Below is my column on the move to end the funding of National Public Radio (NPR). I will be speaking tomorrow on the history and future of American journalism at the Library of Congress. The funding of NPR has long been controversial on various levels, including those of us who oppose state-supported media in any form. This should be a moment of true self-reflection for the media in these changing and precarious times for the free press.
Here is the column:
This week, President Trump signed an executive order that seeks to restrict public funds to NPR and PBS. Since appropriations are made two years in advance, the immediate impact of the order is debatable. However, it is a moment the media should use for long-overdue self-reflection.
I have been critical of some of the administration’s attacks on the media, from barring the Associated Press from some White House events to lifting protections of the media from subpoenas regarding their sources. However, if these objections are going to have any legitimacy, the media must take a serious look at what it has become.
This coming week, I have the honor of giving the keynote address for the Center for Integrity in News Reporting at the Library of Congress. For many of us who have been part of the media for decades, these are precarious times for the American press. The damage done to the press in the last decade would have been unimaginable when I started. The most chilling fact is that it is almost entirely self-inflicted.
The state of American media was captured recently when the president of the White House Correspondents’ Association (and MSNBC correspondent) Eugene Daniels declared, “We are not the opposition.” Given the controversy that had occurred over the association originally booking a vehemently anti-Trump comedian for the dinner, it seemed more like a punchline than a plausible claim.
As if to bring that comedic point home the next day, the New York Times published its collection of essays titled, “A Road Map of Trump’s Lawless Presidency.” A recent study showed that media coverage of the Trump Administration has been 92 percent negative.
The undoing of American journalism began in “J-schools,” where young reporters were taught that the touchstones of neutrality and objectivity were no longer viable. At schools like the University of Texas, students are told that it is time to “leave neutrality behind.” Stanford journalism professor, Ted Glasser, has insisted that “journalists need to be overt and candid advocates for social justice, and it’s hard to do that under the constraints of objectivity.”
Editors soon picked up on the change and declared that “Objectivity has got to go” in hiring reporters committed to what I have called “advocacy journalism.”
The result has been a transformation of American journalism into a type of echo chamber that amplifies liberal and often partisan Democratic talking points. That includes framing the news in overtly biased ways — for example, describing rioting as “fiery but mostly peaceful.”
The public were treated as clay to be shaped by an enlightened media in what they would see and hear. It was insulting and alienating.
Recently, Trump noticed a wounded veteran with a Let’s Go Brandon! sticker and the president jokingly asked “who is that?” That was a far more profound question than he may have intended.
“Let’s Go Brandon!” became a familiar political battle cry not just against former President Joe Biden but also against the mainstream media. It was first heard during an Oct. 2021 interview with race-car driver Brandon Brown after winning his first NASCAR Xfinity Series race. When NBC reporter Kelli Stavast’s questions were drowned out by loud and clear chants of “F— Joe Biden,” the reporter quickly and inexplicably declared, “You can hear the chants from the crowd, ‘Let’s go, Brandon!’”
“Let’s Go Brandon!” instantly became a type of “Yankee Doodling” of the political and media establishment.
The response of the public itself has been deafening. Readers and viewers have left mainstream media in a mass exodus. Despite falling revenues and ratings, most of the media outlets seem entirely clueless or, at least, unyielding. Even as media outlets plummet in revenue, editors and reporters continue to saw at the branch upon which they are sitting.
When Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos brought in Robert Lewis, a British media executive, to try to restore profitability and readership to the paper, he was met with a virtual mutiny. Lewis nevertheless dropped this truth bomb in the middle of the newsroom: “We are going to turn this thing around, but let’s not sugarcoat it. It needs turning around. We are losing large amounts of money. Your audience has halved in recent years. People are not reading your stuff. Right. I can’t sugarcoat it anymore.”
It did not matter. The Post has been writing primarily for itself and a minority of the population for years. The staff seemed shocked that Bezos actually wanted for the paper to sustain itself rather than treat it as a liberal billionaire’s vanity project.
That brings us back to NPR. Some of us have objected for years to the government subsidizing one radio outlet. It only made it worse that NPR was overwhelmingly Democratic in both its staff and its coverage. For years, NPR ignored complaints over its bias. It had a lock on federal funding to subsidize operations, even though its audience was shrinking.
