The Signal Report - Don't Buy The Fake News Narrative
Here’s your Daily dose of Human Events with @JackPosobiec Go to https://www.BlackoutCoffee.com/POSO and use promo code POSO for 20% OFF your first order. Go to https://hometitlelock.com/poso and use promo code POSO to get a FREE title history report so you can find out if you’re already a victim AND 14 days of protection for FREE! And make sure to check out the Million Dollar TripleLock protection details when you get there! Exclusions apply. For details visit https://hometitlelock.com/warr...
I want to take a second to remind you to sign up for the Pozo Daily Brief.
It is completely free.
It'll be one email that's sent to you every day.
You can stop the endless scrolling, trying to find out what's going on in your world.
We will have this delivered directly to you totally for free.
Go to humanevents.com slash pozo.
Sign up today.
It's called the Posto Daily Brief.
Read what I read for show prep.
You will not regret it.
Humanevents.com slash Pozo.
Totally free.
The Pozo Daily Brief.
This is what happens when the fourth turning meets fifth generation warfare.
Commentator, international social media sensation, and former Navy intelligence veteran.
This is Human Events with your host, Jack Posovic.
Christ is king.
It's a dangerous moment for the United States of America when the president and his loyalists use every lever of power to silence United States senators for speaking up.
The White House has made it very clear the orders that come from the Commander-in-Chief and the Secretary of War have been upheld as lawful.
Suggesting otherwise creates confusion and weakens our national security.
For these senators and members of Congress to come forward and use their status as veterans to claim in some way that they are allowed to stand in the chain of command is treasonous.
President Trump ups the rhetoric against Somali immigrants in Minnesota.
This comes after prosecutors uncovered fraud that largely benefited parts of the state's community.
They say 59 people have been convicted in those schemes and more than $1 billion has been stolen from taxpayers.
Somalians ripped off that state for billions of dollars, billions, every year, and they contribute nothing.
I don't want them in our country, I'll be honest with you.
Somebody would say, oh, that's not politically correct.
I don't care.
Their country stakes, and we don't want them in our country.
I could say that about other countries, too.
The Trump administration now pausing all immigration applications from 19 countries it determined to be high risk.
This comes in the wake of the Washington, D.C. shooting of two National Guards members allegedly by an Afghan national.
And according to reports, the administration may not be done with this list possibly growing to 30 countries.
President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth both defending the administration's boat strike campaign while also distancing themselves from the most explosive detail.
The second strike that killed the survivors of that September 2nd attack in the Caribbean.
At a cabinet meeting Tuesday, both men insisted they didn't know a follow-up strike had even happened.
Somebody asked me a question about the second strike.
I didn't know about the second strike.
I didn't know anything about people.
I wasn't involved in it.
I knew they took out a boat.
But I would say this.
They had a strike.
I watched that first strike live.
As you can imagine at the Department of War, we got a lot of things to do.
So I didn't stick around for the hour and two hours, whatever, where all the sensitive site exploitation digitally occurs.
All right, this is Jack Posobic.
We are live.
Human Events Daily.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard.
We are here live at the Department of War, the Pentagon itself, and we're very excited to be sitting down with Commander Tim Parlator.
He is also a senior advisor to Secretary of War Pete Hegseth.
Commander, thank you so much for joining us.
Thank you.
Tell us, we've been here.
We've been conducting interviews throughout the week.
We got to meet with the Secretary earlier today.
Talk to us about this new, you know, this sort of new transparency, this new welcoming that the department is offering for the new media corps.
Yeah, I think we're very excited to have the new media in here.
We went through quite a process with the legacy media and the Pentagon Press Association to try to implement reasonable regulations because building access is a privilege, not a right.
And I think that they had considered it to be a right.
And so when we went through all that and ultimately, whether it was a negotiating tactic or something else, they all decided to leave or as Kensley likes to call it, self-deport.
And I think that they really thought that that was going to be something that would cause us to say, oh, okay, well, we'll pull back the policy because we really do want you in this building.
But the reality is we didn't need that.
And so to have new media come in who are really covering this department, not in just the way that we want to, but you guys have been really asking good, hard, fair questions and putting out the truth of what the department is actually doing.
So we're very excited about that and want to build that relationship.
You know, since I've been in the building on Monday and I keep waiting for it, you know, nobody's handed me my script of prepared questions.
No one's handed me my, oh, this is what we want you to ask me about.
It just doesn't happen.
Right.
Exactly.
And that's a lot of that is a misunderstanding of what the old policy was.
And, you know, the initial policy, draft policy that went out, it was admittedly imprecise.
And that's why I came in to edit it to make it much more clear.
But a lot of the things that they were saying were in there just didn't exist.
