Trump admin leaked war plans in a restaurant

From Signal scandals to public bravado, a pattern of carelessness around classified information is getting harder to ignore.

I don’t know what you’re going to think of this, but it is one of the most outrageous things I have seen in a long time.

We now have video of attorney Mark Geragos appearing on TMZ with Harvey Levin, hours before the bombing of Iran began. Geragos was recording from Joe’s Stone Crab in Washington, D.C., and what he casually described overhearing should stop everyone in their tracks.

If what he said is accurate, this is an operational security failure of staggering proportions.

---

---

What was overheard

At roughly 3:45 p.m. Eastern, well before the strikes were publicly announced, Geragos told Harvey Levin that he was overhearing a conversation at the next table about the United States bombing Iran that very night.

He implied the people speaking were connected to the government. He would not name them, but he made clear this was not random speculation from tourists. He suggested they were “in the know.”

The strikes were not formally announced until nearly twelve hours later, around 2:30 a.m., from Mar-a-Lago.

If individuals with advance knowledge of a military operation were openly discussing it in a crowded Washington restaurant, that would be a catastrophic breach of operational security.

Loose lips sink ships is an old phrase for a reason.

Why this matters

Washington, D.C. is not just another city. It is a hub for intelligence services from around the world. Friendly governments operate there. Adversarial governments operate there. Contractors, lobbyists, journalists, staffers, foreign agents. They are all there.

If sensitive military plans were being discussed loudly enough for a celebrity attorney to overhear them and repeat them on camera, who else heard them?

Military operations are not reality television. Information like this can cost lives.

American service members have already been killed in connection with this operation.

Whatever anyone thinks about the decision to strike Iran, that debate becomes secondary if the people responsible for executing the mission are placed at greater risk because someone could not keep their mouth shut at Joe’s Stone Crab.

Incompetence or arrogance

There are different ways something like this can happen.

Sometimes it is incompetence. Sometimes it is arrogance. People who believe there will be no consequences. People who treat classified information as insider gossip rather than life-and-death intelligence.

In more cynical scenarios, leaks are deliberate. Information is floated for political reasons or to shape a narrative.

But this did not sound like a strategic leak. It sounded like bravado and people who thought they were untouchable.

And that fits a broader pattern.

We have already seen what people call “Signal Gate,” where sensitive conversations were handled with alarming carelessness. We have seen individuals elevated to high levels of authority who would never pass a standard security clearance review under normal circumstances. We have seen corners cut because loyalty was valued over competence.

When you surround serious operations with unserious people, this is what happens.

A pattern of carelessness

There is a theme here, and it should concern everyone regardless of party.

Deeply irresponsible behavior around deeply serious matters.

It is one thing to disagree about foreign policy. It is another thing entirely to normalize a culture where operational details are treated like cocktail party conversation.

If the reporting bears this out, someone needs to answer basic questions. Who was at that table? What did they know? Why were they discussing it publicly? And what safeguards failed to prevent it?

National security is not about feeling important in a crowded restaurant.

It is about protecting American lives.

We will continue watching for additional reporting on this. Because if this story is accurate, it deserves far more scrutiny than it has received so far.

---

We’re reaching over 150 million people every month across YouTube, podcasts, Substack, and beyond. But algorithms can change. Platforms can fold. And when that happens, this newsletter is how we stay connected.

If you’re not yet a paid subscriber, please consider joining.
If you’re already paid on one platform, consider supporting us on both Substack and our website.

You can subscribe on our website and right here on Substack.

And if you’re really on fire, consider gifting a subscription—we’ve got thousands on our waiting list ready to read, watch, and fight back.

Let’s keep building.

—David

PS: Can’t contribute right now? No problem. You can support us for free by subscribing on YouTube, listening to our audio podcast on Spotify or Apple Podcasts, or become a free subscriber to this very Substack. Every bit counts.