One editor finally had enough. Uri Berliner went public, pointing out that NPR’s Washington headquarters has 87 registered Democrats among its editors and zero Republicans. NPR and its CEO, Katherine Maher, were dismissive and frankly arrogant. They attacked Berliner, who ultimately resigned in disgust.
Maher recently had a disastrous appearance before Congress in which she attempted to walk back her own biased public statements against Republicans and Trump.
Some of us oppose NPR’s funding as a form of state-sponsored media — a fundamental contradiction with principles of freedom of speech and the press. However, this is a moment the rest of the media should not let pass.
NPR was ultimately undermined by its own arrogance. Editors and journalists did not have to worry about the fact that its shrinking audience was overwhelmingly white, liberal and affluent. Due to its support in Congress, it could make the vast majority of the country, which does not listen to its programming, help pay for its programming.
It will now have to choose between sustaining its bias or expanding its audience. It certainly has every right to be a left-leaning outlet (as do right-leaning outlets), but it has to sustain itself in the marketplace. It is the same question that other media outlets must face as more Americans turn to new media. With polls showing the press at record lows in trust, media companies are increasingly writing for each other rather than most of the public.
The choice now rests with the media and, more importantly, the public. American journalism will either re-embrace greater neutrality or continue toward insolvency and irrelevancy.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
Here’s the REAL insude story on how the 60 Minutes Episode with Kamala Harris was created. The amount of editing effort was phenomenal and certainly worthy of the highest award for production achievement:
CBS Reveals They Interviewed Kamala For 721 Hours In Order To Compile ’60 Minutes’ Of Usable Footage.
https://babylonbee.com/news/cbs-reveals-they-interviewed-kamala-for-721-hours-in-order-to-compile-60-minutes-of-usable-footage
#9. JT> Quote: “I have been critical of some of the administration’s attacks on the media, from barring the Associated Press from some White House events to lifting protections of the media from subpoenas regarding their sources. However, if these objections are going to have any legitimacy, the media must take a serious look at what it has become.”
Why would the impetus be upon the very media that has turned unarguably anti-American? Even during the Yellow Journalism of the late 20th Century the American press as it were, was not particularly anti-American. With the exception I suppose of during the Civil War, and most of the LDS (Lincoln Derangement Syndrome), at that time was of course, centered in the Southern press, and Great Britain. At the time considering supporting the Confederacy. Might we have waited with a bit more patience following the attack on Fort Sumter, to see if the Southern press might come to a realization that they were being unbalanced in their reporting?
There are many echo’s in our self proclaimed modern society, that serve as reminders to what took place 164 years ago and just how far, or not, we have come since then. Tariffs, back in the new just as they were when the Republican Congress levied huge tariffs to protect Northern industry at the expense of Southern agriculture, which effectively levied a 38% tax on the Southern States economies. The 1816 Tariff, later the 1828 Tariff of Abominations (as so tubed by the South, were smoldering triggers to what later would become a secession movement.
There are many more, but a striking one is heard over and over again in the debate over what to do, or not, with illegal aliens. The argument that resurfaces periodically for allowing them to stay, or allowing them to come here in the first place, essentially boils down to, “Who’s gonna to pick the cotton?” As this rationale goes, the illegal aliens do us a great service by performing the role of the old South’s indigent cotton pickers, at the time roughly nine and half million of them not recognized as citizens.
But I digress. The puzzlement of the JT quote above ques my question. Why would it be up to the corrupted press to self reform without a boot print on the seat of their pants as encouragement?
In the interest of balanced analysis, I would appreciate your comments on the Trump family’s alleged financial profiteering from his role as President. The NYT just had a major article on the dealings of Trump’s sons. I very much appreciated your frequent articles about the Biden family’s money-making machine. Please don’t shy away from doing the same analysis with the Trump family.