You know, the idea of having to pre-clear stories through the department, that used to be the policy in this building.
Really?
In the 1940s, back when this building was first built, press passes were handled through the Office of Censorship.
And so everybody signed this thing that said that they had to submit all of their writings to the Department of War Office of Censorship for pre-publication review.
You all had to maintain physical standards too, because you had to go out in the field with the troops.
Hey, hey, I'm there.
I'm there.
Let's go.
But that hasn't been the rule since the 50s.
And so when we put out this new policy, we put in there very explicitly that the department employees and the military members are not allowed to release non-public information without it being pre-cleared through the appropriate office.
The media misinterpreted that as we were saying that they weren't allowed to do it.
And the reality is that was not even a policy.
That's Congress.
Congress passed laws that says government employees are not allowed to disclose non-public confidential information, not just classified.
When I was in a very similar uniform to yours, that was absolutely something that we had to get.
And we took training on it every year and it was very well understood.
And so we had to be clear that this is the rules regarding department personnel so that the media would understand it is a crime for them to do that.
And so if you're asking a department employee to commit a crime, you're soliciting a crime.
Building access is a privilege, not a right.
And if you're soliciting crimes, you don't get the privilege of being in the building.
And that's really at its core what that instruction was about.
And ultimately, while they did this whole performative walkout, you know what they did?
Random, we are coming up on our first break.
We'll be right back here from the Pentagon.
Stand in our way and our golden age has just begun.
This is Human Events with Jack Kesovic.
Now it's time for everyone to understand what America First truly means.
Welcome to the second American Revolution.
All right, Jack Pesobic, we are back live from the Department of War from within the bowels of the five-sided puzzle palace, the Pentagon itself.
And folks, the Pentagon knows about a good cup of coffee.
And anyone that knows me and the work that Human Events does day in and day out knows the conservative movement and movement never stops.
And the fuel that keeps me going, keeps the show going and the work going is blackout coffee.
And trust me, the commander here knows about a good cup of coffee.
Am I right?
Well, maybe not from the Navy, but the bug juice.
But that's what it was, though.
When I was in the Navy, you get the bug juice on ship.
That's why now that I'm out, I say, you know what?
I want a really nice cup of coffee.
That's why I go for blackout coffee.
And so for years, blackout coffee has been my coffee of choice.
And I know so many of you guys want it too, especially at Christmas time, because blackout isn't just a coffee.
It's America and a cup.
It's founded on Christian values, rooted in family and built on the belief that hardworking Americans deserve better than corporate swill and bug juice.
Blackout coffee is a family business that roasts every batch right here in the United States.
To roast, you've got to try morning reaper, smooth medium roast that kicks off your day without bitterness.
And for the dark roast lovers, Brutal Awakening, a bold, rich roast that has deep flavor, that'll keep you sharp and alert.
Perfect for serving friends and family around the holidays.
Because let's face it, the best gatherings start with the best coffee.
Here is my deal.
You go to blackoutcoffee.com slash posto.
Use promo code posto for 20% off your first order.
Blackoutcoffee.com slash pozo.
Support a company that shares your values, supports American jobs, and fuels your freedom one cup at a time.
All right.
We're on with Commander Timothy Parlator.
Commander, and I keep wanting to call you Tim, but no, it's Commander.
It's Commander.
You're in uniform.
We can go back to Tim tomorrow.
We'll go back to Tim tomorrow when you're off duty.
We saw this.
Actually, guys, do we have that clip?
Do we have that clip of Senator Kelly?
And we're pulling up a clip here for Senator Kelly because he had this video over the last couple of weeks where, as you were just saying, about the regulations of federal workers, it sounded to me that he was soliciting information or leaks or insubordination.
And to my ears, it sounded like insubordination from members of the military and undermining the chain of command.
Now, as a retired Navy captain collecting a pension, he is still under the jurisdiction of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
I asked the press secretary Wilson yesterday, will there be an investigation?
We knew that there was.
She confirmed that that had been forwarded to Secretary Phelan over at the Navy.
And by the way, I was also, we were going to have him on today and we were also informed that he got pulled into the White House.
Don't know if it's about that, but that's what he was supposed to be here today.
And that the timeline on that investigation is one week from today on December 10th.
Walk us through what types of things we could see coming out of that investigation.
Sure.
It's that investigation or review is being done by the Navy.
I'm not a part of it.
But they're going to look at a bunch of things.
They're going to look at the facts of the case.
This is not something where you really need an investigation because it all happened publicly.
And so they need to do a good review of the law and see the range of options they have here.
It's not just about a court martial.
They could bring administrative penalties here.
They could, for example, they could reduce his pension.
They could potentially say he's being reduced to the rank of commander in his retirement and then just take his pension down a bit.
