The Trump "War Plan" Leak JUST got Worse | Does it Matter?

The Atlantic story has more updates. Now

all of a sudden we're getting reports

that there were actually potentially

sensitive military details provided. But

now of course people are debating what

is the definition of a sensitive

military update. I mean it probably

would have to require times and the type

of weapons being used but but probably

also names and locations. How about

exact addresses? And so now there's this

huge political debate over how much is

considered how much detail is considered

a war plan. And so there are arguments

on both sides over this. But in case you

haven't gotten caught up with the whole

situation, here's the TLDDR. An Atlantic

reporter was invited to a signal group

chat with the Department of Defense and

the staff of the State Department, JD

Vance and others. And basically here's

probably the worst of it. uh which

provides

exactly that the mission is a go what

time F-18s are going to take off for

their first strike package what time

they're like that you know who's

basically getting targeted now they

don't exactly say we know this is a

Houthy group right because the whole the

whole conversation is Houthies so we

know a Houthy terrorist is being

targeted at his known location and

should be on you know the targets should

be on time in other words the package

delivery from the United States, the

rockets, the bombs. Uh, and uh,

apparently the individual was showing

uh, was meeting his girlfriend at a

known location and you know whether they

had CIA intelligence officers or

whomever determined that the individual

was there, the launch had been confirmed

and there was about a 45minute window

between uh, when the expectation was

that the strike would take place uh, and

sort of this chat about it. uh more F-18

launches and then drone strikes and

bombings. Basically an exact road map as

to when everything would occur. And so

now a lot of uh the Trump administration

staff who were arguing that hey we

didn't provide any war plans have a

little bit of egg on their face because

this does seem like a war plan. Now, in

fairness, the other side, you know, the

more Trump aligned side says, well, I

mean, you know, there isn't an actual

address given, and you know, hey, you

know, signal is not that bad. Maybe

there's just no better software. You

know, to to this I I I think we can just

be reasonable adults and look at this

and say, you know, politicians are

always going to lie to us. And I hate

that about politics. In fact, I tweeted

the following. I tweeted, "Truth and

integrity don't seem to exist in

politics. It seems you have to be a paid

liar directly or by omission to be a

politician." Uh, this is true on both

sides, right? Democrats and Republicans.

I mean, I could tell you all about the

lies of our Gavin Gruom, just like, you

know, maybe you can say provide lies

about Obama or Trump or Biden or

whomever you want, right? It's a it's a

nasty nasty game. Uh like uh you

know somebody left me a comment on X the

other day because I wrote, "Wow, I

didn't have Trump pumping a memecoin on

my bingo card today." You know, because

he was pumping his Trump token. And

somebody replied, "Well, did did you

have, you know, the Biden crime family

on your bingo card?" And I'm like, you

know, it is possible. I just suck at

politics

bingo. So, like I think we can all kind

of agree it's it's just a crappy

crappy, you know, world that we're in

when it comes to politics because you

you kind of like if you don't take a

side, you piss off both sides usually. I

like to reject that argument and I

always like to stay in the middle, but

you've got Levit for example, she by the

way is perfect for Trump. She is the

perfect pitchwoman for Trump because

she, you know, she's like, "Oh, you

know, the Atlantic has conceded. These

were not war plans. Uh, you know, these

these this entire story is just another

hoax written by a Trump hater who is

well known for his sensationalist spin.

And then you get people like Mike Walls

in the chat, obviously involved deeply

here with the government. Duh.

Government official. No locations, no

sources and methods, no war plans.

Foreign partners had already been

notified that the strikes were imminent.

Bottom line, the president is protecting

America and our interest. Well, I mean,

to some extent, this is a bit of a

logical fallacy. First of all, and keep

in mind he tweeted this before the

Atlantic's. Like, really, no war plans?

Here are the war plans. You know what

Kevin's talking about? Kevin's talking

about the trade alerts and the awesome

meet Kevin membership over at meetke.com

where you can get access to all eight

courses, every trade alert, every

private liveream, every alphab uh course

member meetups later this year. You name

it, everything. Trump real estate, you

know, the Trump economics course, the

real estate course, the how to get stuff

done and be productive, the sales

course, the real estate investing

course, the stocks and sight course, all

for a low fee that you could pay on a

monthly basis, quarterly or annually if

you want. Pretty inexpensive, as low as

a buck 63 a day. This price won't last.

