Newsletter: Who Deleted the CIA Director’s Signal Messages?

The revelations that Signal messages were likely deleted despite a court order for their preservation comes as the Trump administration is in a confrontation with the judiciary that threatens our system of checks and balances.

Inquiriespress@americanoversight.org

Our lawsuit against the Trump administration for its use of Signal to communicate about military plans uncovered damning new evidence this week of the administration’s disdain for federal record-keeping rules and basic accountability.

The revelations were revealed in the court-ordered supplemental declarations filed earlier this week by Trump agencies regarding their efforts to preserve messages from the Signal group chat. The declaration from the CIA revealed that not only did the agency fail to preserve any messages, but that someone had proactively deleted messages — potentially even after a court order.

We put together a timeline of the CIA’s actions alongside the various moments in our lawsuit, including the judge’s March 27 order that messages be preserved. Not only did the CIA not initiate action on saving the messages until March 31, the day of the court’s deadline, but there were also apparently two administrative setting changes on the days before and after the order was issued.

We don’t know what those changes were, or who made them, but the modification or deletion of electronically stored information that is the subject of litigation risks violating the federal rules of procedure, established case law, and a court’s direct order telling them to preserve evidence — and carries the potential for sanctions.
Here, we break down the findings from the latest court filings, and explain the key unanswered questions we still have, such as who had deleted the messages from the CIA director’s device, and what exactly those setting changes were.
“The administration’s brazen indifference to our national security and the safety of our men and women in uniform in this matter is now compounded by its blatant disregard for a co-equal branch of the government,” said our Chioma Chukwu.

This all comes as the Trump administration is facing contempt of court for resisting orders related to its harsh immigration and deportation actions, including its refusal to seek the return of Maryland man Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was wrongly deported to a prison in El Salvador.

Beyond defiance of court orders, President Trump’s testing of the bounds of executive power has led to numerous other abuses of office, among them his attacks on the legal profession.
Trump has issued several executive actions targeting specific law firms for their hiring decisions or for their work on issues in opposition to his policies.
The effort to punish firms for their work is a direct threat to First Amendment rights and a brazen attack on the rule of law. We joined more than 20 other organizations in filing amicus briefs in support of three large firms that have challenged the president’s retributive actions, outlining how those abuses of power create a chilling effect across the entire legal profession. Read more here.

Newsletter: Who Deleted the CIA Director’s Signal Messages?

Other Stories We’re Following