Ultimately, what they're going to do is they're going to make a decision, not based on politics, but based on the facts and the law as to what statutes that video violates, what are the impediments to potential court martial, and what makes the most sense in this case.
You know, one of the difficulties of court-martialing a sitting senator, the Constitution prohibits somebody from serving offices in two branches at the same time.
And so if a senator or congressman, yeah, there are members of Congress that continue in the reserves, but if any of them get pulled to active duty, then they're an officer in the executive branch.
Right.
And so then they can't serve both offices at the same time.
And it acts as a functional forced resignation from Congress or the Senate, which that could potentially bring all sorts of other separation of powers issues.
So I think that ultimately the Navy is going to make a well-reasoned decision and recommendation.
It could include administrative penalties as opposed to the full freight of a court martial.
But then at the same time, you got to remember the FBI has been looking into this.
So there's also the DOJ side, which applies to all six of them.
And so that's.
And that would be as a civilian.
Correct.
Correct.
And that's obviously outside of this department's control.
Incredible.
So this is something, and I appreciate, though, that the department is taking it absolutely seriously because it certainly is something that undermines good order and conduct.
And at the end of the day, that's what it's all about.
And that's what the secretary has always said that he wants to restore.
And we saw leaking even in the previous Trump administration from uniformed individuals that led to an impeachment process.
We saw, you know, honestly, leaking of classified information, which did not result in any administrative corrections or punishments at all.
And so I understand the necessity for keeping it serious.
Moving aside, talking about other investigations, I did also receive information from Press Secretary Wilson yesterday regarding a phone call that was made between Secretary Hegseth and Senator Roger Wicker.
And this is the head of the Senate Armed Force Armed Services Committee.
He had come out and talked about opening an investigation into the Secretary regarding a series or a drone strike or series of drone strikes, depending on the parlance on that, that took place down in Venezuela.
When it comes to the legality of these strikes, now this is something, and I've said here on the program, just with my background as an intelligence officer, what I know about that strike just from open source reporting seems to be standard operating procedure.
It doesn't seem to be a differentiation for that.
But for the audience, could you walk us through what you're looking at there?
Sure.
So the initial strike, there's Office of Legal Counsel opinions that say we're allowed to do the initial strike.
Where the controversy comes in is this follow-on second strike.
And here, you really need to do a very fact-intensive analysis of it.
Because what the Washington Post did is, you know, after the video came out and the lack of an unlawful order, they put out this fake narrative based on anonymous sourcing to try to pin an unlawful order on the secretary.
But the reality is he did not give any such order.
The commander, Admiral Bradley, he made the decision, a command decision, based on the information he had available to do a second strike.
Now, ultimately, you have to decide, is that second strike a legitimate military target?
And so here, I'm going to draw a very serious distinction between the people and the boat.
Because you have, initially you have a boat speeding along full of cocaine and people, and that is a lawful target.
You can blow it out of the water.
You can kill everybody on board, no problem.
After that initial strike, you do a battle damage assessment and you make a decision.
That's where that's where us intel got and you make a decision of what to do next.
So if the boat is still floating and there's still cargo in it, it remains a lawful military target.
The goal was to put it to the bottom of the ocean.
Because they could be recovered.
Correct.
It could be recovered.
And there's a long history of this.
We've gone through that here on the program of explaining this is something the Navy has done for quite some time in the Caribbean.
Well, even before that, we did it in World War II.
We, you know, Battle of Midway, you know, we got one of the Japanese carriers.
It was totally out of the fight and full of wounded Japanese sailors.
But because it could have been towed back, the USS Nautilus continued to put torpedoes into it until it went to the bottom of the ocean.
The Japanese battleship, Yamato, the largest battleship in history, same thing.
It was stricken.
It was listing.
And we continued to put dive bombers and torpedo planes onto it until it went to the bottom of the ocean with all of the wounded Japanese sailors on board because the goal was to sink the boat, not the people.
Now, if you have a boat that's on fire, full of cocaine, it's got a couple of narco-terrorists on board that are wounded, that boat is still a target.
And he can shoot that.
Now, if the Admiral sits there and says, I see two terrorists, I see two wounded terrorists floating in the middle of the ocean.
I want to kill those terrorists.
That's potentially legally problematic.
But if he instead says, no, no, no, I see a boat full of cocaine that I was ordered to put to the bottom of the ocean.
I'm going to put it to the bottom of the ocean.
And one of his intel people, one of your types, grabs and says, oh, sir, sir, there's two wounded terrorists on board.
Well, that's collateral damage.
That's fine.
Even though the action is the same, you're still putting the exact same rocket into the exact same place.
If your intent is to kill the people, that's potentially a crime.
If your intent is to sink the boat, that's perfectly illegal.
