Episode 24: The Rest of the Team: Trump’s Whisper Network and the Breach That Followed

Episode Summary:
Some of the most powerful figures in Trump’s national security circle don’t hold formal titles. They don’t lead federal agencies or appear in press briefings — but their influence is vast. In Part One of this episode, we meet the "whisperers" behind Trump’s authoritarian shift: Stephen Miller, Russell Vought, Ric Grenell, and Peter Navarro. 

In Part Two, we dive into Signalgate — a stunning security breach where top officials coordinated a military strike using an unsecured messaging app. Sensitive information was leaked. Allies were outraged. 

In This Episode:

Part One: The Whisperers

• Stephen Miller: Architect of surveillance and domestic control, expanding Trump’s power through legal maneuvers and fear-based policy.
• Russell Vought: The budget master behind Project 2025, weaponizing federal spending to punish dissent and reward loyalty.
• Ric Grenell: Diplomatic disruptor with a vague but powerful title — bypassing institutions and politicizing foreign affairs.
• Peter Navarro: Economic nationalist pushing isolationist policies under the banner of national security.

Part Two: Signalgate

• The Breach: Top officials used a Signal group chat to coordinate real-time military operations — including sensitive CIA details.
• The Response: Denials, deflections, and a released transcript that shattered the administration’s narrative.
• The Strike Zone: A costly, ineffective mission that revealed poor planning and wasteful execution.
• The Fallout: Damaged alliances, legal violations, institutional breakdowns — and a military spread dangerously thin.
• What It Reveals: A government running on loyalty over law, secrecy over strategy, and denial over discipline.

Why It Matters:
This is the conclusion of our three-part national security series. We’ve traced how Trump’s second term is redefining what it means to protect the country — not through competence, but through control. From gutting institutions to empowering unqualified loyalists, this administration is building a security state designed to serve one man, not the nation.

Next Episode: 
We’ll turn our attention to another urgent issue — one that’s probably unfolding right now. Stay tuned.

Transcript

Bella Goode  00:04

Hi everyone. It's Bella Goode, and I'm your host for today's show. In the last episode, we focused on the people holding formal positions of power inside Trump's Administration's National Security arena, from the Secretary of Defense to the Director of National Intelligence, we looked at their backgrounds, their alignment with Trump, and how their lack of experience or extreme views had reshaped what it means to lead in this arena. But there's another layer to this story. Not everyone shaping national security policy has a title that shows up on an organization chart. Some of the most influential players in this administration operate behind the scenes. They're not in charge of specific agencies, but they're helping define the rules, the threats and the responses. They're writing the memos, shaping the legal theories and pushing the strategies that others then carry out. 

Bella Goode  01:03

Now you've heard of the horse whisperer, haven't you? How about the dog whisperer? Well, we now have the Trump whisperers. There's more of them. There's at least four of them, actually. These guys are just as dangerous as the people with official titles, and sometimes even more so. Today's episode is divided into two parts. First, we're going to profile four of these most influential behind the scenes figures in Trump's National Security world. They be; Stephen Miller, Russell Vought, Ric Grennell and Peter Navarro. Each of them brings their own ideology and tactics, but together, they are part of a much broader shift towards secrecy, centralization and authoritarian control. 

Bella Goode  01:51

Now the second half of the episode is going to focus on Signal Gate, the security breach that exposes just how reckless and unprepared this team really is. This is about the people in charge. It's about the systems and the processes that they're building and what they're gutting and what happens when things start to corrode. So let's start with Stephen Miller, one of the four whisperers that we're going to talk about today. He's the Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and Homeland Security Advisor. That's a bit of a mouthful. Stephen Miller may not run a federal agency, but when it comes to Trump's National Security Policy, he is one of the most influential figures in the administration as Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and homeland security, Miller plays a central role in decisions around immigration, surveillance, civil liberties and emergency powers. His ideas are clear, America should be locked down. Threats are everywhere, and the President should have maximum authority to respond. 

