The Trump Admin Group Chat Leak: My Reaction

Hey everybody, our reaction to the viral signal chat leak. We have a very unique take.
I think

you'll enjoy it. Email us as always freedom at charliekirk.com and subscribe to our podcast.

Open up your podcast application and type in Charlie Kirk show. Become a member today.

That is members.charliekirk.com members.charliekirk.com. Get involved with Turning Point

USA at tpusa.com. That is tpusa.com.
Start a high school or college chapter today at tpusa.com. Email me as always, freedom at charliekirk.com.
Buckle up, everybody. Here we go.
Charlie, what you've done is incredible here. Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.
I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk. Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.
I want to thank Charlie. He's an incredible guy.
His spirit, his love of this country. He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point USA.
We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country. That's why we are here.
Noble Gold Investments is the official gold sponsor of The Charlie Kirk Show, a company that specializes in gold IRAs and physical delivery of precious metals. Learn how you can protect your wealth with Noble Gold Investments at noblegoldinvestments.com.
That is noblegoldinvestments.com. It's where I buy all of my gold.
Go to noblegoldinvestments.com. Yesterday, there was some breaking news happening while we were on the show.
We decided not to cover it because we wanted to get all the facts. There was a group chat that was formed over the last weekend, and we're going to go through all of the facts related to this story and give you our analysis, the analysis that has the media in an uproar.
So here are the facts. As you know, over the weekend, President Donald Trump authorized a series of targeted military strikes against the Houthis.
The Houthis were firing upon U.S. vessels.
Now, we must be very clear that it is a quagmire on the southern tip of the Arabian Peninsula. This is in Yemen.
The Houthis are in Yemen, which is on the western part of the southern tip of the Arabian Peninsula, right near Oman and Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia, for years, has been very invested in this Houthi civil war.
It's been disrupting global trade. Many Americans do not even know that there's a country called Yemen, let alone that we should be involved in the Yemenese civil war.
President Donald Trump made a decision to authorize American military strikes. Now, regardless of whether or not you agree or disagree with that, that's actually not the core element at play here.
Once this decision was well underway, there was a group chat that was started on a messaging application called Signal. Now, I use Signal quite a lot, and I'm sure many of you do as well.
It's a secure messaging application where you're able to have messages that automatically delete after an hour, a day, a week, or a month. In this group chat was Vice President J.D.
Vance, Pete Hegseth, John Ratcliffe, Susie Wiles, Stephen Miller, and many others. Now, let's just begin by saying there were no non-government officials on

these group chats. That's a good first start.
There was not people that were not supposed to necessarily be informed of what is going on. Well, until something got leaked.
So I'm going to read this entire group conversation and this group chat conversation, and I'm going to tell you exactly how on earth we have been led to have a window into these private discussions. J.D.
Vance writes at first, at Pete Hegseth, if you think we should do it, let's go. I just hate bailing Europe out again.
Let's make sure our messaging is tight here. And if there are things we can do up front to minimize risk to Saudi oil facilities, we should do it.

Pete Hegseth replies, VP, I fully share your loathing of European freeloading.

It's all caps. 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 can come even close.
The question is timing. I feel like now is a good time as any given POTUS directive to reopen shipping lanes.
And then we should go. But POTUS still retains 24 hours of decision space.
Now SM then replies, I believe this is Stephen Miller. I could be incorrect.
I think it's Stephen Miller. 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. E.g., if Europe doesn't remunerate, then what?

If the U.S. successfully restores freedom of navigation at great cost,

there needs to be some further economic gain extracted in return.

Now, it's presumably Stephen Miller, but we don't know for sure.

Then, in the next iteration, we saw a couple emojis here from Michael Walsh

saying the team in Mar-a-Lago did a great job as well.

Great work, all powerful start.

And the name of the group chat was the Hootie PC small group.

Now, how on earth did we learn about this?

On Signal, you are able to add people to your group chat.