And I think that's where people have really gotten confused over this thing.
The law of war says that shipwrecks.
Which, by the way, is separate from an objective strike, which would be on, say, an HVT, high-value target, terrorist, where that is and has been signed off by OLC.
The thing about shipwrecked people, okay, in the laws of war, you're not allowed to target people that have been shipwrecked.
And what that means is what the Japanese and Germans used to do to us of strafing American sailors in the water, shooting sailors that are swimming.
And that's a very different thing.
If he was shooting at terrorists that were swimming or clinging to a piece of wood like Indianapolis.
Bingo.
Then that would have been a problem.
But if he's shooting the boat, then that's not a problem.
And that's where all the people are messing up their talking points and thinking that this is a war crime when really this is perfectly permissible.
And another point, we're not throwing him under the bus because by Secretary Heg says saying, no, I didn't give him that order, that's not putting him in front of the bus.
That's saying you can't put him in jail for following a manifestly unlawful order.
Instead, you have to focus on did he make the appropriate command decision based on the intelligence he had available to him?
He is allowing him to defend himself.
Commander, thank you so much for joining us here at Human Events Daily.
Incredible interview.
Fascinating.
Thank you so much for joining us from the Department of War here at the Bangkok.
You talk about influencers.
These are influencers, and they're friends of mine.
Jack, All right, Jack Poseilbic, we are back live here, Human Events daily.
We're live at the Pentagon, the Department of War.
Folks, if you are a homeowner in America, you need to listen to this.
The FBI has been warning about a type of real estate fraud that's on the rise, and it's called title theft.
Your equity is the target.
Here's how it works.
Criminals will forge your signature on a single document and use a fake notary stamp and file it with the county.
And just like that, on record, they own your home.
Using your ownership, they can take out loans against your equity or even sell your property.
And you won't know about it until foreclosure or collection notices show up in the mail.
That's why I've partnered with Home Title Lock so you can protect your equity and find out today if you're already a victim.
Use promo code POSO at hometitleck.com and you will get a free title history report and a free trial of their million-dollar triple lock protection.
That's 24-7 monitoring of your title records, urgent alerts to any changes.
And if fraud occurs, their U.S.-based restoration team will spend up to $1 million to fix it.
Find out why I trust Home Title Lock.
Protect yourself like I did.
Don't be a victim.
Protect your equity today.
That's hometitle.com, promo code POSO.
All right, folks.
So we've got this new report that's out, and we'll have our next guest here in a minute.
We've got this new report out, the Pentagon IG report on the Signal app.
And AP is reporting, and CNN first reported it earlier regarding the use of signal messaging app to convey information about a military strike against Houthi militants in Yemen.
Now, remember, this was back earlier in the administration, so a different drone strike than the one that we were just talking about.
So I do have some quotes that they've given us from Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell.
And Sean will be joining us in a moment's time.
And so Sean has stated, says that it's a total exoneration, proves what we all knew.
No classified information was shared.
This matter is resolved and the case is closed.
This is, again, I'm reading the statement.
The signal narrative is old and worn out.
It's starting to resemble Joe Biden's media mental state.
The department stands behind its previous statements that no classified information was shared via signal.
I'll skip down a little bit to a deeper point here.
It says, the review confirms what we said from the very beginning.
The Secretary of War did not share any classified information.
This review shows the Secretary is vindicated.
The IG found that no information, classified information was shared.
What it found instead is a bureaucracy desperate to weaponize process by leaking information because they knew it would hurt Secretary Hegseth.
And of course, this is between Operation Roughrider and Operation Midnight Strike.
And so the question, the report that's out from AP, and I'm putting these up against each other, said that it was sensitive information, potentially could have put U.S. personnel on the mission at risk.
However, did, however, Hegseth has the ability to classify, declassify material as an original originating classification authority, an OCA, and that he did not, they did not find that he did so improperly, according to people familiar with the report's findings.
The review by the IG has been delivered to the Capitol in the SCIF, and a partially redacted version of the report is expected to be released publicly later this week.
And so this has been one of the things from early on in the administration that has absolutely been a huge, a huge, huge story, huge question.
The signal chat, the use of this chat, was it classified information?
Was it not classified information?
The signal, the text chain of people that were on the signal chat, of course, many people knew, you know, who were in there.
Is almost the entire cabinet at the time.
National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, who is now over at the UN as UN ambassador, I believe, and Vice President JD Vance, DNI Gabbard, were all on this chat as well.
And so, regarding the Houthi strikes, this was the question: was it classified information or was it sensitive information?
And of course, the issue being that Jeffrey Goldberg from The Atlantic had been added to the chat.