Dear ‘generously…..’ There is a HUGE difference between the Trump Family and the Biden Family here. The Big Picture: The Trump Family wealth machine was founded on private enterprises, launched by Trump’s real estate mogul father Fred, rather like the Kennedy wealth machine started by Joe Kennedy’s private enterprises. The Trumps have been quite visible ‘out there.’ .easy for the NYT to find them….. Trump emblazons his name on everything he owns, i.e., he wants people to see his wealth. Trump was not a public servant when he worked to grow that wealth machine..Trump also always gives his full salary as POTUS back to the Govt. to show he is here to serve, not make money. The Biden wealth machine has never been ‘out there’ anywhere.. we are told it was generated under the table.. furtively without public fanfare while Joe Biden was in High Public Office, and many deals, according to folks who have done the research, were with our adversaries, like China.. There are no Buildings emblazoned with ‘Biden..’ No Financial Statements. No taxes filed. No Biden name on anything. The Bidens built an invisible, complex infrastructure of hidden offshort companies and accounts that is hard to find & examine except in bits and pieces as Peter schweizer has done in his Documentary ‘Riding the Dragon’ on You Tube. Did you notice that Biden had to pardon his whole family, while Trump did not have to pardon his family? Public Offcials on all levels are accused of ‘profiteering’ because money is just thrown at them. We are told Biden apparently did it in excess, yet ‘the same analysis’ you ask for is almost impossible as it is all hidden…
Journalists are so arrogant! Before social media we had grape vines! Trumlp proves we still have something despite the media! Mocking bird. How long does it last? We have lasted. Maybe these outfits can’t mock us – the knew target of our disguise out to be …….we are alive ! None the sobs writing the knees are!. Can we stay alive? I’m n! Discernment matters. In the end we face a maker! It won’t be pbs! It’ll make us poorer but not make us! One handed it to the next generation to carry; we will! Who cares about PBS and npr? Who is watching? Let them waste money. Its only a notion anyway. The producers will face their end – I believe they’ll have to answer. It is peanuts – let them go slay their demons! Maybe save their own souls!
MAKE ALCATRAZ GREAT AGAIN! MAGA!!
“They are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please.”
– Thomas Jefferson
_______________________
Article 1, Section 8
The Congress shall have Power To…collect Taxes…to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States;….
Jonathan: Sorry I’m late with my regular comment but I was busy all day–taking part in a demonstration outside a Tesla dealership. Big turnout with a lot of horn honking and thumbs up by cars passing by. Resistance is contagious!
Defunding NPR/PBS has long been the wet dream of the right. It’s right there in Project 2025. You and they are on the same page. DJT has his own long fight with the press. He calls it the “enemy of the people”. So his EO is no surprise. Every wannabe dictator wants a compliant press, only “nice” stories about El Generalisimo. DJT is no different. It’s right out of the Nazi playbook. First go after the free press and silence it.
Now you claim funding public radio is “a fundamental contradiction with principles of freedom of speech and the press”. Here we part company. Let me explain. There is an interesting article in the publication NiemanLab by Joshua Benton (1/24/22) in which he lists 33 other democratic countries that fund public broadcasting. Benton lists each country by how much they spend per capita on public broadcasting. Here are just some of the countries with per capita data in US dollars:
Germany–$142.42 per person
Norway–$110.73
UK–$81.30
Japan–$54.75
Australia–$35.78
New Zealand–$26.86
Canada–$26.51
And where is the US? Dead last! We spend only about $3 per person on public broadcasting. It’s no like it is a cash cow. NPR gets only 1% of its budget from the federal government. The bulk of its funding from membership fees from local affiliates, underwriting and private donations. So with DJT it’s not about eliminating “fraud, waste and abuse”. It’s about eliminating any public programming he dislikes. And it’s not just NPR/PBS. DJT is also suing CBS for $20 billion claiming he was disadvantaged by the editing of the Kamala Harris interview in October of last year. Kind of rich considering DJT refused to participate and then went on to defeat Harris in the election! Kind of reminds me of the kid who comes to play marbles. He keeps losing and when he gets up to leave he tries to take your marbles too!
Make no mistake. Public broadcasting is not the villain–it is the victim in this drama. As pointed out above thriving democracies around the world support public broadcasting as necessary to “free speech” and the right of the public to be informed. Strong support for public broadcasting is not inconsistent with democratic values. I say we need more money for NPR/PBS, not less!
“LOSING” and can’t stand it!
Dennis SmackEntire, I strong urge you to return to one of your spiritual homelands: China, Iran, or Cuba. APBS loves China, Iran, and Cuba, so you’ll be right at home there. They also hate freedom and liberty and love tyranny–which you deeply love as well. After you move to one of those places, do continue to post here on how great they’re run and how they’re so much better than America, which you want destroyed.
Gosh Dennis,
I was waiting nervously, hoping you were going to post. 🙂
So, you were protesting the most advanced and the most American made car in the world that has the lowest carbon footprint. Are you planning on buying a gas guzzler? Or a Chinese made GM?
