Ambassador Susan Rice Responds to “Signal-Gate"

Summary

The MeidasTouch Podcast Summary

Episode: Ambassador Susan Rice Responds to “Signal-Gate”
Release Date: March 30, 2025
Host: Ben Meiselas
Guest: Ambassador Susan Rice, former Ambassador to the United Nations and former National Security Advisor

---

1. Introduction

In this episode, Ben Meiselas welcomes Ambassador Susan Rice to discuss the controversial “Signal-Gate” incident involving inappropriate use of the Signal chat application for sensitive national security communications during the Trump administration. The conversation delves into the implications of this breach, the handling of classified information, and the broader impact on U.S. alliances.

---

2. The Signal-Gate Incident Overview

Ben: Introduces the topic by referencing Tulsi Gabbard's statement during a Senate hearing, where she claimed that no classified materials were shared in the contentious text messages related to war plans.

Ambassador Rice: Responds by vehemently disagreeing with Gabbard’s assertion.

“It's laughable. Let me explain why I say that, Ben.” [03:58]

Rice emphasizes that any meeting involving National Security Council principals is inherently classified, regardless of the platform used.

---

3. Analysis of Tulsi Gabbard’s Statement

Ambassador Rice: Criticizes Gabbard's claim that no classified information was shared, highlighting the nature of the discussions that inherently contain sensitive information.

“Tulsi Gabbard is either lying or being deliberately evasive by trying to say no intelligence material was shared.” [04:56]

She explains that the meeting's content, including military plans and operational details, should unequivocally be classified.

---

4. Classification of National Security Communications

Rice details the protocols for handling classified information within the National Security Council.

• Secure Locations: Meetings typically occur in the White House Situation Room, a highly secure facility where personal devices are prohibited to prevent unauthorized access.

“We conduct meetings of the national security principals and deputies in the situation room precisely so that we have that kind of secure bubble that can't be infiltrated by our adversaries.” [06:22]

• Secure Communication Tools: National security officials are equipped with secure phones, videos, and document handling systems to maintain the confidentiality of discussions.

---

5. Risks of Using Signal Chat for Sensitive Discussions

Ambassador Rice: Highlights the vulnerabilities associated with using Signal chat for classified communications.

“Having a Principals Committee meeting by text on a signal chain is incredibly reckless and dangerous.” [09:16]

She explains that personal phones are susceptible to hacking, potentially exposing sensitive information to adversaries like Russia.

---

6. Potential Legal Implications

Ben: Asks whether the actions surrounding Signal-Gate could constitute criminal violations of the Espionage Act.

Ambassador Rice: While not a lawyer, she references legal experts' opinions.

“Those that are lawyers and who have spoken on this have said this could well be a violation of the Espionage Act or set a series of violations.” [11:35]

She also mentions potential breaches of the Presidential Records Act due to the mishandling of official communications.

---

7. Trump Administration’s Approach to Allies

Ben: Shifts the discussion to the broader pattern of the Trump administration undermining U.S. alliances, including actions against Canada, Greenland, Panama, and Ukraine.

Ambassador Rice: Provides a comprehensive critique of the administration’s foreign policy stance.

“There is an extraordinary pattern here in the Trump administration of the United States taking actions and decisions that directly harm our closest allies.” [14:02]

She outlines various detrimental actions, such as imposing tariffs, threatening Canadian and Greenland sovereignty, and withdrawing support from Ukraine, leading to fractured international relationships and increased alignment with adversaries like Russia and China.

---

8. Public Perception and Poll Results

Ben: References a recent poll indicating that 74% of Americans view the Signal-Gate incident as a very serious issue, with only 8% dismissing its seriousness.

This statistic underscores the public's concern over the mishandling of classified information and its implications for national security.

---

9. Conclusion and Final Thoughts

Ambassador Rice: Concludes by questioning the motives behind the administration's reckless handling of national security, emphasizing the long-term risks to U.S. safety and global standing.

“We are casting our lot with autocrats like Putin and Xi who don't share our values, don't share our interests...” [16:02]

She calls for accountability and a return to secure, responsible management of national security communications to restore trust and alliances.

Ben: Thanks Ambassador Rice for her insights and expresses hope for future discussions to navigate these challenging times.

“Ambassador Rice, it's an honor to have you on first time on the Midas Touch Network...” [17:19]

---

Key Takeaways

• Security Protocol Breach: The use of Signal chat for National Security Council communications poses significant risks of classified information exposure.

