"Director Ratcliffe, surely you prepared for this hearing today," Ossoff said. "You were part of a group of principals, senior echelons of the U.S. government in now a widely publicized breach of sensitive information. You don't recall whether the vice president opined on the wisdom of the strikes? That's your testimony today under oath?"
Ratcliffe again insisted he didn't recall, so Ossoff read quotes from Goldberg's article, which contained quotes from the senior officials who seemingly did not know he could see their posts.
"Here's what secretary Hegseth said, quote: 'Waiting a few weeks or months does not fundamentally change the calculus, two immediate risks on waiting one, this leaks and we look indecisive,'" Ossoff read. "'Two, Israel takes an action first or Gaza ceasefire falls apart and we don't get to start this on our own terms.' Your testimony is you don't recall the secretary of defense sending that message or reading it?'"
Ratcliffe admits to recalling an exchange but claimed he did not recall the specifics, so Ossoff tried from another angle.
"Let's put it this way, Director Ratcliffe: A discussion by senior U.S. officials on the timing and risks of a proposed military campaign and disagreements between the president and the vice president about U.S. plans and intentions would be of obvious interest to foreign intelligence services, would it not?" Ossoff said, and the director conceded that would. "They were discussing the timing of sending U.S. air crews into enemy airspace, where they faced an air defense threat, correct?"
Ratcliffe said he would defer to the other principals on the group chat about the meaning and context of those discussions, and Ossoff pressed on with his questions but appeared to be frustrated when the CIA director claimed he did not know whether the conversations covered the risks from enemy air defenses to U.S. aircrews.
"You do know that," Ossoff said, and turned instead to U.S. Air Force Gen. Timothy Haugh. "You lead America's signals intelligence collection. Would the private deliberation of foreign senior officials about the wisdom and timing of potential military action be a collection priority for you and the U.S. intelligence community?"
Haugh agreed that the military and intelligence agencies attempted to learn about the plans and intentions of adversary leaders and for military commanders, and he agreed that they would also want to prevent adversaries from learning that key information.
"Director Ratcliffe, this was a huge mistake, correct?" Ossoff said, turning again to the CIA director, who disagreed and then repeatedly interrupted the senator. "A national political – no, no, you hold on. No, no, director Ratcliffe. I'm asking you a yes-or-no question, and now you hold on. A national political reporter was made privy to sensitive information about imminent military operations against a foreign terrorist organization, and that wasn't a huge mistake?"
"This is an embarrassment," Ossoff added over Ratcliffe's continued interruptions. "This is utterly unprofessional. There's been no apology, there has been no recognition of the gravity of this error, and by the way, we will get the full transcript of this chain and your testimony will be measured carefully against its content."
Watch the video below or at this link.
- YouTube
youtu.be
