The Atlantic releases more messages of US security chat

ABC NEWS (Australia)

Former CIA official Larry Pfeiffer says the leak is unprecedented and dangerous.

Transcript

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.

Category

Transcript

Recommended