Connect with us

America

The ‘Signalgate’ scandal grows in the US

Published

on

The controversy continues over messages revealed after senior US officials “accidentally” added The Atlantic reporter Jeffrey Goldberg to their group chat on the Signal messaging app.

The group, which discussed the attack on the Yemeni resistance and the Houthis, included high-level figures such as Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, and National Security Advisor Mike Waltz.

The Atlantic‘s editor-in-chief Goldberg published a second story following the initial report, releasing messages he had previously withheld. The new messages detail the timing of military strikes in Yemen from the Trump administration’s Signal group chat.

The magazine stated it initially decided to withhold specific information about weapons and attack timings found in some texts, saying it generally does not publish information about military operations that “could endanger the lives of US personnel.”

However, arguing that White House officials’ claims led them to believe people needed to see the texts to draw their own conclusions, the magazine wrote, “There is a clear public interest in revealing the kind of information Trump advisors included in insecure communication channels, especially since senior administration figures tried to downplay the significance of the shared messages.”

In his new article in The Atlantic, Goldberg wrote that he received information about the attacks on the Houthis two hours before the positions began to be bombed.

A message from Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth on Saturday, March 15, stated, “Just confirmed with CENTCOM [US Central Command] that we are mission ready. 1215et [19:15 TRT]: F-18s LAUNCHED (1st strike package).”

The Hegseth messages published by The Atlantic appear to detail the exact times aircraft would launch from US aircraft carriers and fire their missiles – information generally considered classified. However, the texts do not specify the actual targets of the attacks, only using terms like Houthi “Target Terrorist.”

Responding to The Atlantic‘s new article, Waltz claimed in a statement on the social media platform X, “No location. No source and method. NO WAR PLAN,” and said foreign partners had already been informed that the attacks were imminent.

Waltz added, “BOTTOM LINE: President Trump protects America and our interests.”

The White House also downplayed the latest revelations, insisting the administration had been “completely transparent” about them.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Wednesday, “This administration works hard every day on behalf of the American people, but the mainstream media continues to focus on a sensational story from the failing Atlantic Magazine that is falling apart by the hour. We have said from the beginning that no classified material was sent in this message thread, no locations, sources, or methods were revealed, and absolutely no war plans were discussed. The real story here is the overwhelming success of President Trump’s decisive military action against Houthi terrorists.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio offered a slightly different explanation for the scandal than the White House, acknowledging it was clear “someone made a big mistake by adding a journalist to the chat” and said, “I’m not against journalists, but you shouldn’t have been in that thing.”

Critics say it is “almost unprecedented” for senior officials to discuss such sensitive information touching on vital US national security interests on an informal, commercially available messaging platform.

Democrats raise Hegseth’s “drinking problem”

Senior Democratic members of Congress used the incident to criticize what they see as “incompetence” at the highest levels of the Trump administration.

For example, Democratic Representative Jimmy Gomez raised questions about Hegseth’s “drinking habits” during a House committee hearing on Wednesday.

During the House Intelligence Committee’s annual worldwide threats hearing, Gomez asked, “Many questions were raised about his drinking habits during the confirmation hearing. To your knowledge, do you know if Pete Hegseth was drinking before leaking classified information?” This prompted responses from CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.

When asked about Hegseth’s drinking habits, Gabbard replied, “I have no knowledge of Secretary Hegseth’s personal habits.”

When the same question was posed to CIA Director John Ratcliffe, he responded, “No, you know, no. I’m not going to answer that. I think that’s an offensive question.”

Gomez argued the question was “memorable” for the public.

The Atlantic also decided to publish the full text after senior Trump administration officials, including Ratcliffe and Gabbard, testified in the Senate on Tuesday that “no classified material was shared” in the Signal chat.

Trump first defended Waltz, then criticized him

President Donald Trump had initially defended his national security advisor Waltz after the scandal broke.

During remarks while signing a presidential order on Wednesday evening, Trump blamed Mike Waltz for the Signalgate scandal.

Trump stated, “Mike Waltz, I think he said he took responsibility. I guess it had nothing to do with anyone else. It was Mike, I guess, I don’t know. I always thought it was Mike.”

On the other hand, Trump questioned why Hegseth was being implicated, despite the Secretary of Defense sharing sensitive operational details, including missile launch times.

The President said, “How do you get Hegseth involved in this? He has nothing to do with it; look, this is all a witch hunt.”

On Tuesday, Trump had said he did not plan to fire Waltz, defending him in a television interview by saying the national security advisor had “learned his lesson and is a good guy.”

However, according to sources familiar with the matter who spoke to POLITICO, Trump was both angered and suspicious that Waltz had The Atlantic editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg’s number saved on his phone.