• Legal Ramifications: Potential violations of the Espionage Act and the Presidential Records Act highlight the severity of the mishandling.

• Impact on Alliances: The Trump administration's actions have strained relationships with key allies, weakening global U.S. standing.

• Public Concern: A majority of Americans view the Signal-Gate incident as highly serious, reflecting widespread anxiety over national security integrity.

---

Notable Quotes

• “It's laughable. Let me explain why I say that, Ben.” [03:58]

• “Having a Principals Committee meeting by text on a signal chain is incredibly reckless and dangerous.” [09:16]

• “There is an extraordinary pattern here in the Trump administration of the United States taking actions and decisions that directly harm our closest allies.” [14:02]

• “We are casting our lot with autocrats like Putin and Xi who don't share our values, don't share our interests...” [16:02]

---

This episode provides a critical examination of the mishandling of classified communications within the Trump administration and its broader implications for national security and international alliances. Ambassador Susan Rice offers expert insights into the dangers of such security lapses and underscores the urgent need for accountability and adherence to established protocols to protect U.S. interests globally.

Transcript

[Advertiser]

Your data is like gold to hackers. They'll sell it to the highest bidder. Are you protected? McAfee helps shield you blocking suspicious texts, malicious emails and fraudulent websites. McAfee Secure VPN lets you browse safely and its AI powered tech scam detector spots threats instantly. You'll also get up to $2 million of award winning antivirus and identity theft protection, all for just $39.99 for your first year. Visit McAfee.com, cancel anytime terms apply.

[William Goudge]

I'm William Goudge, a Vuri collaborator and professional ultrarunner from the uk. I love to tackle endurance runs around the world, including a 55 day 3064 mile run across the US. So I know a thing or two about performance wear. When it comes to relaxing, I look for something ultra versatile and comfy. The Ponto Performance Jogger from Vuri is perfect for all of those things. It's the comfiest jogger I've ever worn and the Dream Knit fabric is why I'll always reach for them over other joggers. Check them out in the Dream Knit collection by going to vuorie.com william that's v U-O-R-I.com william where new customers can receive 20% off their first order, plus enjoy free shipping in the US on orders over $75 and free returns. Exclusions apply. Visit the website for full terms and conditions.

[Advertiser]

This episode is brought to you by Shopify. Upgrade your business with Shopify, home of the number one checkout on the planet. Shop pay boosts conversions up to 50%, meaning fewer carts going abandoned and more sales going Cha ching. So if you're into growing your business, get a commerce platform that's ready to sell wherever your customers are. Visit shopify.com to upgrade your selling today.

[Ben]

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Fiscally responsible financial geniuses, monetary magicians. These are things people say about drivers who switch their car insurance to Progressive and save hundreds. Visit progressive.com to see if you could save Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates. Potential savings will vary. Not available in all states or situations.

[Mantis X Representative]

Want to save time and money on ammo while dramatically improving your shooting? Meet Mantis X, the revolutionary dry fire training system that 94% of shooters say improves their accuracy in just 20 minutes. Used by the Marine Corps, army and Special Forces, Mantis X brings military grade technology to everyday gun owners at an affordable price. Train anytime, anywhere with your own firearm and pay for the system and ammo savings alone in less than two weeks. If you believe in your Second Amendment rights, you must also act on your Second Amendment responsibility to be competent, confident and accurate. Whether you're a beginner or a seasoned shooter, Mantis X is the must have tool to take your skills to the next level. Start improving today. Get yours@mantisx. That's Man T I S x.com I'm.

[Ben]

Joined by former ambassador to the United nations and former National Security Advisor, Ambassador Susan Rice. Welcome. We really want your help to help us navigate what's going on with these text messages of war plans that they invited a journalist on in this Trump regime. Let me just share with you what Tulsi Gabbard said during a hearing in the Senate. She said there was no classified materials. I read it. I want to get your take on it. Play this clip, contact the Defense Secretary or others after this specific military planning was put out and say, hey, we.

[Ambassador Susan Rice]

Should be doing this in a skiff.

[Advertiser]

There was no classified material that was shared in that.

[Ben]

So then there were no classified material. Ambassador, you've been able to see what's been published publicly. Is there classified information in there? And what do you make of her response?