Uh the price will go up on this, so uh

buckle up for that. And when that price

goes up, if you've already signed up for

one of these subscriptions, you will

preserve your price. So, your price

won't go up. Only new uh signups will

have a more expensive price. So,

consider that when you're looking at uh

the Meet Kevin membership. We will have

this price go up soon. So, uh hop in

before before it does, and then you'll

be able to lock in your price. But

anyway, you know, it's a logical fallacy

to go bottom line, Trump is protecting

our America and our interests. Well,

duh. That's the president's job. But

that has no bearing on did y'all make a

mistake? Because if y'all made a

mistake, just own it. Just be like,

"Hey, you know what? We've decided to

use, I don't know, a secured advanced

protection Google chat system instead of

Signal so we can properly document our

messages." It's not that hard. you know,

pick one of the SAS companies that's all

American and promote one of them as

opposed to Signal with disappearing

messages. Uh, and then just, you know,

suck it up. Hey, we effed up. It ain't

going to happen again. You know what? We

took the opportunity to grant a contract

to an American company and spend on even

more transparent data because we value

transparency. We admit we made a

mistake. We're moving on. You know,

that's all you'd have to say. But this

idea of h, you know, no locations, no

sources, no methods, no war plans. Okay.

Well, sure. You didn't give a specific

location. We know it's Yemen because

you're in the Houthi group. No sources

and methods. All right. Well, drones and

F-18s are sources and methods, so that's

false. No war plans. Times combined with

drones and a first strike package and

second strike package sound like war

plans. So, you know, I call this one 67%

[ __ ] Okay. But but again, that's

just politicians. They all do it. And it

like I I didn't have this opinion when I

ran for governor of California in 2021.

I I had this mindset that we could bring

like just live stream every single day

and bring as much truth and transparency

as you can to politics. That was my

thought. But I I almost think that just

like everybody who's involved in

politics just gets corrupted. you get

corrupted into a liar because

transparency doesn't get rewarded

because if you're transparent, you're

just going to get sued or you're gonna

lose the next election, right? It's

crazy, you know. But then you also get

more of these updates like, you know,

here's one. Uh, you know, Wall says, uh,

hey JD Vance, the building we targeted

collapsed. Multiple positive IDs.

Amazing job. JD Vance is like, what?

Mike Michael Walls, sorry, typing too

fast. The first target, their top

missile guy. We had positive idea of him

walking into his girlfriend's building

and now it's collapsed. Well, so is the

NASDAQ 100 right now. But anyway, JD

Vance, excellent. This is also kind of

like a very bizarre conversation to be

reading, but it's sort of like the

nature of war because it's like, hey,

y'all just like literally collapsed

maybe an apartment building or whatever

it was. I mean, I guess I suppose it

could just be I mean, when they say

building, it doesn't appear to be a

house, but anyway. Uh, excellent. just

seems to be, you know, kind of a brash

response, but again, this is probably

the nature of war. Uh, and so, you know,

then you've got Tulsi Gabbard arguing,

well, okay, you know, basically, maybe

maybe certain things were said that

shouldn't have been said, but you know

what? It's up to the Secretary of

Defense to classify or

declassify. Like,

okay. All right. So like this stuff just

drives me nuts because this this is just

on steroids showing us how frankly no

matter what kind of politician you are

just the nature of being a politician

makes you dishonest it seems like

because you have to be for your base. Uh

and it's interesting because you know

you see this a lot with Elon Musk. I

call him Mr. First Reaction now. Uh, you

know, I I love them from from an

engineer and vision for the future point

of view. You know, Tesla, SpaceX,

Neurolink. I I think these are some of

the coolest things of our time. You

know, it's like the Albert Einstein of

our days. But, you know, this

involvement into politics has really

turned him into kind of a slanderer of

his competitors and and a hater. I mean,

look at this now. Extremely important

difference. X AI and his white castle.

ironic he chose sort of a white castle

but maximally truth seeeking AI and then

Google open AI and you know the others

Meta Oracle what he's bagged on all of

them trained to lie and be politically

correct which is interesting because you

know when you used to ask Grock who was

the biggest information spreader in the

world Grock would reply it was Elon Musk

well now it doesn't reply that way

anymore and somebody called out the

Grock staff have for this at XAI and

they called him out constantly calling

Sam a swindler but then making sure your

own AI does under no circumstances call

Elon Musk a swindler and explicitly

telling it to disregard sources that do

so is so effing funny I can't XAI rather

than disputing that they no longer allow

Grock to call Elon Musk a misinformation

spreader replies with you are

overindexing on an employee pushing a

change to the prompt that they thought

would help without asking anyone at the

company for confirmation. In other

words, sorry, some random staffer at

XAI made Grock [ __ ] on Elon a little bit

less and it wasn't the staffer's fault.