I'll see you next time. How on earth did we learn about this? On Signal, you are able to add people to your group chat.
On Signal, you're able to allow other people to come in. You can invite them.
National Security Advisor Michael Waltz invited the editor-in-chief of the Trump-hating Atlantic magazine, Mr. Goldberg, into the group chat to go have a window into all of these private national security conversations.
Now, before I go deeper into that element of this, I do want to make sure that we are clear about what we've just read. What you've read is that both privately and publicly, there is symmetry with the national security attitudes that our foreign policy leaders have.
That there is not a private loathing for the America First policy perspective that they ran on what J.D. Vance believes publicly, he also believes in privately.
What Pete Hegseth has been saying publicly, he also believes behind closed doors. They aren't plotting how to make Elon Musk money.
We saw the Trump administration was telling the truth about what they care about. This is exactly how I'd expect them to speak most publicly and privately.
They aren't plotting about how to get five points of approval without caring about the outcome. It is raw.
It's authentic. now how Jeffrey Goldberg got added is likely because Mike Waltz wanted to add the U.S.
trade representative, Jameson Greer, and had the same initials. Now, allow me to editorialize for a second.
I know Mike Waltz. We disagree on a lot of foreign policy stuff.
There's a serious question as to why Mike Waltz has Jeffrey Goldberg as a saved signal contact. It's a very serious question.
He's the editor-in-chief of a Trump-hating magazine. You are a national security advisor.
You've obviously been dialoguing or talking to him previously. Is Michael Waltz leaking to Jeffrey Goldberg? I certainly hope not.
We know Jeffrey Goldberg has pushed some of the greatest anti-Trump BS in years past. This is not a friendly or a remotely friendly reporter.
This is a major screw up. There is no other way to put it.
And the screw up is allowing this guy to be put in and Michael Waltz doing that. And by the way, when you have presidencies and administrations like this, you're going to have little hiccups and you're going to have speed bumps.
The best way is just to take responsibility, confront it head on and say it was a glitch. It shouldn't have happened.
It was a near miss in the sense that it could have been way worse what Jeffrey Goldberg got his eyes on. It could have been way worse what he got read into and was not supposed to be read into.
Now, some people are saying, oh, this was intentional that they let Jeffrey Goldberg in. None of that is true.
Let's be honest. That is a bunch of BS.
in and out inside and outside the White House calling for heads to roll over this. This was not some sort of intentional.
Let's allow the head of the Trump hating Atlantic magazine to have a window into our signal group chat. So situations like this happen throughout presidencies where things are going a certain way and you have a little bit of a mix-up you have a little bit of a leak how you handle it is everything but there are some serious questions though but you know who does not have to answer questions pete hegseth and jd vance because what pete hegseth and jd vance were articulating in this group chat was an America First policy perspective behind closed doors.
That when you are not seeing the conversations, they're still fighting for the country and saying, these Europeans are pathetic. Could you imagine if we had a chat? Do you know what a real scandal would be? A real scandal would be if we had J.D.
Vance and Pete Hegseth saying, yeah, we have to kind of save face with our base, but the Europeans are actually awesome, but let's pretend that we're tough on Europe. Could you imagine? That would be an actual scandal.
A real scandal would be our leaders saying one thing to voters and doing a completely different thing behind closed doors. In reality, we just happen to see that behind closed doors, they're doing everything they said they were going to do.
We never should have had that window into closed doors because you don't add the editor-in-chief of the Atlantic Magazine to your group chats. But thankfully, it wasn't as bad as it could have been.
Hey everybody, Charlie Kirk here. Brand new year, brand new opportunities to change the world for the better.

It's easier than you might think. You can save babies by providing ultrasounds with pre-born.

Together with the Sanctity of Human Life Month, we're going to save 35,000 babies to show the world that not only do we believe life is precious, but we're going to do something about it.

Your gift to pre-born will give a girl the truth of what's happening in her body so that she can make the right choice. What better way to start this new year than to join us to save babies? And $28 a month will save a baby a month all year long.
A $15,000 gift will provide a complete ultrasound machine that will save thousands of babies for years and years to come. And will also save moms from a lifetime of pain and regret.
I am a donor to this organization, and you should be too.

Start this new year by being a hero for life.

Call 833-850-2229 or click on the preborn banner at charliekirk.com.

That is charliekirk.com and click on the preborn banner.

I'm a donor. You should be too.

charliekirk.com, preborn banner.