[Ambassador Susan Rice]

It's laughable. Let me explain why I say that, Ben. And by the way, it's great to be with you. Any meeting of the National Security principles, this is the cabinet level senior most national security team, and that's what this was is by definition in itself on almost every possible occasion. Those are classified discussions because even the topics that they choose to discuss tells our adversaries something of relevance. So having a meeting of the National Security Council principles is by itself a classified matter. Then next here we are talking about whether or not and when and how the United States should attack a foreign adversary. The fact of that conversation and its contents is inherently classified because if an adversary were to have the ability to learn of those plans and intentions in advance, then that adversary could prepare both by hardening their defenses or evading attack, but more worryingly, by going after the United States and our assets as we conduct the attack. So military plans and operations are inherently classified. Add to that that we know from Jeff Goldberg's reporting that Pete Hegseth, the Defense Secretary, shared sensitive military plans, including attack targets, timing, sequencing, the ordinance or the bomb types that they were going to use. That is all inherently classified. Tulsi Gabbard is either lying or being deliberately evasive by trying to say no intelligence material was shared. You know, she may be trying to be very cute by half and suggesting that no product produced by the intelligence community as opposed to the Defense Department was shared on that chat. We have no way of knowing that. We do know apparently, that the CIA director exposed a covert operative's name on the chat. That's inherently classified. But more to the point, then, let me explain how national security decision making is supposed to work. If you're having a meeting of this National Security Principles Committee, as we call, is typically held in person in the White House situation room, which is a very secure facility in the basement of the White House, you're not allowed to take your phone into the the situation Room. You're not allowed to take your Apple Watch into the situation. You leave all of that outside because those devices we know can be hacked by our adversaries and used as listening devices so that the Russians could be listening to everything said in the situation Room if you brought your phone in. We conduct meetings of the national security principals and deputies in the situation room precisely so that we have that kind of secure bubble that can't be infiltrated by our adversaries. And if the principals, individually or collectively, are not in Washington, not able to gather in the situation room, or maybe it's late at night and they need a way to communicate securely, we have all kinds of setups for that. Every single national security cabinet level principal, whether you're the National Security Advisor or the Secretary of Defense, or the Director of National Intelligence or the Secretary of State, they travel everywhere they go with a secure communications package. These are people who set up for them secure phones, secure videos, secure document handling capacity. So that's always with a cabinet level principle. If they're traveling, the fact that they wouldn't use it if they had it is mind boggling. Secondly, in everybody's home in the Washington area, there are secure compartmented facilities in their homes where they can go and communicate by phone, by email, by video, securely. So we do that for a reason. We do not communicate national security information or have Principals Committee meetings by signal text chat. It's not a secure vehicle. You're not allowed to put them on your government phones. It's not for classified information. And since these were all done on people's personal phones, highly vulnerable to infiltration and exfiltration by our adversaries. So just the mere fact of having a Principals Committee meeting by text on a signal chain is incredibly reckless and dangerous. Then you share classified discussions about military plans and operations and then classified military documents about those plans and operations on this chat. It's extraordinarily reckless, dangerous, and in my recollection, unprecedented.

[Ben]

Donald Trump's special Envoy to Russia Steve Witkoff was allegedly in Moscow while he was on this group chat. The CIA Director, John Ratcliffe testified today that he wasn't even aware today that Witkoff was in Moscow. When I knew about it because it was a matter of public attention. How dangerous is that? Do you believe the Russians now have all of that information and potentially more? What can you give us based on what would you know about these things?

[Ambassador Susan Rice]

Well, if, unless no, there's no yes, the Russians have whatever Witkoff was doing or saying on his personal cell phone. The way Witkoff should have handled this and the way this meeting should have been conducted is Witkoff should have gone into the US Embassy in Moscow and gone into their secure compartment facility and conducted his participation by video conference. That's how this whole thing should have happened. There should never have been a signal chat used as the vehicle for a discussion that involved anything sensitive regarding national security. The Russians undoubtedly have it.

[Ben]

What should happen? I guess in the normal course, what should happen? What do you want to see happen? What do you think is going to.

[Ambassador Susan Rice]

Happen in the normal course? This would be the subject of a gazillion congressional investigations that took months if not years and went through every aspect of this with a fine tooth comb on a bipartisan basis. That's how it would normally happen and people would be held accountable. In a normal administration, if the National Security Advisor and the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence and the CIA Director engaged in a sensitive conversation about military operations on a non secure platform, they would no longer be in those jobs. That's just how it works. We can't afford to have such recklessness and irresponsibility among the people who are meant to guard our national security.

