Featured

California woman says she was raped by Rep. Eric Swalwell in 2018

A new rape allegation against Rep. Eric Swalwell surfaced as he exits a California governor bid and says he will resign from Congress, but the public record so far is largely a press-conference claim pending any law-enforcement filing or corroboration.

Apr 14, 2026

Featured

Trump turns against ‘unacceptable’ Meloni

Trump publicly breaks with Giorgia Meloni after she criticized his remarks about the pope, turning a once-useful alliance into a political liability with consequences for Italy–U.S. relations.

Apr 14, 2026

Buried.News

The stories buried under the noise

Primary focus

Trump fires Kristi Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

A Cabinet secretary was forced out amid contracting and oversight scrutiny, signaling that executive control—not transparent accountability—can dictate leadership of the agency driving mass detention and deportation.

Mar 5, 2026

Featured

Trump’s Acting A.G. Says He Won’t Release Even One More Epstein File

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche says DOJ has released “everything” in the Epstein files, but lawmakers and prior reporting point to millions of pages still withheld and heavy redactions that keep public accountability out of reach.

Apr 14, 2026

Featured

CNN Data Guru Predicts Major Disaster for Trump After Dems Flip Mar-a-Lago

A Democrat flipping the Florida district that includes Mar-a-Lago is real news, but using it to “predict” a national midterm wave oversells what one low-turnout special election can prove.

Mar 25, 2026

Norms Impact

Tulsi Gabbard Is Pushing Debunked Russian Propaganda to Help Trump

A sitting intelligence chief used the White House podium to circulate debunked Russian-spy claims, collapsing the norm that official briefings must disclose known investigative refutations.

Executive

Jul 24, 2025

Sources

https://newrepublic.com/post/198406/tulsi-gabbard-clinton-conspiracy-debunked-russia

Summary

The national intelligence director repeated Russian-spy claims about Hillary Clinton’s health and temperament at a White House press briefing, despite FBI analysis finding the underlying Russian intelligence was “objectively false.” A senior executive-branch intelligence role was used to elevate foreign intelligence assertions while omitting prior U.S. investigative debunking and substituting a selectively framed House committee report. The practical consequence is a weakened public baseline for evidence in national-security claims, making it easier to launder disinformation through official channels.

Reality Check

When the nation’s top intelligence voice relays debunked foreign-intelligence claims from the White House, we normalize disinformation as state speech and erode the evidentiary floor our rights depend on in elections, oversight, and national security. Based on the described conduct—publicly repeating claims already found “objectively false” while omitting that finding—this looks less like a clear-cut federal crime than an abuse of office that weaponizes institutional authority; the core damage is to truthful governance, not merely partisan rhetoric. The peril is precedent: once official platforms can selectively cite intelligence while hiding prior FBI debunking, every future “intelligence-based” allegation becomes easier to launder, and harder for citizens to challenge.

Media

View media post

Detail

At a White House press briefing Wednesday, National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard cited Russian intelligence claims that Moscow had evidence of Hillary Clinton’s “psycho-emotional problems” and alleged reliance on “heavy tranquilizers” while Clinton was secretary of state.

Independent journalist Marcy Wheeler noted Thursday that the same Russian intelligence materials were reviewed and debunked by the FBI in a DOJ-released investigation report from 2018 concerning Clinton’s leaked emails and related Russian intelligence reports. Portions of that DOJ report had remained classified until this month. The FBI analysis stated that much of the Russian intelligence it reviewed was “objectively false,” and the FBI never located the purported stolen documents underpinning the Russian claims; the report stated it was unclear whether such communications existed.

Gabbard instead quoted a 2020 Republican-led House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence report that drew from the Russian intelligence without acknowledging the DOJ’s findings about its falsity. She also claimed the material proved Barack Obama attempted a “coup” by alleging Russian interference in 2016, which was verified by multiple investigations, including a 2020 probe led by then-Senator Marco Rubio.

Norms Impact

CNN montage shows Trump officials in Signal chat condemning Hillary Clinton

Senior national-security officials used an unofficial encrypted chat for strike discussions—and accidentally looped in a journalist—fracturing the norm that classified deliberations stay inside accountable government systems.

Executive

Mar 25, 2025

⚖ Legal Exposure

Ethics Violation

Likely Unlawful

Potentially Criminal

Likely Criminal

Senior national security officials allegedly used Signal—an unofficial channel—to discuss highly classified strike information and mistakenly included a journalist, creating significant exposure for unlawful mishandling and potential unauthorized disclosure pending verification of content and intent. This is not a money-for-action scheme; it is a procedural/operational security failure with serious investigative implications. Criminal liability would turn on what was actually shared, classification status, and whether any conduct was willful or later covered up.