And one of the questions that I still have, and I'm at the time, I remember hitting up every single source that I had in the administration, just about everyone that I could find who had any idea what was going on here.
How was it that Jeffrey Goldberg from The Atlantic was added to this signal chat?
People claimed it was by accident.
People claimed that it was just an oversight that someone had him in their phone incorrectly.
I just don't buy that.
I've never bought that for a second that he was added accidentally.
To me, it seemed deliberate.
I don't know who.
I was never able to get to the bottom of that, but I'll tell you right now, that to me felt like some kind of operation where they wanted information.
And let's be clear.
Let's be clear.
This wasn't just some random, random figure in Washington, D.C., or, you know, somebody's, you think about how many phone contacts you have on your phone, right?
A needle in a haystack.
You're getting someone with J and G initials because sometimes if you use signal like I do, you know that you only sometimes see the initials when you get the actual contact in.
So my question was: if that's all you see, how was it that you get JG in there?
Sean Parnell.
Hey, what's up again?
Come on in.
Get in here.
Get in here.
We got two minutes of the break.
You're coming in.
We're talking about, we're talking about your report right now.
And here he is, folks, as promised, Sean Parnell joining us right now on Human Events Daily.
And so this, and we, we were looking, and I said, look, you know, your office, not afraid of anything here, not afraid of serious questions.
We have about a minute till the break, but then we'll hold you after that.
Okay.
And it's, you know, they said, hey, bring up the signal report.
Go ahead.
Yeah, totally.
I mean, so the signal report is out and it proves what we've known all along that the secretary shared no classified information and he's totally exonerated.
And if you remember, Jack, back to the original narrative when the signal story broke.
Yeah, the fake narrative was that the secretary shared classified information and put troops at risk.
The IG report says specifically that the secretary shared no classified information.
So he's totally exonerated.
What we said back then was totally accurate.
It was a fake news narrative then, and it's an exposed fake narrative now.
And it's done.
It's over with.
It's just not eight months, eight months of.
And I even have the, I even have the, just because we're going up to the break, I even have the AP is reporting here, which points out that the secretary himself does have the ability to declassify.
He's the secretary is an original classifier.
Yeah.
So he can point to a document and say that this is unclassified.
But the point is, and you're going to hear, you're going to hear fake news outlets say that the secretary shared sensitive.
They're going to use the term sensitive because it's a meaningless term.
There's like sensitive is ill-defined.
It's not a classification.
They're just using it to make the story sound scary and say that, oh, he sensitive information and he put troops' lives in danger.
Well, how can that possibly be true when Operation Rough Rider was a resounding success?
Nobody wounded, nobody killed during that operation.
So don't buy the fake news narrative.
Where's Jack?
Where's Jack?
Where is he?
Jack, I want to see you.
Great job, Jack.
Thank you.
What a job you do.
You know, we have an incredible thing.
We're always talking about the fake news and the bad, but we have guys, and these are the guys should be getting public.
All right, Jack, what's up?
We're back live from the Five-Sided Puzzle Palace here.
That is the Pentagon.
We're on with Sean Parnell.
He is the chief spokesman for the Pentagon.
And so, Sean, we're talking about this signal report.
And so the AP is out.
The media is out there, the mainstream media, I should say, and they're saying that Secretary Hegset put U.S. personnel, put the mission at risk using the signal messaging app to convey what they call sensitive information.
However, also points out that it is declassified.
What would the Secretary say regarding?
And I know he mentioned it before, but just since we have longer time, what would he say in response or what would the office say in response that did this put U.S. personnel at risk?
Of course it didn't.
And the proof is in the pudding of the actual operation.
Operation Roughrider was wildly successful.
We achieved the desired end state.
No U.S. personnel were wounded or killed.
Operation Rough Rider was wildly successful.
So obviously Americans' lives weren't put at unnecessary risk.
The Secretary, I mean, I've said it before and I'll say it again.
The Secretary, when he's in these meetings and he's in these operational plans, in these operational planning sessions, he listens to uniformed military personnel.
He asks great questions and he adheres to and believes in the commander in chief and President Trump, which, by the way, is something that's different from the president's first term here in this building.
The secretary is a great, great advocate for the president, believes that I'm here in this building, and ultimately he's very decisive.
So you're going to see a bunch of headlines that have come out about this signal stuff.
But the most important thing for the American people to know, Jack, is the secret, the narrative back then was that the secretary disclosed classified information and therefore, because of that, broke the law.
That's not true.
The report found that the secretary did not share classified information and did not break the law.
And in fact, one of the only things that the IG recommended was more cyber awareness training throughout the.
So so not again, first of all.
Again, first of all, not again.
That this is, if you've been in the military, this is a little bit.
It's very much an inside joke for the DOD.
Cyber awareness 5.0.