They were just doing their job like the

system was designed and yeah, it just so

happens to no longer call Elon a

misinformation special which is

really I mean they basically

admitted this is a tacid admission that

they changed it you know that they

changed their their algo for what's said

about Elon. So I decided to ask Gro 3

beta today. Does Musk spread

disinformation or is he mostly truthful

in his post? Lately I've heard people

call him Mr. first reaction as he echoes

comments that promote his cause or rile

up his base. But I'm not sure if I

should believe that. Uh, and this is

Grock's full reply right here, which I

thought was really interesting because

if you look at Grock's full uh uh

response here, I highlighted some of the

items. Must posting habit on X,

especially in recent years, shows a

pattern. He often reacts quickly to

trending topics, amplifies content that

align with aligns with his views or

interests, and doesn't always pause to

verify details. All right, I totally

agree with that, by the way. Totally

agree. But what's actually interesting

here is listen to this. Okay, I asked,

"Is Musk truthful?" And its reply, "It's

tough to pin down a definitive answer

about whether or not Musk spreads

disinformation or is mostly truthful in

his post because it depends on how you

define

truthful." Oh my god. The Grock

AI is now going to help us question,

well, what what actually is truth? This

is like robots taking over the world.

Like, no, no, no. You know what? You

might think they lied, but but wait a

minute. Which truth are we talking about

here? The truth or the

truth? It Grock literally goes on to

this section here. Critics point to

moments like his 2023 tweet calling him

an anti-semitic conspiracy

theory calling an anti-semitic

conspiracy theory the actual truth. Uh

he later apologized sort of or his

sharing of a fake headline about Trump

and Hitler in 2024 which he deleted

after he got called out. These suggest a

willingness to boost narratives that fit

his own world we world view even if

they're thin on facts. On the flip side,

Musk's fans argue he's just a guy

thinking out loud. He's not a news

outlet. They say his truth is more about

challenging the mainstream narrative

than sticking to nitpicky details. This

is so interesting because now the Grock

AI has been sort of transformed into

this this like hey you know like it's

not his job to tell you what the truth

is. It's not his job to nitpick the

details. So you know it's not lying it's

just it's just encouraging your own

world

view. Um, okay. So, then Grock says,

"So, does he spread disinformation?"

Yes, sometimes, especially when he's

reacting faster, playing to his base.

So, you still have a little bit of

edgginess here on Musk. Uh, is he mostly

truthful? Depends if you mean true to

his own perspective or if you mean

factually rigorous. Okay. I' I've never

seen this before. I've I've never asked

somebody for the truth and then had them

say, "Oh, well, you know, the truth

actually depends on if you're talking

about true to himself or like factually

true." Look, if you're like a mature

adult with an IQ of at least 70, you

should be scratching your head going

right now and saying, "This this is

loony." Like, this politics is turning

the world absolutely loony. And I have

no idea where this world is going to

go. Sympathetic chimp says gaslighting

robots. Yeah, seriously. That's that's

exactly what this is. And it's scary

because it makes you wonder like

honestly I try to use AI very very

little because I think there's going to

this freaking wheel sucks. Hold on. I

got these wheels for 18 bucks off

Amazon and they won't stay still. Gosh,

switch wheels. There we go. Oh, that's

so much better.

So, I try not to use when I research

artificial intelligence because it

forces me still to do the hard work. And

to me, it actually it it's easier for me

to learn and understand when I'm just,

you know, when when I'm actually doing a

lot of the research myself or really

fully formulating my own opinions and

I'm fact-checking them because it sort

of connects, I feel like, more synapses

in your brain than just sort of reading

a summary. And that's why I try to share

that in-depth perspective with you,

which is hard to do in short form

content or, you know, zingy tweets or

tweets or whatever. Uh but really uh

this is you know it makes you wonder

where is the world going to go if if we

can sort of edit the way chat bots

function to sort of make you question

what even the definition of truth

is bizarre. So we're going in a very

weird

direction. So, if I had to zingily

summarize this, uh, I guess the way I

would summarize this, uh, is, um, how

would we do

this? Probably say something like Elon

Musk's own Grock is now redefining what

the truth

is. Grock says when it comes to

determining whether Elon Musk spreads

disinformation or not, quote, "It

depends. if you mean true to his

perspectives or factually rigorous. Yes.

Now all of a sudden we're in a world

where the definition of true and fact

depends on what your political alignment

is. I'm not sure what the direction of

this is going to be in the long term. So

I mean I think that's that's kind of the

world we're in right now. Uh, and uh, I

don't know how I feel about it, but uh,

I I actually feel pretty conflicted

about it, but uh, this gives you a

little bit of an update on the Atlantic

story. Again, my opinion, it's sort of

like advice. If I could give practical

advice, which you could apply for, you

know, in your own world as well, use

Google chat. Use Google chat, use

advanced protection, use security keys.