Sources

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-signal-hillary-clinton-cnn-atlantic-b2721016.html

Summary

CNN aired a montage of current Trump administration officials condemning Hillary Clinton’s past handling of classified information as reports surfaced that senior officials discussed a planned Yemen strike in a Signal group chat that included a journalist. The event underscored a widening gap between public accountability rhetoric and internal operational discipline for national-security communications. The practical consequence is a normalized pathway for sensitive strike deliberations to move onto non-official platforms, increasing exposure risk and eroding enforceable oversight.

Reality Check

This conduct threatens to turn classified national-security decision-making into an off-books messaging habit that weakens oversight, compromises operational security, and ultimately endangers our rights by eroding enforceable rules. If “highly classified information” about an impending strike was shared on Signal and exposed to an unauthorized person, the most relevant federal exposure runs through the Espionage Act (18 U.S.C. § 793) and unlawful removal/retention of classified material (18 U.S.C. § 1924), with potential records-law problems if official business was conducted outside required channels. Even if prosecutors never charge a case, running Principals Committee communications through a non-official app while failing to detect an interloper is a governance failure that normalizes impunity at the highest levels.

Legal Summary

Legal Analysis

18 U.S.C. § 793 (Espionage Act) — Willful retention/transmission of national defense information

Alleged facts indicate top officials used Signal ("not an official communications channel") to discuss "highly classified information" about an impending U.S. strike, and an unauthorized person (a journalist) was mistakenly added and remained present.
Structural risk: inclusion of a non-cleared outsider in a live thread about a pending strike supports an inference of unauthorized "communication" of protected information, even if participants later deny "war plans" were texted.
Key gap: the article does not specify the precise content/classification markings, whether any participant acted willfully, or whether the information qualifies as NDI; exposure depends on what was actually shared and state of mind.

18 U.S.C. § 1924 — Unauthorized removal/retention of classified documents or material

Using a non-official encrypted messaging app for classified discussions can constitute mishandling/unauthorized handling of classified "material" depending on agency rules and whether the information was classified at the time of transmission.
Key gap: the record described is a chat; the statute often litigates around "documents"/"materials" and intent; further facts would be needed to assess fit.

18 U.S.C. § 641 — Conversion/theft of government records or things of value

If classified operational details were transmitted via non-official channels and exposed to an unauthorized recipient, the government could frame the information as a "thing of value" improperly conveyed.
Key gap: the article does not establish intent to convert or knowingly convey government property; the described addition appears mistaken.

18 U.S.C. § 1001 — False statements (investigative risk)

After the report, a senior official stated "nobody was texting war plans"; if investigators establish the chat contained operational planning details, this creates potential false-statement exposure.
Key gap: the article does not provide the underlying chat contents sufficient to assess falsity or materiality.

18 U.S.C. § 1519 — Destruction/alteration/concealment of records (contingent)

Because the communications occurred on a non-official platform, any later deletion or concealment of chat contents during an investigation could implicate obstruction/records-concealment theories.
Key gap: no facts in the article indicate deletion, concealment, or record-tampering—this is exposure only if such conduct occurred.

Conclusion: The described conduct reflects serious investigative red flags for classified-information mishandling and unauthorized disclosure due to the use of Signal for highly classified strike discussions and the presence of an unauthorized journalist, but the article’s facts do not yet establish the willfulness and content specificity typically needed for a confident criminal charging posture.

Detail

CNN’s The Source aired a montage of resurfaced clips showing current Trump administration officials criticizing Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server for classified material. The montage aired after reports that White House National Security adviser Mike Waltz mistakenly invited The Atlantic editor-in-chief Jeff Goldberg to an encrypted Signal chat titled “Houthi PC small group,” where senior officials discussed highly classified information related to an impending U.S. strike in Yemen.

Participants described as included in the chat included Vice President JD Vance, National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Steve Witkoff, Susie Wiles, and Stephen Miller. Waltz formed the chat with colleagues on the National Security Council’s “Principals Committee,” using Signal, which is not an official communications channel for top government officials. Goldberg reported that no one identified him in the chat, including when he left the thread, which would have generated notifications.

After the reports, Clinton posted on X: “You have got to be kidding me,” with a screenshot of the report. Trump said in the Oval Office he did not know about the story, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told reporters that “nobody was texting war plans.”