[Ben]

Ambassador, do you see anything here that could potentially rise to criminal violations of the Espionage act and how this is handling or other things like that?

[Ambassador Susan Rice]

I'm not a lawyer and so I'm not going to make that judgment, but those that are lawyers and who have spoken on this have said this could well be a violation of the Espionage act or set a series of violations. It seems much more clearly to be a violation of the Presidential Records Act. Unless the people on that chat very deliberately then copied and downloaded the chat to a government communication system, a classified or unclassified system, then they will have violated the Presidential Records act on that. I have enormous experience and I'm pretty confident in saying that so. But you know, for Donald Trump to say, well, Mike Walz has learned his lesson and won't do it again, is more than insufficient. The president who campaigned in 2016 on Hillary's emails knows very well how important it is to safeguard classified information. And if he can't hold his team accountable for this, then clearly he's not interested in safeguarding classified information.

[Ben]

Seeing a recent poll that just came out, about 74% of Americans find this to be a very serious issue. Only 8% say they don't find it serious. Then there's a group of undecideds there. I just have to ask you, while I have you on the show, you know, you've been observing what this Trump administration, I say, regime has been doing in terms of attacking our allies, consistently talking about taking over Canada, annexing it, annexing Greenland, annexing Panama, throwing tariffs on this country, pulling the tariffs back, really pushing our allies to isolate us, form their own kind of defense groups. We're seeing that in Europe with Canada, making deals with Australia. While I have you, I just would want to hear your kind of overall also, by the way, Trump's attacks on Ukraine a lot to unpack and I want to have you back on the show to go over all of those issues. Of course. But while I have you here now, Ambassador, you're just your overall thoughts of what you've been observing.

[Ambassador Susan Rice]

Well, let me give you my overall thoughts, but let me give you before I do that, a specific thought that relates to what we've been talking about, the so called signal gate that is relevant to your question. You know, JD Vance is revealed on that signal chat to have expressed a really shocking view that is consistent with the concern inherent in your question. His view was that in his judgment it wasn't worth now the United States taking military action against an Iranian backed terrorist organization that was attacking and continues to attack the United States, our personnel and our vessels because it would have the ancillary benefit of helping the Europeans who use that passageway around Yemen, that sea passageway, Red Sea, etc. For much of their commerce. He would rather screw the Europeans and leave the Iranian backed Houthi rebels who are terrorists to continue to attack us than do something that that would be beneficial to our European allies. So we're living in a real upside down time. Now to go to your larger question. There is a extraordinary pattern here in the Trump administration of the United States taking actions and decisions that directly harm our closest allies, whether the Europeans or the Canadians, you know, threatening Greenland, threatening Canada, as you said, imposing painful tariffs on our closest partners, withdrawing USAID from the field, closing down the voice of America, leaving Ukraine almost to Russia's mercy. This is all of a piece that is extremely worrying. We have realigned ourselves, reoriented ourselves. We are no longer the ally and trusted friend of Western democratic nations. We are instead the favored partner now of Russia, and through Russia, China, who are closely allied. This is upside down, and it's deeply disturbing. We are rupturing trust and ties that have kept Americans safe since World War II. And we are casting our lot with autocrats like Putin and Xi who don't share our values, don't share our interests, but want to take the United States off the field in Europe, in Asia and elsewhere around the world. It's absolutely upside down. And you have got to ask yourself, what is the motive for President Trump and his team to pursue this radical revision of what has kept us, the structures, the relationships, the alliances that have kept us safe for so long?

[Ben]

Well, sometimes, Occam's razor, the simplest answer may be the tragic, unfortunate and dangerous one. Ambassador Rice, it's an honor to have you on first time on the Midas Touch Network and we hope you come back. And we hope this is the beginning of a number of interviews we're able to do with you to help us navigate through these difficult times. Thanks, Ambassador.

[Ambassador Susan Rice]

Thanks, Ben. I look forward to it.

[Ben]

Take care, everybody. Hit subscribe let's get to 5 million subscribers. Can't get enough Midas? Check out the Midas plus substack for ad Free articles, reports, podcasts, daily recaps from Ron Filipkowski and more. Sign up for free now at midasplus dot.