You could even if you ever text people

on iPhone, you know, you could verify

people's identity by co, you know, like

they they give you little keys and you

can sort of link them. So if there are

any changes to somebody's profile, they

become unverified. You put little check

marks on your trusted contact, so to

speak. It's very fascinating. Uh and so

I do that with, you know, Lauren or

employees or otherwise. Uh and and the

only way you could do that is in person,

which is great. Uh so anyway, that

that's something to consider. But uh

there are practical ways to be more

rigorous and I honestly think the Trump

administration could take an opportunity

here to strengthen a their transparency

but also you know their operational

security because in the Atlantic stories

you multiple times hear them talk about

hey OBSCAC opsac opsac operational

security and it's so ironic because

they're literally talking about

operational security while failing at

operational security. Now, you know,

again, a lot of supporters for Trump are

arguing, hey, this is all just fake news

anyway because who cares? Donald Trump

is uh, you know, doing what's best for

the country and, you know, nothing

happened. It's not like the reporter

sent these messages to the Houthies, in

which case he'd be a traitor. I don't

know if that's the point, you know. I

think I think if the CEO of JP Morgan

and Chase gave me his login to access

everyone's bank account in the United

States who has a Chase account, you

know, like and then I logged in and I'm

like, "Oh my gosh, I see everybody's

bank accounts in the United States." It

does

that make Jamie Diamond's failure any

less bad? No. It's horribly bad and he'd

probably get fired as CEO. You probably

should see some discipline here as well.

Uh, you know, under any other

administration, I bet you would, but I

bet you the CEO of Jamie of JP Morgan

would lose their job if they did that.

Now, if somebody's like, "Oh, well, you

know, Kevin would have to have been a

criminal to leak the what he saw on

those bank accounts." And it's like,

okay, but that's a logical fallacy.

You're shifting the problem. You You're

going from, oh, they committed an error.

Yeah. Well, it doesn't matter because

that would only be a problem if another

person made a mistake or committed a

crime. But that doesn't resolve the fact

that a massive mistake happened. So,

uh, you know, but then again, the nature

of politics is people have to put on

their political veil and say, "Oh, well,

you know, I benefit from promoting Trump

or Musk, so I must continue to do that.

Uh, and I think this is problematic. You

get a lot of this, by the way, in uh,

and I see a lot of this, especially on

X, a lot of people posting things like,

"Oh my gosh, look, you know, buy uh, buy

Tesla is is skyrocketing on the Google

Trends search results." Yep. Well, maybe

that's because Trump buys Tesla

skyrocketed when he bought a Tesla. So,

and we have to be able to isolate these

things. But if you say that, you're

unpopular to the Tesla crowd. You know,

oh, you know, why you gotta be negative

about a positive story? Uh, and you

don't make a lot of friends with it

because the bears are already bears. So,

that's where social media sort of skews

the desire to actually share what

actually is the truth. Because in a

realistic example here, if the fact is

with certainty, if the certain fact is

Tesla search results are skyrocketing

because Trump buys Tesla is

skyrocketing. If that is the fact, then

the claim that oh Tesla scale sales must

be skyrocketing because by Tesla is

skyrocketing in the Google search

results is false. The claim is factually

false if it is true that they're only

skyrocketing because of Donald Trump

buying a Tesla. Now then you could make

a further claim that because Donald

Trump bought a Tesla search search

results might continue to be high for by

Tesla because now more people want to

join the bandwagon. Okay, but that's a

different

claim. And so that sort of argumentation

uh is very difficult I think for people

to process sometimes uh who who who

don't want to you know put in the effort

because it's not part of first reaction.

Uh even even using the word

argumentation implies argument like

people yelling at each other. But if you

ever taken or studied logic you

understand argument is simply you know

providing a claim and evidence. Uh a

well structured argument is one that

follows a logical flow. This is my

claim. Here's my evidence. Here's my

conclusion.

Therefore, that's an

argument. Uh, so that's my take on this

Atlantic story. Uh, and, uh, now it's

time to move on to the next story. Why

not advertise these things that you told

us here? I feel like nobody else knows

about this. We'll we'll try a little

advertising and see how it goes.

Congratulations, man. You have done so

much. People love you. People look up to

you. Kevin Praat there, financial

analyst and YouTuber. Meet Kevin. Always

great to get your take.