Is it still 5.0 when I was 5.0?
It's probably 10.0 right now, I don't know.
But the point is is obviously the IG report was not damning if the recommendation was simply more cyber awareness training and no, I haven't seen the report yet.
You know, this is all kind of breaking as I've been on air was there a section did the IG get into and I understand if this is beyond purview did the IG get into the inclusion of a mainstream media reporter in this Signal Signal chat?
Jeffrey Goldberg from the They did not.
Yeah, they did.
They did not.
But yeah, obviously, there's still questions around how something like that could possibly happen, but they did not.
But ultimately, for our purposes, the IG report totally exonerates Secretary Hickseth.
He will not disclose classified information.
And I'm just going to say, for someone who's done so much adversarial journalism against President Trump and against members of his administration, this was the guy who came up with suckers and losers.
That guy.
And so to say that it was a random inclusion on a signal chat like this of that guy beyond, you know, and I was going to say prior to when you walked in, I was, you actually cut me off and I was making my point that, you know, sometimes on Signal, you can only see the first two initials of the name.
So, okay, JG, I've got lots of people in my phone that might start with a J or a G, a friend or a relative or whoever.
What are the odds that the person that comes in that has the J and the G is the guy who made up the suckers and losers hoax?
It just, it, that's the part where it just don't pass the smell test.
It's all.
He is one of the greatest hoaxers of President Trump's first term while President Trump was running.
You're right.
It, I mean, how the hell he gets added to a signal chat, I think is beyond me, but he did.
And ultimately pushed yet another hoax with saying that the secretary disclosed classified information or classified work plans that put American troops at risk.
He did not.
Again, fully exonerated.
And ultimately, I mean, that's what we said back then.
And that's what we're saying now.
And guess what?
We were right.
Now, that being said, you know, you mentioned communications.
Is there something that the DOD is working on beyond this to kind of this platform to be able to work on with government devices to be able to have these high-level communications?
Because I remember taking a step back and thinking about it and saying, when you have members of the cabinet, when you have them going all over the world working for the president, working on his administration, working on his priorities all over the world, all over the country, different parts, I can see the need for having a way to communicate electronically to be able to cut across all of the boundaries.
There's obviously a purpose for this.
It's such a great point.
Is there a way then to be able to meet that, but also protect the Jeffrey Goldbergs of the world from getting information?
I can tell you we are looking at that right now.
But to your point, Jack, I mean, it is critically important for us to be able to communicate at the speed of relevance on a 21st century battlefield.
Right.
And even, and I'll just say it because I'm not in uniform or in official capacity that, and I've been on the civets and secured video contacts.
And they're not quick.
They're not quick.
And even in this building, so I was an infantryman when I served in uniform.
He's not going with technology.
But right.
We just break, we just break things.
But I come into this building and I realize that most of the offices for senior government officials in this building are skiffs.
So you can't have your phone in your office.
You can't communicate with the outside world, but for on an office phone, which it's just antiquated and inefficient.
And the bottom line is, if you're the Secretary of War and the President of the United States is reaching out to talk to you, you need a secure way to talk to him, whether you're on the road, in the office.
I mean, you can't talk when you're in the office because you're in a skiff.
I mean, it's just.
And I guess I'll put it this way.
You know, Sean, I watched all these Hollywood movies and I see all these fancy gadgets that James Bond and Jack Ryan and all these people have.
Surely the secretary and the president have a line like that, right?
Yes, they do have secure ways and secure cell phones that they can talk on, but no, it's not like the movies.
It's not like the movies.
It's not like the movies.
Not at all.
No, and so it's not.
And so that's something where, you know, it seems to me that I kind of, I think I understand the situation because, you know, having been an intelligence officer, I understand that this is.
I don't even want to say publicly some of the ways that I've communicated with people that have been in the field in the past.
Let's just say they're far less secure than Signal.
Yeah, for sure.
But because of convenience.
Yeah.
And so to your earlier question, like, of course, we're looking at the scrolling cards.
Yes.
Oh, my God.
So, yeah, of course we're looking at more modern, secure ways to communicate in real time because as you said, the president doesn't sleep.
The president is all over the world, all over the country.
The secretary is all over the world, all over the country, and oftentimes working in a skiff.
So you have to be able to communicate on the fly.
You have to be able to communicate at the speed of relevance on a battlefield that changes on a dime.
And we're working on ways to develop and do that right now.
What is now, I only have here for a couple more minutes.
I asked Press Secretary Wilson yesterday regarding this Senator Wicker and this situation over the U.S. Senate.
She said that there was a phone call between the Secretary and Senator Wicker.
I think that was the first time that's been publicly acknowledged.
Can you tell us anything else about that phone call or the current status of all that?
