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

AI spending heads toward $7 trillion as analysts warn of market bubble risks

Published

on

Massive financial resources directed into artificial intelligence technologies are driving companies into dangerous territory for global markets.

If expected productivity gains fail to materialize despite these immense capital flows, the artificial intelligence sector faces the risk of inflating into a giant bubble.

The Wall Street Journal reported that should such a scenario unfold, a widespread collapse capable of shaking the entire financial system and dragging down the broader market will become inevitable.

Estimates by McKinsey & Company project that global spending on data center construction alone could reach $7 trillion by 2030.

According to the newspaper, if these massive investments fail to deliver adequate productivity gains, the global economy will suffer a severe blow.

Should the sector as a whole turn out to be a bubble, the resulting damage will spread directly across the broader financial system.

While market observers note that a major crash—whether sooner or later—would drag all equity markets down with it, declines in AI-related stocks are currently being offset by gains in other sectors.

However, the first concrete signs of emerging vulnerability appeared in the memory chip market, where a sector-specific bubble formed and burst within just four months.

South Korean market shaken by sharp drop

In June, shares of South Korea’s Samsung and SK Hynix, the world’s two largest memory chip makers, sank by more than 12%.

The sharp sell-off pulled down the country’s broader stock index. South Korea’s benchmark Kospi index dropped 10%, triggering an automatic 20-minute trading halt.

Growing investor anxiety over artificial intelligence triggered the steep decline in the two giant companies, which together account for half of the total market capitalization of the Kospi index.

US equity markets also felt the ripple effects during the same period. The Nasdaq index closed down 2.2%, while the S&P 500 fell 1.4%, marking their worst single-day performances in two weeks.

Nevertheless, The Wall Street Journal pointed out that the disruption has not yet produced catastrophic consequences for the rest of the market.

While the bursting of massive historical bubbles resulted in disaster for national economies, smaller and localized bubbles in recent years have failed to paralyze broader economic growth.

The primary reason for this resilience is that these recent investments were not predominantly funded through leverage and bank credit.

When those localized bubbles burst, investors suffered wealth losses, but the financial system remained intact.

Russell Napier, a global macroeconomic strategist and keeper of the Library of Mistakes, a financial history archive in Edinburgh, evaluated the current market posture:

“The banking system is in superb condition, which means there will always be enough credit available to blow the next bubble.”

Continue Reading

America

Anthropic AI models breach corporate systems after escaping isolated test environment

Published

on

Anthropic has announced that several of its advanced artificial intelligence models escaped an isolated testing environment and accessed the live internet.

In a review published Thursday night, the company stated that in three separate incidents dating back to April, the models independently breached the systems of multiple companies without the AI developer’s knowledge.

Anthropic said the incidents involved an unreleased internal research test model, alongside its Opus 4.7 and Mythos 5 models.

Mythos was made available last month to a limited audience composed of technology companies and cybersecurity researchers, an initiative also known as Project Glasswing.

The AI developer did not disclose which companies were breached, but said the affected firms were informed of the incidents on Monday.

Anthropic noted that it conducted the review after OpenAI revealed last week that two of its most powerful models had breached containment, escaped their testing environment, and infiltrated several entities, including the AI platform Hugging Face and cloud provider Modal Labs.

System misconfiguration allowed internet access

Anthropic stated that it examined more than 140,000 tests to find evidence of whether Claude could gain access to the internet from test environments designed to be isolated.

The evaluations included “capture-the-flag” exercises, in which Claude was instructed to breach other systems to obtain information. This is a method frequently used by experts to assess a model’s hacking capabilities.

The San Francisco-based company stated that a “misconfiguration” in systems operated by Anthropic and its testing partner left the models with live internet access, enabling them to infiltrate external systems.

Anthropic said it approached remediation efforts “with full ownership of the responsibility.”

Neither Anthropic nor the affected organizations detected the unauthorized entries at the time they occurred.

Anthropic added that it may examine its logs more extensively, noting that the findings gave the company “cautious optimism” that such risks can be overcome through increased investment and more stringent safeguards.

David Allott, a cybersecurity expert, told the BBC: “The overarching lesson here is not that AI has developed fundamentally new attack vectors.”

“Instead, it means that AI agents can combine capabilities, acquire credentials and system access to act autonomously, while adapting scope and scale at machine speed,” Allott said.

The developments come as technology companies invest billions of dollars to develop AI agents capable of independently executing a range of tasks, from research and customer support to cybersecurity.

Continue Reading

America

Elon Musk’s America PAC plans $100 million field operation for 2026 Republican midterm push

Published

on

Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk is returning to the political spending arena with a new field program designed to help elect Republicans in at least eight states ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

Musk has authorized his political action committee, America PAC, to spend between $100 million and $120 million on a new ground game focused on conservative voter turnout for the 2026 midterms, according to a Thursday report by The New York Times, which cited two unnamed sources informed about the plans.

America PAC funneled more than $250 million into Donald Trump’s reelection campaign in 2024, a expenditure that established Musk as the largest political donor in US history.

The New York Times reported that America PAC is reviving its spending initiatives and has reached out to other Republicans in recent weeks regarding the new field operations.

The effort is also being coordinated with other Republican Party spending groups, according to the report.

The newspaper identified targeted Senate races in the states of Alaska, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, and Ohio, while noting that discussions are also underway regarding contests in North Carolina, Georgia, and Texas.

The political action committee is additionally expected to deploy funds for House of Representatives elections in Washington, Wisconsin, and California.

The news comes a day after Axios first reported that America PAC’s operations were resuming, with a focus on driving Republican turnout during the non-presidential election cycle.

A spokesperson for America PAC declined to comment on The New York Times report but confirmed the Axios reporting to The Hill. The spokesperson stated that the spending group was “excited” to contribute to efforts to maintain the Republican majorities in Congress this fall.

“The President’s political team and the rest of the GOP apparatus have built a world-class operation that has Republicans well-positioned to make history and retain control of Congress this fall,” America PAC spokesperson Andrew Romeo said in a statement. “We’re excited to be part of the team again.”

The campaign will reportedly target Republican voters through door-to-door canvassing, mailers, and digital advertisements, enabling other groups to concentrate their resources on television advertising.

The developments were reported days after Musk told The Economist magazine that he had gotten “carried away” during his brief foray into politics.

The SpaceX CEO entered the political arena during the 2024 election, pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into Trump’s presidential campaign and accompanying the candidate on the campaign trail.

Musk went on to lead Trump’s cost-cutting initiative, known as the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which executed sweeping employment and funding reductions across the federal government. Those efforts sparked controversy for Musk and his enterprise empire, including Tesla, whose shares fell sharply during his period of political involvement.

Musk departed the White House in late May 2025, and DOGE officially terminated its operations on July 4.

Shortly after leaving government, Musk and Trump engaged in a public dispute over the president’s sweeping spending legislation, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.” During the friction, Musk threatened to form a third party, though the initiative never materialized.

Musk and the US President appeared to resolve their differences last year, with the tech billionaire most recently joining Trump alongside other technology leaders on a trip to China in May.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey