

00:08No, that's not correct. So, Senator, what I've related is that that any information

00:17that was related from my perspective or that I observed from the intelligence

00:20perspective was not classified information. With respect to the

00:24assertions and the allegations that there was strike packages or targeting

00:30information or things that relate to DOD, as I pointed out, the Secretary of

00:36Defense is the original classification authority for determining whether

00:40something's classified or not, and as I've understood from media reports, the

00:44Secretary of Defense has said the information was not classified. Are you

00:49aware that the Secretary of Defense declassified this information prior to

00:54the discussion? I'm not. Director Gabbard, same question. You've said it, you've

00:59indicated, at least the impression I got, was there was no classified information

01:04discussed, is that correct? Senator, my answer is the same as the Director of

01:08the CIA's. So, the question has to be posed to Secretary Hegsteth whether he

01:15declassified the information and at what point he did declassify it. Do you agree?

01:20Yes, I defer questions to the Secretary of Defense. Okay. Director Patel, are you

01:28conducting an investigation of this, these discussions and activities? Thank

01:34you, Senator. As I informed the Vice Chairman on the same question, I

01:38found out about this late last night, early this morning, so I don't have an

01:41update for you on that. Well, thank you. When you get an update, we'd appreciate

01:46it very much. Yes, sir. Director Gabbard, were you overseas during any parts of

01:53these discussions? Yes, Senator, I was. Were you using your private phone or

01:59public phone for the signal discussions? I won't speak to this because it's

02:06under review by the National Security Council. Once that review is complete, I'm

02:11sure we'll share the results with the committee. What is under review? It's a

02:15very simple question. Your private phone or officially issued phone. What

02:20could be under review? National Security Council is reviewing all aspects of how

02:25this came to be, how the journalist was inadvertently added to the group chat,

02:30and what occurred within that chat across the board. So you were not

02:38going to disclose anything about whether you use the phone. Director

02:45Radcliffe, there has been indication that the CIA has warned recently retired

02:52personnel about the vulnerabilities of Signal and other encrypted messaging

02:57applications. If that's the case, why were you discussing these issues on Signal?

03:05Senator, Signal use, as I've said repeatedly, is permissible for work

03:12purposes. I've never said that end-to-end encryption apps like Signal are a

03:17substitute for classified systems, and I was not discussing classified

03:22information in this setting. But as you've indicated previously, perhaps the

03:30Secretary of Defense was discussing classified information, and only he can

03:34be held accountable in terms of whether it was classified or declassified at the

03:38point he spoke. Is that accurate? Well, I didn't say it that way. I said the

03:42Secretary of Defense is the original classification authority, and my

03:46understanding is that his comments are that any information that he shared was

03:51not classified. But you have no way to verify that? I don't. Again, this is a very

04:00troubling example and a great lapse in our intelligence and our discussion. One

04:08further point, if you are not aware of any classified information on the

04:16discussions back and forth, would it be appropriate for the author to release

04:20the entire text of what he heard or transcribed? I think the the author has

04:30released, my understanding, essentially almost all of the information as it's

04:35been related to me. I don't know what calculation the author made with regard

04:40to what information would be released or not. I can again confirm

04:45that with respect to the communications that were related, as to me, there was no

04:51classified information. According to the article quote, the message contained

04:58information that might be interpreted as related to actual and current

05:01intelligence operations, and the author did not disclose that information. So the

05:07question would be if he disclosed everything he heard, in your view, that

05:10wouldn't be classified information. I know the context of what that is, and I

05:14think the author said might be interpreted as related to intelligence

05:21information. It was not classified information. So it goes back to my point,

05:25if he released all this information he did not release, he could do so without

05:29any liability at the federal level. I think you're asking for a legal answer

05:35I'm not able to give you, but. Mr. Patel, can you opine? You're a lawyer and you're

05:40director of the FBI. Would he face any legal liability if he released the

05:45information? Because of the questions you and the Vice Chairman have put to me, I'm

05:48not going to prejudge the situation, and that legal call is ultimately for the

05:51Department of Justice. Thank you. Thank you very much.

'Were You Using Your Private Phone Or Public Phone For The Signal?': Jack Reed Grills Tulsi Gabbard

Category

Transcript

Recommended