WATCH: Sen. Ossoff’s full line of questioning
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senator Jon Ossoff, a member of the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee, today pressed Trump Administration officials on the recent Signal chat scandal.
Today, in a U.S. Senate Intelligence Hearing, Sen. Ossoff pressed CIA Director John Ratcliffe on senior U.S. national security officials discussing sensitive information about imminent military operations against a foreign terrorist organization on an unsecure messaging platform, putting servicemembers and our nation’s security at risk.
During his questioning, Sen. Ossoff pressed Director Ratcliffe on the details of the Signal conversations, to which Ratcliffe repeatedly said he did not recall.
Sen. Ossoff later asked Director Ratcliffe and Director Timothy D. Haugh of the National Security Agency/Central Security Service whether or not a discussion by senior U.S. officials on the timing and risks of a proposed military campaign and disagreements between the President and the Vice President about U.S. policy and planning would be of obvious interest to foreign intelligence services.
Both said yes.
Sen. Ossoff finally asked Director Ratcliffe if “this was a huge mistake,” to which Ratcliffe replied, “no.”
Click here to watch Sen. Ossoff’s line of questioning.
Please find a transcript of Sen. Ossoff’s line of questioning below:
SEN. OSSOFF: “Thank you, Mr. Chairman and thank you all for joining us and for your service.
“Just to make sure I understand some of the basics here. So, Director Ratcliffe, you were a member of the Houthi PC small group signal chain, correct?”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “I was.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “Yeah, and so were the Vice President, the Secretaries of State and Defense, the National Security Advisor and Ms. Gabbard, correct?”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “I believe so. I don’t have a list of who was invited to be honest.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “So, and so was national political reporter Jeffrey Goldberg, correct?”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “I don’t know that.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “Yes, you do.”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “I don’t know Jeffrey Goldberg. And I’ve already testified, I don’t know whether or how he was added.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “Okay, well, he was a member of the signal chain, and the discussion included the Vice President’s private opinion on the wisdom of proposed U.S. strikes in Yemen, correct?”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “I don’t recall.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “Vance: ‘I think we are making a mistake. I am not sure the President is aware of how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now. There is a strong argument for delaying this a month.’
“You don’t recall?”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “I don’t.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “You don’t recall seeing that?”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “As you read that, I don’t.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “It included the private opinions of the Secretary of Defense on the timing of strikes in Yemen, correct?”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “I don’t recall.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “Director Ratcliffe, surely you prepared for this hearing today. You are part of a group of principals, senior echelons of the U.S. government, and now a widely publicized breach of sensitive information. You don’t recall whether the Vice President opined on the wisdom of the strikes, that’s your testimony today under oath?”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “In that setting, I don’t recall.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “Here’s what Secretary Hegseth said. ‘Waiting a few weeks or months does not fundamentally change the calculus. Two immediate risks on waiting. One, this leaks and we look indecisive. Two, Israel takes an action first, or Gaza cease fire falls apart, and we don’t get to start this on our own terms.’ Your testimony is, you don’t recall the Secretary of Defense sending that message or reading it?”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “I recall there being an exchange. I don’t recall the specifics as you’re reading it.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “Well, let’s put it this way, Director Ratcliffe, a discussion by senior U.S. officials on the timing and risks of a proposed military campaign and disagreements between the President and the Vice President about U.S. plans and intentions would be of obvious interest to foreign intelligence services, would it not?”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: :Yes.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “And they were discussing the timing of sending U.S. air crews into enemy airspace where they faced an Air Defense threat, correct?”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “I’m going to, Senator, defer to the other principles that you were referring to about what the meaning and the context of what they were…”
SEN. OSSOFF: “They’re talking about the timing of U.S. air strikes, correct?”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “Yes.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “Yes, and therefore, the timing of sending U.S. air crews into hostile airspace, correct?”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “Yes.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “And therefore, the time period during which enemy air defenses could target U.S. air crews flying in enemy airspace, Correct?”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “I don’t know that.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “You do know that.”
“Let me ask this question, General Haugh, you lead America’s signals intelligence collection. Would the private deliberation of foreign senior officials about the wisdom and timing of potential military action be a collection priority for you and the U.S. intelligence community?”
GEN. HAUGH: “Senator, it’s our job to do indications and warning for both the plans and intentions of adversary leaders and for military commanders.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “And, would not, information about the timing of air strikes allow a military to preposition or queue air defense systems to shoot down enemy aircraft?”
GEN. HAUGH: “I think Senator, from our perspective, any advance warning is something that we certainly are trying to protect.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “Director Ratcliffe, this was a huge mistake, correct?”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “No.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “A national political…”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “Hold on.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “No, no, you hold on.
“No, No, Director Ratcliffe, I asked you a yes or no question, and now you’ll hold on.
“A national political reporter was made privy…”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “You can characterize it how you want.”
SEN. OSSOFF: “Was made privy…”
DIR. RATCLIFFE: “The White House has made clear that it was an inadvertent mistake, an inadvertent mistake of adding a reporter to a signal…”
SEN. OSSOFF: “Was made privy to sensitive information about imminent military operations against a foreign terrorist organization and that wasn’t a huge mistake? That wasn’t a huge mistake?
“This is an embarrassment.
“This is utterly unprofessional.
“There’s been no apology. There has been no recognition of the gravity of this error, and by the way, we will get the full transcript of this chain, and your testimony will be measured carefully against its content.
“Thank you, Mr. Chairman.”
# # #