So the Secretary, you're talking about with the investment of Mark Kelly.
No, This was regarding Senator Wicker potentially looking into war crimes.
Oh, we're talking another fake narrative, a fake war crimes narrative.
And this being the fact that it's a Republican senator.
Yeah.
So I'll tell you that the Secretary a couple of days ago talked to Chairman Rogers on the Hask and talked to Chairman Wicker.
And those conversations went, as I understand it, very, very well.
And the narrative in the media that you see is that, oh, we don't talk to Congress enough.
I think there have been 13 briefings on Southcom operations with members of Congress to try to keep them in the loop.
But yeah, I mean, part of our job is to, you know, the president has a mission.
He's told us that defense of the homeland is a main priority and a main pillar of that mission.
And part of it is stopping drugs, fentanyl, from flowing into our country.
And that's exactly what we're doing.
And we're going to keep doing it.
Is there any plan to have Secretary Hagseth head over to conduct briefings either classified or unclassified with the committees?
So I think Admiral Bradley is the then commander of JSOC and now the SOCOM commander is going to be on the Hill this week talking about it.
But like I said, the Secretary is in regular contact with members of the HASC and the SASC, and he's going to continue to do that.
But we're also going to continue to get after this mission because it's important to protect our homeland.
You know, like we are the first Department of Defense, Department of War that's actually prioritized defending the homeland.
You remember some of the images of our southern border under Biden, like where the military is being overwhelmed and illegals are streaming into the country?
I don't think I'll ever forget them.
It's kind of crazy, right?
That it just took a president with a spine like President Trump in an act of Congress.
Bring it all to a stop.
Don, they're calling us out.
End of a time.
Catch you next time for lawyers.
All right.
All right.
Sounds good, Jack.
Good to see you, man.
Thank you, Virginia.
Jack is a great guy.
He's written a fantastic book.
Everybody's talking about it.
Go get it.
And he's been my friend right from the beginning of this whole beautiful event.
And we're going to turn it around and make our country great.
Amen.
All right, Jack Posobic back live here, Human Events Daily, live in Washington, actually Arlington, Virginia, just adjacent to Washington, D.C. at the office of the Secretary of War, also known as the Pentagon.
Folks, let's face it, this is amazing because, of course, wait, I just have to say, so we're doing the silent ad.
All right, we've got the silent on.
That's the Faraday cages.
But this is amazing because I'm doing the Faraday Cage silent ad.
And of course, this Chris is what you get it.
But we're doing that inside the Pentagon, literally from inside the Pentagon with all of the Intel agencies having ties to this building.
And on the same day that the SignalGate story just came out.
So if there was ever a place, if there was ever a day that you wanted to be sure about the security of your phone, it is today.
And this is the place.
Because folks, let's face it, your phone is a tracking device.
Government agencies, like perhaps the one I'm in right now, big tech, corporate data brokers, and even cyber criminals, they're all fighting for a piece of your digital footprint.
They don't ask.
They just take it.
That is why silent exists.
Silent makes Faraday gear that blocks all wireless signals, cellular, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, GPS, RFID, and NFC.
No signal means no tracking, no remote access, no breadcrumbs.
Same tech that's trusted by special operations teams worldwide.
It's used to block signals, avoid surveillance, and secure communications wherever the mission leads.
And now it's available to you to protect your family, your freedom, and your digital footprint.
So drop your phone in a silent Faraday sleeve and it's off the grid completely silent.
Invisible to the outside world from backpacks to sleeves to crossbody.
Silent's patented tech gives you control of your privacy.
Visit slnt.com slash posto to save 15% and get free shipping on qualifying orders.
That is slnt.com slash poso.
Protect your rights, secure your data, and stay one step ahead.
SLNT.com, silence the chaos.
All right, folks.
So that is where we are at.
We're waiting for our next guest to join us.
And I believe he'll be here soon.
But, you know, I just have to, I want to just point that out again because the secretary's office came in the room during the break right here, just now.
I want to tell you what just happened.
So the signal story is out.
Secretary's office comes in the room, walks in and gives us this piece of paper and says, we have an update for you on the Signal IG report.
We want this in right now.
And I said, okay, do you want, you know, do you want me to bring this up?
And they said, well, when Sean Parnell comes in, I'm the chief spokesman, we want him to talk about it.
And he wants to talk about it.
And so you think of the narrative that they've been pushing at us saying that, oh, you're the new Pentagon Press Corps that, you know, you've got Jack Vesovic, James O'Keefe, and guys from Tim Pooler there.
And you got the post-millennial and human events and all the rest.
And we can bring him in if he's ready.
And you're not asking any serious questions.
They came to us and said, we want to talk about the IG report on Signal.
We want to talk about it.