Bella Goode  02:58

Miller rose through far right politics, from working for Michele Bachmann years ago to Jeff Sessions a while ago and became a key player in Trump's first term, pushing policies like the Muslim ban and family separations at the border. Now he's one of the main architects behind the efforts to expand detention powers, reinterpret surveillance laws and redefine domestic dissent as a national security threat. He has also played a key role in defending Trump's new tariffs, framing trade policy as a tool of economic warfare. Miller is not just influencing policy, he's helping build the legal structure for a national security state rooted in fear, power, consolidation and authoritarian logic. He is not on camera much, but his fingerprints are everywhere. 

Bella Goode  03:57

Another one of the whisperers is Russell Vought, and he's back in the White House, this time with more power and a bigger mandate. As Director of the Office of Management and Budget, the OMB, Vought oversees one of the most powerful agencies in the federal government. His job is to shape and manage the $6.75trillion dollar federal budget, direct spending across every department and to make sure that Trump's policies are enforced throughout the executive branch. That includes far more than just writing numbers into spreadsheets. Vought controls the purse strings for the entire federal government, and uses that power to reward loyalty, punish dissent and restructure how Washington works. Under his leadership, OMB is driving massive cuts to social programs, ramping up deregulation and pushing policies like Schedule F, which would reclassify 1000s of career civil servants so that they can more easily be fired and replaced with political appointees. 

Bella Goode  05:06

Vought is also one of the architects behind Project 2025. The broader plan to centralize presidential power and overhaul the federal bureaucracy. In his view, national security isn't just about foreign threats, it's about purging internal resistance, and that means defunding programs that track perceived enemies at home, including journalists, activists and government employees seen as insufficiently supportive of Trump, he is weakening oversight agencies and turning federal departments into tools of executive control. He's not a bomb thrower and he's not a showman, but Vought is quietly executing one of the most radical restructurings of government in modern American history, and he has a budget to match. 

Bella Goode  05:59

Okay, the next one is Ric Grennell. May also- may not hold a formal cabinet title, but he remains one of Trump's most trusted messengers, especially when it comes to foreign policy and intelligence. He's been given a vague but powerful role, Special Envoy for special missions. Sounds like it was made up, and it probably was, that allows him to operate outside of traditional diplomatic channels. He has made back door deals, bypass the State Department, and used his position to insert politics into cultural institutions like the Kennedy Center, where he is aggressively dismantling diversity initiatives. 

Bella Goode  06:41

Grennell's tenure as ambassador to Germany and acting director of national intelligence was marked by controversy, but also by loyalty to Trump of protocol. Now his influence comes through informal access, private diplomacy and behind the scenes messaging, shaping how the administration frames global events and responds to dissent. Grennell isn't building systems like Vought or legal frameworks like Miller, but he knows how to work the media. He knows how to pressure allies, and he uses soft power to get results, often for Trump's personal or political benefit. 

Bella Goode  07:21

And the fourth Whisperer is Peter Navarro. He also doesn't have an official title in this administration, but he's still shaping its worldview. Navarro sees economic policy as national security policy, and he's behind much of the logic driving the trade war, the isolationist turn and the idea that globalization is a threat to American power. He believes that the US is in a state of economic war, and that anything short of total self reliance is a vulnerability that thinking informs everything from tariffs on allies to crackdowns on foreign students, investment restrictions. 

Bella Goode  08:04

Navarro's rhetoric blends Cold War nationalism with conspiratorial claims around China, academics and tritorious corporations. He's pushed for using emergency powers to control supply chains, to expel foreign researchers and to seize assets tied to adversaries. He's not in the Situation Room, but he is everywhere in the messaging. Navarro is a bridge between economic extremism and the National Security paranoia, helping justify policies that isolate the US and erode Global Trust. Taken together, these four whispers, Miller, Vought, Grennell and Navarro, show us how power in Trump's administration really works, not necessarily through process, but it is through proximity, not through expertise, but it is through ideology. And when you pair them with the official players we covered in Episode 23 you get a national security team that is fiercely loyal, deeply unqualified and dangerously unconstrained. 

