Former CIA official Larry Pfeiffer says the leak is unprecedented and dangerous.
Category
📺
TVTranscript
00:00I've been involved in national security in one way, shape, or form for four decades,
00:07and I've never seen the kind of information that Mr. Goldberg showed us today as not being
00:14classified at least at the secret level, if not the top secret level.
00:18This is information about attacks against a foreign nation, surprise attacks against
00:23a foreign nation, and this material was being put on an unsecure platform hours before
00:30it was to commence.
00:32Even with the little details that were available, it was enough detail that if it had gotten
00:36the hands of the Hooties, they could have moved from the target zones, they could have
00:40hardened the target zones, they could have launched defenses that could have potentially
00:45brought aircraft down and killed American pilots.
00:50It is really ludicrous to claim that it was not classified.
00:55How would these sorts of conversations normally have taken place?
01:00It sounds as though Signal, in your experience, isn't the go-to platform for these sorts of
01:07conversations to be happening.
01:11Absolutely not.
01:12Signal is a wonderful platform for people like you and me to use in our civilian lives
01:17to protect our communications as they're traversing through the airwaves or down cables
01:21or wires.
01:23But when the communication is on your phone, whether you're preparing it, storing it, or
01:28whether you're receiving it and storing it, it is vulnerable to surveillance and collection.
01:32These are non-secure devices.
01:34They're not to be used in secure spaces.
01:36So the information is vulnerable to exploitation by foreign intelligence services.
01:41So very dangerous to use it.
01:43How would it normally have been done?
01:45Normally these kinds of conversations would happen in the White House Situation Room or
01:49other SCIFs, as we call them, Secure Compartmented Information Facilities, which are hardened
01:55and protected from surveillance.
01:57If a principal, who are very busy people, if they're not able to physically be in one
02:01of those rooms, they have secure communication packages that are provided by the White House,
02:07the National Security Council, that allows them to join a meeting in progress from wherever
02:12they are, whether it's at a home, in an office, in a car, in a plane.
02:17Heck, we even brought in Secretary Kerry during my time at the White House.
02:21We brought him in from his sailing yacht off the coast of Martha's Vineyard.
02:25It can be done.
02:26It can be done easily.
02:27This equipment is just steps away from these individuals.
02:32Is there any idea why they would have used a platform such as Signal to have a conversation
02:39like this?
02:40If that technology is available.
02:43That is the big mystery to me.
02:45I think it's some combination of laziness, arrogance, ineptitude.
02:51I mean, sure, it's a lot easier to pull out of your pocket, your iPhone, your Android,
02:58and communicate with people than it might be to walk into another room or to take an
03:03elevator down to get in your car or to drive across town to go to the White House Situation
03:08Room.
03:09But I expect my senior leaders of my country to take those extra steps in order to protect
03:14those kinds of communications and protect the military personnel who are involved in
03:21these operations.
03:23The Trump administration has been sort of downplaying this incident over the last couple
03:28of days.
03:29We just heard the president suggesting that Signal itself was part of the problem.
03:36Do you think that there will be any ramifications for the president or any of the other top
03:40officials who were involved in that chat?
03:43Do you think there'll be any ramifications for them domestically?
03:47So I would agree with the president that putting this kind of information on Signal was probably
03:51the original sin of this multi-act endeavor.
03:56Will there be consequences?
03:58I think there'll be consequences for someone.
04:00I don't think anybody did anything criminal.
04:01I don't think anyone's going to be charged with a crime or go to jail.
04:05Could somebody be forced to resign over some of the negligence with which they approached
04:10this activity?
04:11I think that's possible.
04:13The two that I think would be most likely would be Michael Waltz, the National Security
04:17Advisor, or Secretary Hegseth, because Waltz put him on this platform, Hegseth is the one
04:23who put the sensitive information out into the chat and into the communication.
04:28But ultimately, all of them bear some responsibility.
04:31I, as an intelligence official, when I would go to a meeting, there were a number of things
04:36I would want to know before that meeting even began.
04:38Who's in the room or who's on the conversation?
04:41What classification level is the meeting happening at?
04:44And what clearances do the individuals in that room have?
04:47And if you had any question about that, you had a responsibility to raise that question
04:52to ensure that, again, the information was being protected.
04:58Should American allies, such as Australia, given that we're involved in the Five Eyes
05:04Alliance, et cetera, should they be concerned about the way that sensitive information is
05:09being handled by the Trump administration?
05:11Well, I think there have been a number of instances over the course of the last couple
05:16of months that have raised that question in capitals all around the world, including our
05:20staunch Five Eyes allies like Australia.
05:22I think this activity of the last couple of days underlines that concern.
05:29And I would hope that our good allies are asking the right kinds of questions in the
05:34right kinds of forums to the United States and to their counterparts to ensure that their
05:40material is being protected.
05:41You know, we have a robust, wonderful partnership.
05:45And frankly, the security of the Five Eyes nations would not be what it is today if we
05:50weren't cooperating together.
05:52And so, ultimately, it's a relationship based on trust.
05:56And if trust has been harmed, I think the US probably does owe our allies some answers.
06:03Former CIA Chief of Staff Larry Feifer there in Washington, thanks so much for your time.
06:07Appreciate your insights.