CNN | After the White House argued, repeatedly, that there was no
classified information in the now-infamous group chat of national
security officials, The Atlantic published it.
CNN reporters annotated the entire chat, which included Hegseth’s description of F-18s and drones preparing to strike targets, which anybody listening in would have known were to occur in Yemen since the name of the chat included the word “Houthi.”
The White House and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth continued to argue, even after release of the chat, that the information wasn’t classified, but only sensitive.
Multiple experts advised on CNN Wednesday that people should not get sidetracked by whether or not the information was classified.
What’s below are the assessments of:
- Retired Brigadier Gen. Mark Kimmitt, who during his military career worked as deputy director for strategy and plans for US Central Command, and then worked in the State Department as assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs during the George W. Bush administration
- and Beth Sanner, a CNN National Security analyst who was deputy director of national intelligence for mission integration during portions of both the first Trump and Joe Biden administrations.
Kimmitt and Sanner both appeared on CNN Wednesday, and I subsequently followed up with Sanner on the phone.
Was classified information shared?
CNN has reported that sources within the Pentagon believe that the information shared by Hegseth, which detailed when, to the minute, US fighters and drones would strike Houthi targets, was clearly classified.
Whether it was technically classified is beside the point, according to Kimmitt.
“I think everybody’s missing the relevant issue,” he said, noting that Hegseth has the authority to declassify Pentagon information.
“If he says it’s not classified, it’s not classified,” Kimmit said. But “the fundamental question that we should be asking is, ‘Should it have been classified?’ And the answer, of course, is yes.”
What should be classified?
“I think we’re watching a lot of bob and weave, instead of just making this simple,” said Sanner, who added that the rule of thumb is that anything that shouldn’t be put into an unclassified email should be treated as classified material.
“Another really easy way to look at this is, ‘If I’m sitting in Moscow or Beijing, would I be happy to get this information and think that I’ve gotten something really interesting?’” she said. Obviously yes.
What’s interesting to adversaries?
First, the military portions of what was shared clearly should not have been shared.
“If there are planes, trains automobiles, whatever, heading toward an attack, it is classified,” Sanner said.
And if Hegseth wants to declassify something, there is a process of documentation that should be followed, she said.