Bella Goode  09:12

Trump spent his first term fuming about the so called Deep State and the people who tried to rein them in. This time, he's made sure that there's no obstacles. He's finally built the team that he's always wanted, one that follows orders, protects his image and keeps him the one in control. So what could possibly happen if this team faced a real world crisis? Well, that brings us to the most serious security failure of Trump's second term thus far, Signal Gate. 

Bella Goode  09:46

So back in March, the public learned that top members of the Trump administration had used a private signal chat to coordinate US military strikes in Yemen, that chat included real time. Details, targets, launch windows, weapon systems, and even identification of a CIA source, and it included someone who never should have been there, a journalist. Jeffrey Goldberg, not only a journalist, but the editor of The Atlantic magazine. Apparently he was mistaken for someone else. The breach went on for several weeks. So on these Signal chats, they openly discussed attack timelines and coordination all through an unsecured app that automatically deletes messages unless someone stops it. So Goldberg had access to serious information. 

 Bella Goode  10:43

At first, he held back. Actually, he did the decent thing. He did publish a story, but the most sensitive parts of the conversation, things like exact strike times, names or even CIA sources, were not released because he didn't want to endanger anyone. But when the administration officials began calling him a liar and denying that anything sensitive had been shared, he changed course. He released the full transcript, and once people saw what was actually being said, including specific targets, launch windows and real time updates, the administration's story fell apart. Still, the administration's first move was denial. Then came deflection. Officials claim nothing was classified that had been shared. They blamed Goldberg, they attacked the media. They insisted that it wasn't a big deal, just unfortunate optics, whatever that means. They claimed the information wasn't technically classified, and they hoped the public would just move on, but the facts were hard to ignore. 

Bella Goode  11:50

Outside experts confirmed that the information shared would normally be classified. Former officials warned that it could have put pilots and troops in danger. Allies were furious, especially Israel, whose intelligence had reportedly been included in the chat and yet there was no serious investigation. Attorney General Pam Bondi said that she wouldn't pursue charges. The FBI stayed silent. Trump stood by his team. No one was fired. And then there was the actual military operation itself. The thing that they were coordinating through Signal reporting from the New York Times shows that the strikes on the Houthis have been largely ineffective. Most of the Houthi weapons infrastructure is underground and heavily fortified. The targets above ground weren't especially strategic, but the administration still used some of the Pentagon's most advanced and expensive munitions. The operation has already cost the US about a billion dollars, and it has drained weapon stockpiles to the point where military planners are worried about readiness for a future conflict in China. 

Bella Goode  13:06

Doesn't sound like this was a small operation, it sounds like it was a pretty large operation. So the chat wasn't just reckless. The mission itself that was planned turned out to be wasteful, performative and strategically questionable. The fallout is still growing, with allies losing trust the US readiness in question, and a military stretched thin by costly and ineffective operations. Sensitive strike information, including names of CIA sources and real time launch windows, was shared in an unsecured group chat, if that information has leaked into the wrong hands, whether a foreign spy or just someone shared- sharing screenshots online US pilots and intelligence officers could have been an immediate danger. Officials say that we got lucky this time. 

Bella Goode  13:58

But luck isn't a security strategy, there's the damage to us credibility. America relies on close relationships with allies to share intelligence and coordinate global security efforts, but after this, countries like the UK and Canada and Israel are reportedly reevaluating what they're willing to share. Some have already started limiting sensitive co-operation. That's a huge problem. Once trust is broken, it's hard to rebuild, and our security depends on those partnerships. There's also a legal and institutional breakdown. The Federal Records Act requires that all official government communication be preserved, and that includes messages related to military actions, but Signal has a feature that automatically deletes messages after a set time. That means that some of the most critical national security conversations of the year may already be gone with no trace and no accountability. 

