First briefing at Pentagon today in a month, and w/ Press Secretary Kingsley Wilson taking Qs for first time. I asked about SECDEF's team recently suggesting that the ongoing, independent inspector general review of Signal usage at the Pentagon is a "witch hunt."
She responded, in part: "Dan, what I will say is that we are, in good faith, providing a statement to the IG for this investigation. Unfortunately, for some reason, details of that have leaked..."
I asked: "So you're attacking somebody based on an assumption?"
Ms. Wilson said that by virtue of details from the IG review leaking, "we believe that this is a witch hunt and a total sham and being conducted in bad faith." I asked: How do you know who is leaking? She said that "We assume that it would be someone from the IG's office."
Can you explain the belief that this IG inquiry -- not yet released -- is a "sham"? And, will you take it seriously when the findings are released?
That came after this previous scoop, in which The Washington Post reported that details posted on Signal from SECDEF's Signal account derived from an email labeled SECRET/NOFORN. Hegseth Signal messages came from email classified ‘SECRET,’ watchdog told www.washingtonpost.com/national-sec...
Coverage of that statement appears here. Hegseth's team said then that the IG inquiry "is a sham, conducted in bad faith and with extreme bias." Hegseth team lashes out at Pentagon’s internal ‘Signalgate’ review www.washingtonpost.com/national-sec...
@sodrock.bsky.social do you have suggestions for what a member of the press should ask your former HS lab partner next time