So they came to me and said, can we ask about this?
And I said, I'd love to ask you about this.
And I'm going to ask you hard questions.
I'm going to ask you serious questions.
We're going to get into it.
I want to hear the nitty-gritty and let's get the facts out.
And that's what this is all about, ladies and gentlemen.
It's about not saying, you know, that we're not going to ask about the hard questions.
Venezuela, are we going to a regime change in Venezuela?
I don't know, but there's people in this building who might know.
We're going to ask that question.
The drone strikes.
What is happening with these drone strikes?
Are they actually hitting people who are just floating around in the water like survivors?
Well, you saw the commander here and he walked through it.
He walked through the legalities of that, that if you have a vessel that is recoverable by a terrorist organization that still has those narcotic content on there, which is a commodity that can then be traded and then sold in the U.S. market, not only just for, of course, for sale, but then used for that funding that goes back to that organization, then that is still a legal target.
It is a lawful target of the United States military under those authorities.
That is the difference.
And we're here asking those serious questions.
And in fact, I appreciate the fact that they gave us serious answers.
And ultimately, ultimately, just like in any other media, it is up to you, the American people, to be the ones to decide what you do with that.
And again, you know, we think about different things.
And, you know, you go back to, say, the Pentagon Papers, right?
All the way back during the Vietnam War and questions about whether or not the Vietnam War was going well.
And the fact, and that was a Democrat scandal, right?
That was something where it was, but again, it was a military industrial complex.
That was McNamara.
That was Johnson.
They were up there every day saying, oh, the war is going fine.
The war is going fine.
The war is going fine.
And that just wasn't the truth.
And inside this building, inside the Pentagon, this very same building, if you could, and I really should have, you know, we've been doing all these interviews about news of the day.
But the history of this building is so incredible.
And in this building, they had reports during Vietnam that the war was not going well.
And that story came out.
And the truth needs to come out specifically and most importantly, when it comes to issues of war, of life and death.
That's what human events stands for, whether now, whether in the past, or whether it's in the future.
We will always stand for that.
And if America's interests are being called into question, then we want to know, are these operations being done for the interests of the American people or are they being done to serve some other purpose?
That's our job here.
That's going to be continuing to be my job.
And, you know, really, when you look, really, when you look at the history of the Pentagon, not only, of course, you know, the Pentagon papers, but you go all the way back to 9-11 and you go back to the rings that were smashed here on that day, the people who saw the plane flying over on the bridge, the bridge that I drove over just this morning to come into this building.
When you think about the different operations that were fought and run out of this building, it's truly remarkable.
And it's incredible history.
This building was built all the way back during World War II.
So really only spent two years building it.
It's an old building coming up on its 100-year anniversary.
And it features in, you know, it's just a building like any other.
It's an office building.
There's various columns to it.
But we do every once in a while get a couple of generals in.
In fact, like General Tata, who we have here joining us right now.
General, please come in and sit down.
We only actually have a couple of minutes left until the end of the show.
But what I'd love to do if we can, we'll get you on for the last two minutes and then we'll go over a little bit and we'll play on the next time.
But I want to say thank you so much for joining us.
It's good to see you again.
Not the first time this week on air.
Congratulations on everything you're doing.
I appreciate it.
Congratulations to you as well.
When we're talking about, though, the military readiness, the quality of life, just in one minute, what would you say the difference has been between the previous administration and now?
We're focused on those things that unify us instead of those things that divide us.
We're focused on unity of command, unity of mission instead of critical race theory and DJ.
That's in one sense, that's a good thing.
And it's really as simple as that, folks, because you have a situation where now it's about every warfighter and every member of the military, which, by the way, includes families, which includes dependents, which includes children, which includes the quality of life on base.
It doesn't matter what your politics are or what your critical race, et cetera, is none of that matters because that's all something that affects everyone.
Recruiting's off the charts, Jack.
Since president was elected, since secretary has been put in the position and Senate confirmed, recruiting is off the charts for every service.
We've already hit mission on a couple of services for the next fiscal year.
I actually know someone.
I have a friend who's younger who was looking to get in.
And for specific jobs, you can't even get them.
That's right.
Space Force, cyber?
Gun.
Cyber is.
You think, you know, okay, FY27 now, you got to.
Apparently, Air Force Loadmaster is pretty viral on TikTok right now.
So that's, you can't get it.
Yeah, that's a cool job.
I was a paratrooper.
I watch all the TikTok videos and they say, oh, that's a cool job.
I want to go hang my legs out there and take it out.
So it's viral.
You can't get out.
And it's a testament to what you have done in order to change the ship.
We are going to go, we'll record a little bit more.
We're out of time for the show today, the live show, because we're going to record this in a minute.