Another source said the President was particularly disturbed by the “embarrassing nature” of the incident. This person stated, “The President was very angry that Waltz could be so stupid.”

America

US national debt hits record $40 trillion as borrowing accelerates

Published

on

The US national debt has reached a record $40 trillion as borrowing expanded at a historic pace.

The development has heightened investor concern over the state of US public finances, despite Donald Trump’s pledge to bring spending under control.

Gross federal debt crossed the threshold on Tuesday, according to Treasury Department data published on Wednesday.

Calculations by the Financial Times show that debt climbed by $3 trillion over the past year, registering the fastest rate of increase in history outside the pandemic period.

Marc Goldwein, senior policy director at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget think tank, said:

“This is like a giant, flashing ‘check engine’ light. It doesn’t mean your engine will melt down tomorrow, but it is a clear sign that things have gotten quite out of hand. And it’s not just the size of the number; it’s the speed at which we’ve reached it.”

The US national debt has surged over the past two decades, climbing from below $6 trillion at the start of the century (about $12 trillion in 2026 dollar terms) as massive public spending during the financial crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic compounded enormous budget deficits.

In the past 10 years alone, the total debt load has doubled. Debt held by the public—a key gauge tracked by markets that excludes intra-governmental holdings—now exceeds $32 trillion, roughly equal to the size of the US economy.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office expects debt held by the public to surpass the post-Second World War record of 106% of GDP by the end of the decade and to reach 120% by 2036.

As borrowing increased, investors began demanding a higher premium to hold US bonds.

This has driven interest rates higher, leaving debt servicing costs larger than national defence spending.

The situation has created unease in Washington. On Wednesday, prior to the release of the debt data, the Treasury Department announced it would double its buybacks of long-term government debt in a bid to halt a recent sell-off.

Last week, the US paid its highest borrowing costs since 2001 to sell 30-year bonds.

Wednesday’s 10-year Treasury auction produced the highest yields since 2007 as investors fretted over the scale of the debt.

Ed Yardeni, president of Yardeni Research, said: “That is an awful lot of money being borrowed. It is going to feed on itself with interest expenses. If interest rates rise because of concerns about the high debt load, that will lead to even more interest expense. It’s a vicious cycle.”

Trump returned to office in 2025 promising to rein in “wasteful” government spending.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent pledged to reduce the budget deficit to 3% of GDP by the end of Trump’s term.

However, measures to trim spending in some areas were offset by broad tax cuts in the president’s signature 2025 fiscal legislation, the “One Big Beautiful Bill”, which will add more than $4 trillion to the debt by 2034.

Trump also requested an increase of more than 50% in annual defence spending, seeking $1.5 trillion in the largest budget request in US history.

The deficit fell to 5.9% of GDP in 2025 from 6.3% the previous year. The CBO expects the deficit to decline to 5.8% this year. The US national debt comprises years of accumulated deficits compounded by interest charges.

Analysts noted that both US political parties missed opportunities during periods of economic expansion to take significant steps toward curbing spending.

Calculations by the Congressional Joint Economic Committee indicate that over the past year, total national debt grew by roughly $7.9 billion a day, or approximately $91,000 per second.

Budget specialists said they hoped crossing the $40 trillion threshold would spur politicians from both parties to take meaningful steps to bring borrowing back under control.

Michael Peterson, head of the Peterson Foundation, a think tank dedicated to returning debt to a sustainable trajectory, said:

“My hope is that this serves as a national alarm and wake-up call to address our fiscal future. If we keep borrowing this much, we are going to face a day of reckoning in financial markets… People will wake up one day and decide: ‘You know what? I’m more worried about the United States now. I’m going to demand higher interest rates, or I’m going to put my money somewhere else.'”

Continue Reading

America

Independent US oil firms set to sign output deals in Venezuela

Published

on

Several independent US oil producers are expected to sign production contracts with Venezuela’s state-owned oil company in the coming days.

According to sources who spoke to Politico on condition of anonymity because details of the event have not yet been made public, a signing ceremony involving several small US producers and Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA) was scheduled to take place in Houston on Tuesday (18 August) evening.

One source said Venezuela’s oil minister and the head of PDVSA’s exploration division were scheduled to attend the ceremony. Another source added that the event could be postponed until Wednesday morning.

The White House, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment, was not expected to be officially involved in Tuesday’s ceremony.

However, the development follows a visit by senior officials to Caracas in late April, where they signed memorandums of understanding that established the framework for formal production agreements in the country, which holds some of the world’s largest oil reserves.

Despite the tailwind provided by high crude prices, negotiations had stalled over key details such as dispute resolution, while officials in Caracas contended with two devastating earthquakes in June that claimed thousands of lives.