Bella Goode  15:00

And there's the military cost to the strikes themselves as revealed above. And for what a billion dollars, a flashy moment, a few emojis, a mission dubbed a success in a chat thread, but with little to show for it. It was a show of strength on paper, but it did more to expose weakness than project power. So when we talk about fallout, we're talking about a long term loss of trust, growing gaps in military preparedness and a clear sign that the people now running national security are playing pretend while the consequences are very real. 

Bella Goode  15:37

Signal Gate reveals what happens when institutions are undermined, when they're gutted, when loyalty is prioritized over expertise, and when the rules are treated as optional. It shows us what a government looks like, when people act with impunity, when mistakes aren't corrected but buried, when security protocols are ignored, not out of ignorance, but because the people in charge don't believe they need to follow them, and it shows how fragile the system is when guardrails depend on people doing the right thing. The story matters, because it wasn't just about messaging apps or operational mistakes. It puts lives at risk. It undermines trust with our allies. It damages the credibility of our military and intelligence communities, and it revealed a culture of carelessness and denial at the highest levels of government. Every breach like this chips away at something bigger and our ability to function as a trustworthy global power and our ability to govern ourselves with integrity. Signal Gate is more than a scandal, it's a warning. 

Bella Goode  16:48

So that brings us to the end of our national security series. Over the past three episodes, we've taken a close look at what national security is supposed to mean and what it's become under Donald Trump's leadership in Episode 22 we laid the foundation national security isn't just wars and weapons. It's about defending the Constitution, upholding democratic norms and keeping American people safe in a changing world. That means protecting against cyber attacks, disinformation, pandemics, the climate disasters, not just missiles and tanks. We looked at how past administrations built systems of checks, expertise and cooperation across agencies, and we showed how those systems are now being dismantled, piece by piece. 

Bella Goode  17:38

In Episode 23 we looked at the people now holding the reins from unqualified political appointees to loyalist ideologues. Trump's National Security team is a mix of inexperience and extremism. We saw how the traditional guardrails of competence and credibility have been replaced by performative leadership TV personalities and political litmus tests. The result is a hollowed out security apparatus, one that looks strong on paper, perhaps, but lacks the knowledge discipline and strategy to deal with real world threats. 

Bella Goode  18:16

And now in Episode 24 we've explored what happens when you put that kind of team in charge. Signal Gate has revealed just how far we've fallen. It wasn't only a technical failure or a one off mistake, it was a direct result of a culture that rewards loyalty over judgment, secrecy over transparency and spin over truth. The fallout is still growing, loss of trust with allies, growing doubts about us readiness and a military stretched thin by expensive, ineffective shows of force. A colleague of mine who spent 40 years in national security, put it plainly. He told me, "The use of signal to discuss war plans was a juvenile mistake made by folks with little to no previous experience in government. It just reflects the amateur hour nature of the administration's approach to foreign policy."

But he went further. "More important is the weakening of our foreign policy institutions, especially at the State Department, defense and intelligence agencies, cutting experts out of the process doesn't just sideline good analysis, it sends a chill through these agencies and makes us all feel less safe." He warned that the destruction of US aid Trump's erratic tariff policies and his reckless threats allies and bizarre territorial ambitions, like seizing parts of Canada, where building a beach resort in Gaza have created confusion, instability and a weakened America. In his words, "The confusion caused by the abrupt policy changes and irrational institutional cuts will probably make Americans less secure and less prosperous." 

Bella Goode  20:03

So where does that leave us? It leads us in a dangerous place, not just less safe from the outside threats, but less protected from the ones coming from the inside our own government. It leaves us with a White House that views accountability as disloyalty and expertise as the enemy, and it leaves us with a question that each of us will have to answer. If this is how power is being used today, what kind of future are we willing to accept tomorrow? Because national security is no longer just about protecting borders, it's about protecting the soul of the country. And that brings us to the end of this three part series. Join us for another deep dive topic next week, and in the meantime, the full transcript and links are online, and you can leave your comments. This isn't passive listening, it's political dialog. You can also leave a review about this episode. It can help shape where this podcast goes next until next time, stay engaged, stay informed, and most importantly, stay in the fight. This is Bella Goode, signing off.