So I have one more thought that I want to go into a thought exercise regarding this situation. I was not overly surprised by the elements of this story because we have a hyper online administration.
Pete Hegseth, JD Vance, they are on the younger of the continuum in the spectrum. My generation, I'm 31.
JD.D. Vance is about 40.
Pete Hegseth, I think, is late 40s. We do a lot of our communication on Signal, on Telegram, on WhatsApp, and on group messages.
The team is moving very, very fast. Now, in the future, these situations should be happening in skips.
And it is the National Security Advisor's job to even rein in cabinet officials and say, nope, we can't be having this conversation here. Can't be doing this.
Let's go to a SCIF. Let's go to a secure conference line.
However, understand that a lot of government and a lot of corporate America and a lot of high stakes decision making is occurring in secured group chats. The reason being, it's far more efficient to have a group chat with 20 people and they can chime in at their the likelihood of their own timing, the own choosing at their own convenience.
Then having a conference call where everyone has to be there at the same time and then almost nothing gets done. Not defending the elements here, but conference calls are literally hell on earth.
It is where bureaucrats go to waste time. A group chat is far more efficient.
You can have a very substantive back and forth and discussion on hopefully non-classified, non-military matters on a group chat than you can having a conference call. Well, and what do you think? And what do you think? Now, let's be serious.
How bad was this screw up? Well, we accidentally gave some details about bomb strikes on terrorist group that we were publicly talking about doing. This wasn't the operation to kill bin Laden.
It wasn't an invasion of Iran, which hopefully will never happen. It was airstrikes on a militant group.
It's embarrassing. It's embarrassing for Mike Waltz.
And President Trump says that he's learned his lesson and that he's a good man. It's President Trump's call.
That's breaking news right here. But embarrassing is very different from destructive.
Now let's compare that to some of the other flubs our DC military intelligence elite have cooked up. What is worse, accidentally having a journalist in your hooty strike chat or pushing fake intelligence to justify invading Iraq? By the way, you know who helped push that intelligence and argued for us to invade Iraq? Jeffrey Goldberg, the reporter in this group chat.
What's worse, a signal group chat or lying about making progress in Afghanistan while we spent over a trillion dollars to achieve absolutely nothing than botching the evacuation so we lost billions in equipment and more than a dozen American lives? What's worse, this chat or overthrowing the government of Libya, causing a decade-long civil war and humanitarian crisis? Let's look beyond the defense issues. What's worse, this group chat or letting tens of millions of people over the border? What's worse, this chat or Democrat mayors sheltering criminals and gangbangers? If you are watching the mainstream media right now, you are being subjected to propaganda.
The people who led America into one gigantic disaster after another are trying to convince you that you are relatively, your relatively mild embarrassment is the worst scandal ever. and let's also reiterate, the group chat itself, despite the fact that Jeffrey Goldberg got invited, actually showed a highly competent dialogue amongst people that weighed all the options related to a military strike.
They are going about the use of American force with prudence, with wisdom, with humility, with sobriety, not with a lustful zeal for blood and conquest in perfect alignment with their public commentary. The way that J.D.
Vance and Pete Hegseth talked about the use of American force should give you confidence that we are not going to go to a thermonuclear war with Russia, should give you confidence that they go about the use of American missiles and American intervention with a serious degree of weight, that it is not something that is thrown around like a Frisbee. It's not like George W.
Bush, who wakes up another day and wants to invade another sovereign nation. If John Bolton would have been on this group chat, he would have said, this is a waste of time.
We should have Marines invade Yemen. Instead, through a collaborative discussion, we now got an exclusive window, the likes of which we may never see again and that we have not seen for forever, into the foreign policy calculus of this new administration.
And hopefully we never see it again. We got a little bit of a sneak peek into the mindset and embarrassment aside, it actually shows that we're in very capable hands as to how these decisions are being made, who is making them, and them weighing the potential costs of U.S.
involvement. In a backwards way, it's actually awfully reassuring.
Hey, Charlie Kirk here. Ever see your dog slowing down or having health issues and wonder, what can I do to make them better? Well, my friend, add rough greens to your dog's food for 90 days and you'll see changes that will amaze you, guaranteed.
Invented by naturopathic Dr. Dennis Black, Rough Greens wants to invite you and give your pup the Rough Greens 90-Day Challenge.
In the first 30 days, you'll see shinier coats and increased energy. By day 60, your dog will have a stronger immune system, less shedding, and improved joint function, all due to live nutrients you've added to their diet.
And at 90 days, better digestion, reduced inflammation, improved heart health, and you might even have reduced their cancer risk. Fetch a free Jumpstart trial bag for your dog today.
Go to ruffgreens.com. Just use promo code Charlie.
That is roughgreens.com, promo code Charlie, and just cover shipping. You don't have to change your dog's food.
To improve your dog's health, just add a scoop of ruffgreens. That is ruffgreens.com.
Joining us now is Senator Ron Johnson from the great state of Wisconsin. Senator, welcome to the program.
Senator, we are pushing very hard. We have deployed our entire field staff at Turning Point Action.
They are living in the state of Wisconsin right now. We are going all in and doing everything we can.
Please remind our audience about the importance of this Supreme Court race. Well, Charlie, and thank you for all those efforts.
You understand, as your organization understands, the way you win elections in Wisconsin is ground game, ground game, ground game. You combine that with the volunteers, the RPW, Elon Musk's efforts, some other big supporters, that's how we're going to have to get it done.
But what's so crucial about this is we have another election for the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Last time we lost, our candidate only got 800,000 votes.
Now, to put that in perspective, President Trump is now the record vote getter in Wisconsin, just shy of 1.7. There's no reason whatsoever that we're running 900,000 votes below his record total.
So we need to get out to vote because this is a race between a judge, I've got a senior moment here, Brad Schimmel, and his opponent, Susan Crawford, who will be a judicial activist, someone who will legislate from the bench, will first redistrict the federal, the congressional seats. We'll probably lose a couple seats from that standpoint.
Then the next thing they'll do is overturn Act 10. They'll cost Wisconsinites hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars over the time.
Probably overturn voter ID. We may never have another free and fair election in Wisconsin.
We'll certainly never clean up our voter rolls. So this is crucial election has national implications.
It's great that Turning Point, your organization is getting out there and understanding the national implications of this. So talk about how the far left is mobilizing and they are spending a lot of money in the state of Wisconsin.
I also want to throw up. Let's go to cut 97.
This shows how our voters are very low propensity. This is a strict turnout game.
Let's play Cut 97, please. In 2020, in their data, people who didn't vote, if they had voted, would have been a little bit more democratic than the country overall.
But over the next four years, people who didn't vote went from being a somewhat Democratic-leaning group to a group that Trump won by double digits. OK.
So the second graph here, we have for every precinct, we look at what percentage of people voted in 2022. And then we just look at what was the change in Democratic vote share from 2020 to 2024.
And so what you could see here is that for the lowest turnout precincts, you know, Trump increased his vote share by something like 6 percent, while for the highest turnout precincts, Harris actually increased her support. And, you know, that's really the story of this election is that, you know, people who follow news really closely, who get their news from traditional media, who like say that politics is an important part of their identity, they became more democratic in absolute terms.
So what they're saying here and that last one, that's David Shore, who had a great conversation as their client to lefties, but very thoughtful. Senator, what he was saying there at the end is the most astute point when it comes to the Supreme Court race.
He says those that have politics as part of their identity tend to be more Democrat. Well, Senator, people who have politics as part of their identity are more likely to vote in a spring off your election for a Supreme Court race.
Therefore, our side must drive turnout of low propensity voters. Senator.
Yeah, that's true. Conservatives, we don't want to deal with government.
We want to live our lives. We want to go to work.