The message I derive from such actions is that the new Democratic Party is pro-criminal, pro-fraud, pro-illegal alien wife beaters, child rapists, thugs and a southern invasion by the terrorist Cartels.
The New Democratic Party: They would rather stick their heads collectively in the sand and deny the growing monster that will devour the world, 37,000,000,000,000 reasons that we are in deep trouble.
Look up how many cars are actually made in America from American parts with American workers. Out of 400, Tesla has three models in the top ten and two of them rank #1 and 3. You and your buddies are not hurting Musk. You can’t hurt someone that successful. You are hurting Americans and American workers.
No solutions. No plans to solve problems. Just whining like angry three-year old children.
Why are you conflating the national debt with the trade deficit?
They are 2 separate things.
The national debt arises because the government spends more than it takes in with taxes.
It is an internal problem that is caused directly by our own government.
It is true that the national debt is over $36 trillion, but that is entirely our own fault.
It can only be solved by reducing government spending and/or increasing taxes.
In contrast, the trade deficit is simply the difference between the value of the goods we import and the value of the goods we export.
The total trade deficit in 2024 was $918 billion.
The trade deficit with China in 2024 was $295 billion.
Cutting imports from China or anywhere else will not reduce the national debt.
Increasing exports from the US will not reduce the national debt.
Nowhere in the constitution does the govenrment have the power to fund the press.
Funding for PBS and NPR was unconstitutional when conceived and never should have been allowed.
Ending it has been sought by everything who seeks constitutional government.
The entire idea that govenrment should use the money of citizens to fund the media is lunacy in so many ways.
Franklin would have rolled over in his grave.
Yes, government funding the press a fundamental contradiction with principles of freedom of speech and the press.
Idiotic arguments that other governments fund media does not change that contradiction.
The use of tax payers money to fund idiotic causes – left or right is contradictory to individual liberty.
The fact that quasi socialist governments throughout the world have done so does not make the idea better or the contradiction less.
“And where is the US? Dead last!”
NO the US is FIRST in freedom and respecting the rights of its citizens to keep their own money to do with as they please.
Dennis – if you beleive NPR or PBS is of value – then donate. Millions have – in the past I have.
But you may not steal other peoples money through taxes o pay for something YOU want.
It is irrelevant how much or little of other peoples money is spent.
It is NOT YOUR MONEY.
You are correct this is not about eliminating fraud, it is absolutely about eliminating abuse.
It is abuse when our govenrment chooses to spend public money for anything that is not specified as an obligation of governemnt in the constitution, Necescary, and only a task that only government can perform.
“It’s about eliminating any public programming he dislikes.”
No person in the US should have to pay to support programming they do not like.
“DJT is also suing CBS for $20 billion claiming he was disadvantaged by the editing of the Kamala Harris interview in October of last year.”
I beleive that lawsuit has been settled.
While I disagree with the lawsuit. CBS is free to use deception to shill for Harris, that does not change the fact that CBS’s conduct was reprehensible.
“He keeps losing and when he gets up to leave he tries to take your marbles too!”
Donald J. Trump is the president of the United States – YOU lost, CBS lost, Harris lost.
“Make no mistake. Public broadcasting is not the villain”
Correct.
“it is the victim in this drama.”
Incorrect. Public broadcasting has lost nothing that it had any right to in the first place.
“As pointed out above thriving democracies around the world support public broadcasting as necessary to “free speech” and the right of the public to be informed.”
Government does NOT and can not deliver rights to people.
It exists to protect those rights.
Government is required to protect and defend a free press not to pay for it.
” Strong support for public broadcasting is not inconsistent with democratic values.”
Of course it is. Your stupid argument can be made for anything you want.
” I say we need more money for NPR/PBS, not less!”
You are free to give as much or little as you please.
Many of us are not against helping to fund public broadcasting but with the support comes the obligation to provide both sides of the issues.
Uri Berliner revealed that 87 out of 87 of NPR staff, reporters, and other important personnel are aligned with the Democrat Party. Zero out of 87 identify in any way with what we commonly refer to as Conservative. If Berliner is correct, and no one has disputed his numbers, how is NPR the victim?
What courage, what foresight! “I’ll take public money and feather my side’s nest.” I used to listen to NPR every morning and think, “How fortunate we are to have a public, fair and balanced news source.” Now I (rarely) listen and, when I do, I think, “How unfortunate we are that NPR has become a one-patty, leftwing affair.” Things change, often for the worst, and, when they do, we must change with them. Defund!
loser
What defines a large land mass country is whether it evolves into an authentic “Civilization.” America has yet to reach that goal. End result, we see it as a predatory, slap-stick conglomeration; an AD-HOC assemblage of people with no compass to guide them.
So what does everyone think about the latest Signalgate revelations.
Signal, like Linux is open source, and anyone is free to adapt the code to their own specifications and create their own versions.
In fact, the version being used by Waltz and Hegseth was not the original version. They were using a version called Telemessage, developed by an Israeli company of the same name, and recently sold to Smarsh.
How do we know this ??
Because a photographer captured Waltz logging in to this app at one of Trump’s “cabinet meetings”. The photo clearly shows the login page for TM SGNL, which is the abbreviation for Telemessage.
Telemessage was recently hacked and the hacker has revealed that Telemessage relays messages through its own servers and creates an archive before forwarding the message to the recipient. Unfortunately, the coding of Telemessage is very poor, and the hacker demonstrated that when they created the archive, they also destroyed the encryption.
Thus, the messages exchanged were never encrypted.
The hacker was also able to access archived chats with Marco Rubio, Tulsi Gabbard, and JD Vance.
He was also able to access data containing the contents of messages; contact information of government officials; back-end login credentials for TeleMessage; and more that he has not revealed due to the sensitive content. Data pertaining to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, crypto exchange Coinbase, and financial service providers like Scotiabank were extracted by the hacker.
It is extremely likely that foreign state actors have already gained deep access into secret government information through this vulnerability.
Just today Telemessage announced they have suspended their service.
And before you MAGA morons start with your usual demands for proof and citation links, just google:
Telemessage hack
There are thousands of links.
And a special message to John Say, who earlier today posted the following:
” Signal is MORE secure than MOST real time battlefield communications systems”
You are an idiot. The stuff you post is nonsensical garbage that most of the time is simply made up B.S.
“Former Housing Official: U.S. Government Has Built a $21 TRILLION Underground City for the Wealthy and Powerful to Live If a ‘Near-Extinction Event’ Occurs”
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/05/former-housing-official-u-s-government-has-built/
Catherine Austin Fitts, who served as the assistant secretary of Housing and Urban Development for Housing between 1989 and 1990, appeared on former Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s podcast last Tuesday to claim that the United States government has spent a whopping $21 TRILLION over several years building an underground city for the wealthiest and most powerful in the country.
To help back up her allegation, the 74-year-old Fitts cited a report released by Michigan State University economist Mark Skidmore. The economist and their team said in their paper that they had uncovered $21 trillion in “unauthorized spending” in both the Department of Defense and Housing and Urban Development from 1998 to 2015.
Fitts told Tucker that money was used to develop an “underground base, city infrastructure, and transportation system” hidden from the entire country.
“We have built an extraordinary number of underground bases and, supposedly, transportation systems,” she said. “Some of these are documented as part of the national security infrastructure, but I think there are many more in the United States and all over the world.”
ATS – Lets start at the top.
Lets assume your story is true – as you are alleging it, it is not – you said Google – I did.
According to the tech media outlet that reported the alleged hack – “The messages of cabinet members and Waltz were not compromised” But contact information was.
Regardless, you take issue with my claim that Signal is more secure than battlefield communications systems.
And your evidence is a claim that messages from a signal derived app with an added archiving feature that pruportedly was compromised somehow disproves that ?
Battlefield communications are archived in plain text – including paper.
You clearly know NOTHING about secure messaging and encryption – ALL encryption systems can be broken.
The most secure are permutations of one time pads. It is highly unlikely you will crack a onetime pad encrypted message without securing a copy of the “pad” Today these are things like DVD’s recording random noise from space.
Onetime pads are supposed to be used for messages that you expect to keep secure for very very long periods of time – like communications between embassies. One of the reasons the US has been so pissed about Wikileaks founder julian assange is because he was able to secure a large number of messages from Hillary to various embassies that were embarrassing to Hillary. I am not sure how Assange got these massages – they were supposed to use a onetime pad. Obviously they did not. So much for secure communications by democrats.
