Occam's razor I lean towards a theory of "Signalgate" being intentional.

This is literally the opposite of Occam's razor. He is arguing for a more complicated explanation, not a simpler one.

His theory is based on the fact that the people in the room know how to use Signal and were foreign policy heavy hitters.

These are all heavy-hitters in the admin and most former military with the training and experience around handling sensitive information. .......Pretending they are clueless about operational security doesn’t pass the common sense test.

Then somehow he is surprised that it wasn't an ordinary group chat

Another sign that this was a calculated move was the fact that these messages sent in the group chat are long. It was odd how fully-formed the texts were crafted, as if bullet points on the ideas and policy goals for the administration. This kind of detailed discussion is usually reserved for foreign policy strategy meetings, not GC comm

Boy oh boy! Does he miss the point here. This is not an ordinary group chat. It's a meeting of the Principals Committee. That's one level down from a full National Security Council meeting. The principal being the head of the agency. You didn't get the deputy from the state department you got Marco Rubio. You didn't get the deputy at the CIA you got Director John L. Ratcliffe.

So it's completely unsurprising you got well-formed and thought out policy goals. They have staff working on this. It was obviously copied into signal. They weren't making this up on the fly. They were stating a known position.