Venezuela’s interim president, Delcy Rodríguez, announced new regulations last month that offer more favourable fiscal terms to international oil companies.

According to an industry source close to the negotiations, the signing of the contracts comes after the Trump administration renewed pressure on Rodríguez to ensure PDVSA concludes agreements with American firms.

The source said these efforts included outreach by Secretary of State Marco Rubio to discuss how increased oil revenues could assist the country following the devastating earthquake earlier this summer.

The source added:

“Delcy reached a renewed awareness that increased oil production is the way to rebuild after the earthquakes and to achieve what her government wants to do for the people suffering from the earthquakes.”

David Goldwyn, president of the international energy consultancy Goldwyn Global Strategies, said investments from independent oil producers and boosting output from existing fields would serve as the “primary source of new oil growth for the next few years” for Venezuela.

“While the oil majors are trying to buy time to see how the political situation clarifies and whether they can cherry-pick the best assets, independent companies can de-risk their projects in the short term,” Goldwyn said.

However, Goldwyn noted that these investments would add no more than 300,000 barrels per day to the country’s oil production over the next year, falling far short of the multi-million-barrel increase that officials in Caracas and Washington wish to see.

“Until the framework improves, electricity is restored, and the political picture becomes clear, all we will see is incremental production growth,” the strategist said.

Continue Reading

America

US-Brazil rift widens over proposed sanctions and trade tariffs

Published

on

Diplomatic tensions between the two countries remain at a peak as the US government considers new sanctions targeting a judge on Brazil’s Supreme Court.

According to sources familiar with the matter who spoke to the Financial Times (FT), the Trump administration is evaluating new measures against Justice Alexandre de Moraes, whom it sanctioned last year on human rights grounds before subsequently rescinding that decision.

Washington’s renewed focus on the magistrate threatens to widen the rift between Brazil and the US across trade and political spheres, casting a shadow over upcoming elections in Latin America’s largest nation.

A little over a year ago, De Moraes was subjected to sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Act. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent accused him at the time of engaging in a “repressive censorship campaign, arbitrary detentions that violate human rights, and politicized prosecutions,” including measures directed at former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro.

Bolsonaro, an ally of Donald Trump, was sentenced last year to 27 years in prison for plotting a coup.

However, sanctions targeting the judge, his wife, and a company owned by his family were lifted in December following a meeting and phone conversations between Trump and his Brazilian counterpart, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

According to a source familiar with the matter who requested anonymity, US interest in De Moraes was revived partly due to a case that ignited a debate over press freedom in Brazil.

The judge authorized police raids against a journalist and two sources as part of an investigation into media coverage concerning a Supreme Court justice and his family.

De Moraes defended the action, arguing that the information in question had been illegally obtained and disclosed, thereby endangering the safety of the justice’s family.

The judge gained global prominence several years ago following a public conflict with Elon Musk, which briefly led to the billionaire’s X platform being blocked in Brazil.

Supporters say he “helped protect Brazilian democracy against a wave of misinformation.”

However, critics, including the Trump administration, view him as violating free speech rights.

“He went after the president’s supporters. Not just Elon Musk, but MAGA supporters in Brazil as well. Even if we want to build good relations with Brazil, it is clear that this man is an adversary,” said a person familiar with the US government’s thinking.

Another person stated that the reimposition of Magnitsky sanctions is “under evaluation,” noting that such sanctions entail the freezing of US-based assets and a prohibition on American companies and individuals conducting business with targeted parties.

While it remains unclear whether or when a decision will be reached, any such move would intensify an escalating retaliatory spiral between the two most populous countries in the Americas.

Tensions initially erupted more than a year ago when Trump imposed a 50% tariff on Brazil while demanding that prosecution proceedings against Bolsonaro be dropped.

That tariff was subsequently invalidated by the US Supreme Court.

A brief period of de-escalation since then has drawn to a close, with the US applying a 25% import tariff on numerous Brazilian products in July.

Last month, Brazil denied entry to two Trump envoys over concerns regarding potential interference in its upcoming October elections. Washington rejects those allegations.

Lula, who is seeking re-election for a fourth presidential term, suggested that the US might act to support his main opponent, Senator Flavio Bolsonaro, the jailed former leader’s son.

The 80-year-old president has also engaged in a sharp public exchange of words with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

On Sunday, thousands of supporters gathered to welcome Lula at a stadium in Sao Bernardo do Campo, an industrial suburb of Sao Paulo, for the official launch of his election campaign.

Lula originally achieved prominence in the area during the late 1970s as a union leader heading metalworkers’ strikes.

Speaking at the venue, Lula said, “I thank the working men and women of this country who believed that someone like themselves could achieve more than someone different from them. As long as I am alive, I will not stop fighting, and I will not allow the right [to prevail].”

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey