Time to End an Error
By 
The knives are coming out for Pete Hegseth:
But former national security and intelligence officials say it’s Hegseth who looks particularly bad given the level of detail he shared.
“The egregious actor here is Hegseth,” said one former senior intelligence official. “He’s in the bullseye now because he puts all this out on a Signal chat.”
Interviews with multiple current and former national security officials this week, including career military and civilian officials, reflect growing concerns about Hegseth’s leadership at the Pentagon.
The group chat scandal is the latest in a series of what some officials say are examples of questionable judgment by the former Fox News host, as he has struggled to implement consistent and durable policies across the Defense Department in his first two months as secretary.
So far, several high-profile initiatives spearheaded by Hegseth inside DoD since he was confirmed in January— including several related to the southern border mission and a purge of “DEI” content—have either been scaled back or rescinded as he has rushed to implement changes demanded by President Donald Trump and Elon Musk.
The current and former officials said the rocky start underscores both Hegseth’s inexperience and his freewheeling approach to leadership. Many of his orders are verbal and based on gut instinct rather than a deliberative, multi-layered process, people familiar with his methods said.
As it happens I have opinions:
Hegseth’s contribution to the now infamous “Houthi Signal Chat” looks to my admittedly inexpert eye like the work of someone suffering deeply from impostor syndrome. He eschews any serious strategic discussion in favor of simple bromides about restoring freedom and deterrence, along with locker room-style insults of the Europeans. Hegseth follows these up with the most problematic part of the entire conversation, the pasting of details of the attack into the chat.
These details (almost certainly classified) changed the chat from embarrassing to legally problematic, a point that Hegseth himself didn’t seem to realize. Rather, his contribution looks very much like the work of someone who wants desperately to belong despite suspicion that they do not merit inclusion, not unlike a graduate student in seminar making a comment in order to convince everyone (including themselves) that they actually deserve to be there.
Hegseth’s response to Signalgate has made everything worse. He attacked Jeffrey Goldberg even as the White House acknowledged the authenticity of the transcript. Unlike National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, he has rejected any responsibility for the scandal.
Also ask me of four months ago!
Into this, Donald Trump decided to throw Pete Hegseth, former Army National Guard officer, Fox News presenter, and probably the most spectacularly unqualified individual ever to be considered for such a difficult post.
Even before allegations emerged about sexual assault, infidelity, and heavy drinking, the nomination was under fire because of Hegseth’s complete lack of qualifications.
While he has some military experience and has commented on defense issues on television, Hegseth lacks an independent political base and a strong history of personal achievement. He has no experience managing a large organization, either inside or outside government.
Hegseth is unlikely to be able to exert authority within the Pentagon or to act as a useful advocate of DoD in intra-administration debates, and his relationship with Congress is almost entirely non-existent.