Regardless battlefield communications systems do not typically use encryption systems like onetime pads.
They use much weaker and faster systems. Further if we are dealing with battle field signals, such as radio’s that can be intercepted or blocked. preventing the message from being jammed is as important as encrypting it.
Regardless battlefield systems are designed to be fast and secure for SHORT periods of time.
Some hacker cracking a battlefield system a month later is meaningless.
Using YOUR example – Lets presume that some hacker got Hegsoths chat and provided it to the Houthis – a month after the attack.
How much use would that be to the Houthis ?
As you are dense – this is not just about the Houthi’s and Hegseth.
Cracking battle field secure systems is only useful BEFORE thje targets are destroyed.
A different example – most of the presidents (or many other government officials). calendars are “born classified”.
We do not as an example want a repeat of the Dealey Plaza incident where Lee Harvey Oswald knew weeks ahead of time where President Kennedy would be so that he could plan an assassination.
When the president has an announced event in a public space – the Secret service prepares weeks even months in advance. When the president does something unplanned secuity is far lower – because the event coudl not be anticipated by a malicious actor.
Regardless as soon as the event is over – it is no longer important who was access to the information.
Battlefield communications systems must be extremely hard to crack for hours – maybe in a few instances days.
After the bombs have fallen – it no longer matters.
So you have not refuted my claim that Signal is more secure than battlefield communications systems
I doubt that you can name a single military communications protocol or system.
I worked with others on code that translated secure military communications systems from one communications protocol to another. Like the alleged Telemessage hack – if you hacked the servers doing that routing and translation – you had plain text access to everything.
you have not provided a source for anything you have said.
Google Trump pee tape – that produces thousands of links.
Where is the pee tape ?
You have made specific claims.
Those of you on the left have lied so often – news reports of claims made by unnamed 3rd parties are NOT sufficient.
Those caught lying repeatedly must provide indisputable proof to be beleived in the future.
You make a claim based on a photo at a cabinet meeting – this is proof of what ?
You have not provided the photo – you are saying some photographer got a close up of a cell phone in a cabinet meeting. Cell phones are banned in the west wing and have been for sometime.
I am aware that there is a claim that there is a hack of Telemessage. But that is contradicted by the fact that Signal is opensource. If there was a hack of Signal – you could provide the specific code that was vulnerable. Signal is licensed under the GPLv3 – if you redistribute a modified version of GPL’d software you are legally obligated to provide the source code.
So where is the vulnerability ?
You claim that other Chats have been accessed – so where are those chats ?
There have been claims that Signal has been hacked before – those claims have thus far proved bogus.
signal.org
“Message history is stored only on your device and Signal does not keep a copy of it.”
Absent gaining physical access to a phone using Signal that participated in a chat, you can not access massages – they are not stored anywhere else.
Purportedly there was a hack of a Telemessage archiving feature – unique to Telemessage – not Signal, that has nothing to do with transmitting and receiving messages, but archiving them.
So you can not even get your own story correct.
Those of you on the left make LOTS of unsourced claims.
Where is the Trump pee tape ?
Why is it that anyone should believe a collection of random claims that have no evidence and are logically highly unlikely.
As I said before Signal is MORE secure than MOST real time battlefield communications systems.
I have no idea what this babbling incoherent mess is supposed to mean.
You keep babbling about Signal being secure with end to end encryption.
THEY WERE NOT USING SIGNAL !!!!!!!
You say:
“Message history is stored only on your device and Signal does not keep a copy of it.”
THEY WERE NOT USING SIGNAL !!!!!!
They were using Telemessage, a version of Signal that was very poorly coded.
Messages were not transmitted from device to device. Messages were routed through Telemessage servers where a copy was made and the message was forwarded to the recipient. By diverting the messages the encryption was DESTROYED.
THERE WAS NO ENCRYPTION !!!!!
Why are you babbling incoherently about battlefield systems and Wikileaks and the Secret Service and pee tapes and the JFK assassination.
.
The issue is very simple.
Telemessage is a cheap Signal knockoff that is poorly coded in such a way as to destroy encryption.
The security breach of TeleMessage was facilitated by a critical vulnerability: hardcoded credentials embedded directly in the application’s source code. Software engineer Micah Lee analyzed the app and discovered these credentials among other security flaws, creating an easy entry point for attackers. This dangerous practice-storing authentication keys directly in code rather than implementing secure credential management-is a fundamental security mistake that made TeleMessage’s systems accessible to unauthorized users with minimal effort.
The hacker reports it took him 15 minutes to get in.
While this hacker did not report the content of messages, the point is that a sophisticated nation state adversary has almost certainly exploited this vulnerability to a much deeper level.
You also babble incoherently about getting information AFTER the Houthi attack could not compromise the mission.
How ignorantly stupid do you have to be to make such an insane statement.
The point is that the vulnerability has always been there, and it is highly probable that nation states have been monitoring these chats in real time.
Your stupidity and wilful ignorance defy belief.
Your comment is an incoherent mess of rambling thoughts that makes absolutely no sense. You drift aimlessly from thoughts about battlefields to wikileaks to Hilary Clinton to pee tapes to JFK assassination without any rational coherence.
There is something very seriously wrong with you.
The short version – since I doubt you will read the longer one.
Your response – as well as that of the press proves:
you do not know what you are talking about.
Worse still you have not thought logically about what you are claiming.
You have zero understanding of military communications, or government communications or cryptography, or how these systems work – or even what is their purpose.
There are numerous errors in your claims.
But the simplest is what I said before – which you failed to read.
Battle field comuncations only need to be secure for a short time – usually minutes, sometimes hours, rarely a few days.
Absent Jeffrey Goldberg calling the Houthis in real time, there was no national security risk to publishing Hegseth;s messages. They needed to be secure for about 45minutes. Hacking them over a month later – which is the primary source to your idiot claims is NOT a breach of national security – it is merely embarrassing.
Signal was not EVER the problem – adding Goldberg to the chat was the ONLY security breach.
It would not matter if the entire message stream was published in the Atlantic – so long as it was not published int he 45 minute window in which the operation took place.
Please think a bit before you post stupid nonsense.
You are completely and utterly missing the point.
The issue is not whether Hegseth and Waltz’s chat was compromised in such a way to warn the Houthis. That is entirely beside the point.
The issue is that they were using a poorly coded Signal knockoff WITH NO ENCRYPTION.
This vulnerability has always been there.
There is a high probability that adversarial nations have known about this vulnerability and been exploiting it in real time.
Telemessage added the archiving feature to Signal.
They have been marketing it to governments around the world as an app that would meet the archiving of government records requirements.
The problem is that it was not a secure system and was not encrypted.
They were using Amazon AWS, they do not have their own servers.
There is absolutely nothing secure about their systems.
Telemessage shut down the system today.
This is an obvious admission that they have a major screw up on their hands and are probably looking at government sanctions and lawsuits.
I strongly suspect that we will never hear from Telemessage again.
What part of any of my posts is made up ?
Please be specific ?
You do not even understand the basic requirements of secure communications.
You do not understand that bitcoin, diplomatic messages, and battlefield communications each have entirely different security requirements standards and needs.
Nobody cares about the presstitutes. They’re irrelevant presstitutes now. We just don’t want any taxpayer funds going to presstitutes. Let presstitutes be presstitutes. That’s what they were made to do: presstitute themselves in the service of the Presstitution Industry.
Such is the nature of presstitutes.
On Sunday Trump announced plans to reopen Alcatraz prison.
Is it just coincidence that WLRN, in Miami, broadcast the movie “Escape from Alcatraz” on Saturday night and again on Sunday morning ?????
This guy has completely lost it !!!!!.
By the way, WLRN is a PBS station.
OT
If these allegations prove to be true, and they are in writing so hard to deny, then Lettia James and two of her chief officers face disbarment.
https://whitecollarfraud.com/2025/05/05/ny-ag-letitia-james-virginia-mortgage-document-witnessed-by-top-staff-as-federal-investigation-looms
While a New York jury may be too corrupt to convict them in a criminal trial it may be that a Virginia jury is more responsible and at least some charges might be brought in Virginia.
Amazingly stupid and reckless for her to bring bs charges against Trump while she had records like this in her past.
Trump got no financial benefit from his estimates of the value of his property. Everyone knows the lender is going to do his own appraisals. But if true of James, she got significantly better mortgages by her statements.
I suppose it is racist to expect the chief law enforcement officer of New York to actually follow the law.
Of course, in a perfect world, she would already be in prison for egregious malicious prosecution, prosecutorial misconduct, false statements et al.