We want to provide for our families, whereas leftists, they want power.

They get power by winning elections, by governing and imposing their ideology on us.

So, again, we need to wake up everybody who voted for President Trump, let them understand what's at stake here on April 1st, and get out and vote.

I mean, if every Trump voter voted for Brad Schimmel, we would run away with this race. But again, in the last Supreme Court race, our candidate only got 800,000 votes versus President Trump's 1.7.
And of course, the left, the last time, turned that Wisconsin Supreme Court race into the most expensive elected judicial race in history. This race is going to top that.
It's just grotesque, the amount of money the left throws at these things. Good news is we've got supporters on our side now that are trying to match those totals.
But even better news is we've got organizations like yours that realize the way you really win is not running millions and millions of dollars of ads. That's important.
You got to do it. You got to keep up.
But it's about ground game and getting out to the voters themselves and energizing them and making sure they know how important this race is. So, Senator, can you contrast what you are feeling on the ground? You know, the state of Wisconsin better than anybody.
I would put you number one as a Republican and maybe Scott Walker because you have won in the hardest of all terrains. I mean, you beat Russ Feingold in 2010.
I think you beat him again in 2016, if I remember correctly. And then you won against Mandela Barnes, I think, in 2020.
I mean, when all the odds are stacked against Senator Johnson, you triumph. And you do it through grassroots and you do it with connecting with the mayor's candidates and county commissioners.
Can you contrast how it feels on the ground versus a couple years ago where we lost the Supreme Court race? Do you feel more national attention and more energy versus a couple years prior? Yeah, there's no doubt about on our side, we're paying a lot closer attention to this race than we did the last time because we lost the last one so miserably.

But this feels very similar to most elections in Wisconsin, dead even, really close, and it's going to come down to a few tens of thousands of votes probably. Again, I don't quite understand that.
you know, why in a presidential year, you can turn out 1.7 and win by 30,000 votes in a

non-presidential year, you've turned out about, you know, 1.2 million and win by 30,000 votes or lose by 30,000 votes. It's Wisconsin, it's going to be close.
It's just amazing the way both sides seem to, you know, ratchet up the turnout by about the same level, no matter what the race is, whether it's presidential or non-presidential. So I'm thrilled to hear that.
And I know the grassroots are working really hard. Senator, shifting gears for a second now to more broad macro elements.
What is your take on this story with Jeffrey Goldberg, the Atlantic? Obviously not a great look with, you know, adding the editor-in-chief, the Atlantic into a private group chat and the strike then subsequent strike on the Houthis. What is your analysis? Your Senate colleagues are acting as if this was the leaking of the invasion of Normandy and an outrageous over the top hyperbolic response.
Senator, how are you processing all of this? Well, it does sound now that you start reading the reports that this has been embellished. You know, it's obviously not a great look.
My guess, this was a obviously a mistake, a mistake that I'm sure is being corrected and has been corrected immediately. I mean, it'll be up to the president to decide exactly what action to take.
But from my standpoint, I don't doubt that this is all being blown way out of proportion by the Atlantic and by the mainstream media. And I also have no doubt that this is going to be corrected very, very quickly.
I certainly contact or my discussion with nominees is follow the Federal Records Act, make sure that all communications are preserved, follow the law. And I think by and large, that's exactly what the people inside the conservative administrations do.
We certainly see how Vice President Biden, President Biden violates that by using all these private email addresses, that type of thing. So again, I caution Republican nominees, don't do that.
Follow the law. Also, I want to now touch on the reconciliation process.
How are we proceeding on the one big beautiful bill? What are you pushing for specifically to try and bring this to be a victory for the border and hopefully spending cuts? We cannot forget spending cuts. Senator, where we at? To me, it's all about spending.
There's no way you can justify from going, you know, going from $4.4 trillion in 2019 up to $7.3 trillion this year. And particularly when you take a look at the options I've laid out there to return to a pre-pandemic level, whether it's Clinton in 98, Obama in 2014, or Trump in 2019, leave Social Security and Medicare as they are today, plus up the other outlays by population growth and inflation.
You've got a baseline spending level somewhere between $5.5 and $6.5 trillion. $6.5 ought to be the absolute maximum we ought to be considering.
Unfortunately, the House resolution at most is going to cut about $1.5 trillion over 10 years, which is going to take us from about 7.3 down to what, 7.1? I mean, it's just completely unacceptable. So President Trump, he needs to get serious about reducing spending if he's going to accomplish the goal he's laid out there about balancing the budget.
I don't think anybody that voted for President Trump thought he would continue spending at Biden's levels. And so there's a real, we're loggerheads right now at the House.
I know they want to pass one big, beautiful bill. I think a multi-step process always made more sense.
A lot simpler, get the border funding to President Trump now. I would just quite honestly extend current tax law to make sure that we don't have a massive automatic tax increase on the table.
I'd get those things off the table, get them out of the way, and then start doing the really hard work of trying to convince my colleagues, and we've got big spenders in my party too, of returning to a reasonable pre-pandemic level. I proposed in the Wall Street Journal a panel made up of House members, senators, and the administration going line by line publicly with members of the administration.
Justify this. I mean, why are you spending so much more than an inflated 2019 level? We can literally save hundreds of billions of dollars per year, you know, at a minimum $700 billion, and that's not even touching Medicaid.
Don't touch Social Security, Medicaid, or Medicaid. And it's still $700 billion less than we're spending today.
Why aren't we talking about that versus the meager savings the House resolution would offer us? I completely agree. We need massive spending cuts.
If we are serious about saving our republic, we need to analyze every single expenditure of the federal government.

Senator, thank you so much for your time.

And everyone, go out and vote and get someone to vote in the state of Wisconsin.

We must win the Supreme Court race.

Senator, thank you so much.

Thanks for your efforts.

Private student loan debt in America totals over $300 billion.

You could take control of your student loan situation with a plan that works for your monthly budget. I just had lunch yesterday with the YReFi team.
They are phenomenal patriots. They love the country.
They love the state of Arizona. Let's face it.
If you have distressed or defaulted private student loans, nobody is coming to bail you out. And bankruptcy is not an option.
Go to YReFi.com. Bad credit is accepted.
Do you have a co-borrower? Why Refi can get them released from the loan. You can give mom or dad a break.
You can even skip a payment every six months up to 12 times without penalty. You don't have to ignore that mountain of student loan statements on your kitchen table anymore.
Just call 888-YREFI-34. 888-YREFI-34.
Go to whyrefi.com. May not be available in all 50 states.
Can you imagine being debt-free and not living under this burden anymore? Be unburdened by what has been. Go to YREFI.com.
That is Y-R-E-F-Y.com. Can you imagine being debt-free? Go to YREFI.com.
That is Y-R-E-F-Y.com. I'm just reading some emails here about the chat situation.
I got to give our audience credit. Our audience is not happy with it.
Our audience says that there is no excuse for this, that we must hold ourselves to a higher standard. Very impressed by the audience's high standard.
In fact, my favorite email says President Trump is working his tail off all day long and has to be distracted by allowing the editor-in-chief, The Atlantic, into a group chat. Unacceptable.
That is the vibe of the audience, and I think you guys deserve a lot of credit. I want your thoughts.
Freedom at charliekirk.com. Do you think Mike Waltz should be fired? What do you think is the right course of action post this chat story of the way forward? President Trump had nothing to do with this.
By the way, a lot of times people say, oh, it involves Trump. This one, trust me, President Trump is not putting together signal group chats.
You could say a lot of stuff. He's not putting together signal group chats.

I want to play some more pieces of tape here, especially the fallout from the signal chat. Let's go here.
This is Mr. Goldberg describing what he saw in the chat.
Play cut 143. The specific time of a future attack, specific targets, including human targets, meant to be killed in that attack, weapon systems, even weather reports, the precise detail.
And then a long section on sequencing. This is going to happen.

Then that is going to happen.

After that happens, this happens.

Then that happens.

And then we go and find out if it worked.

I mean, you know, he can say that it wasn't a war plan, but it was a minute by minute accounting of what was about to happen. However, you were not supposed to be in there.
Never should have happened. Now understand Signal has and will is continued to be an authorized method of communication.
Joe Biden started that practice and President Trump has continued it. Scott Jennings comments on it.
Play cut 145. The signal program was preloaded on a number of devices and agency computers in this circuit when they got there.
So in their view, it was already in use. Number two, in some of the messages they talk about needing to go to the high side computers, which is the classified system.
So they clearly were knowing there was a line on what you could discuss in a chat like this versus classified system. Number three, there is a dispute over whether the term war plans is being exaggerated.
And number four, look, I love the policy. It's well executed.
You've got a thoughtful policy discussion going on. And we did what the Biden administration would not do, stop these people from harassing our shipping lanes and our boats and our Navy.
So let me tell you the biggest concern of all. If that is correct, and it was government devices that everyone was using signal with, then why did Mike Waltz on a government device have Jeffrey Goldberg saved on his signal profile? That's a serious question.
It's not like this was some carryover when he was in Congress. Jeffrey Goldberg is a chief neocon, a very neoconservative person.
So is Mike Waltz. Mike Waltz is a maximalist neocon.
He is very close to John Bolton on several issues. I've had this discussion with him before.
That's fine. President Trump likes to mix it up.
He likes to have aggressive and can kind of come in and mediate it. Not doubting President Trump's wisdom here.
But it does beg the question that if it's preloaded on a government device and this is your government official channels and communication, then how is it saved in your signal chat? I know how signal works. Who actually invited this person into a Signal chat? Seems to be Mike Waltz.
That means he's added Jeffrey Goldberg as a contact on Signal since he became National Security Advisor. Now, he could have potentially imported his previous signal profile onto a government device? Maybe, potentially, but it begs a lot more questions than answers.
And just more broadly, what are you as the National Security Advisor doing dialoguing with Jeffrey Goldberg? The room for error is nothing, And praise God, this could have been a lot worse.

Narrowly avoided what could have been something catastrophic.

And this is a developing story. I do want to hear from you.
Freedom at Charlie Kirk dot com.

What do you think should happen in this instance? Thanks so much for listening.

Everybody email us as always freedom at Charlie Kirk dot com.

Thanks so much for listening and God bless.

For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to Charlie Kirk dot com.