The Trump administration accidentally texted military plans to a journalist. The White House says it's fine.
The Trump administration accidentally texted an Atlantic journalist its plans to bomb Yemen last week. It seems obtaining confidential information on U.S. military operations is now easier than ever.
On Monday, The Atlantic's editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg reported that he had been inadvertently added to a Signal group chat with several apparent U.S. government officials, including Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Fox News host turned Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth. Goldberg received the invitation to the group last Thursday, two days after he'd accepted a connection request from an account ostensibly belonging to national security advisor Michael Waltz.
Signal is a secure messaging app with end-to-end encryption, making it popular among journalists, activists, whistleblowers, and others for whom privacy is a primary concern. As such, it isn't completely bizarre that a politician might reach out to a journalist via this avenue.
You May Also Like
However, it's far less usual for U.S. government officials to use Signal to plan military operations. Such highly sensitive information would typically be discussed either in person or via the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet), the U.S. government's secured computer network system intended for sharing such classified information. Employing a messaging system that's also open to civilians is highly unorthodox, to say the least.
As such, Goldberg initially had "very strong doubts" about the authenticity of the group chat. He wrote that he couldn't believe U.S. officials would communicate about war plans on Signal, nor that a U.S. national security advisor would carelessly add him to such a chat.
However, he was soon convinced of the Signal chat's authenticity after U.S. airstrikes on Houthi targets in Yemen took place on Saturday. The chat filled with celebratory messages and emojis within minutes, including a fist, American flag, and fire from Waltz. Two hours prior, a message from Hegseth in the Signal chat had shared the weapons, targets, and timing of the planned strikes.
"The information contained in [the Signal messages], if they had been read by an adversary of the United States, could conceivably have been used to harm American military and intelligence personnel, particularly in the broader Middle East, Central Command’s area of responsibility," wrote Goldberg.
This prompted Goldberg to leave the Signal group, as well as reach out to various U.S. officials about it.
U.S. officials confirm the Signal group chat was real
The U.S. National Security Council (NSC) has since confirmed the Signal chat's authenticity, though did its best to downplay the serious implications and give the egregious breach of security a positive spin.
"This appears to be an authentic message chain, and we are reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain," NSC spokesman Brian Hughes wrote in a statement to The Atlantic. "The thread is a demonstration of the deep and thoughtful policy coordination between senior officials. The ongoing success of the Houthi operation demonstrates that there were no threats to troops or national security."
Of course, the mere success of an operation doesn't prove that there was never any threat at all.
Despite the blunder, it initially seems as though U.S. officials involved in the Signal chat won't face any serious repercussions. Republicans have quickly come to their defence, with Speaker Mike Johnson rejecting the possibility that Waltz or Hegseth might face disciplinary action.
"What you did see, though, I think, was top-level officials doing their job, doing it well and executing on a plan with precision," said Johnson.
The White House has also publicly stood by them, with press secretary Karoline Leavitt saying in a statement that "President Trump continues to have the utmost confidence in his national security team, including national security adviser Mike Waltz."
However, POLITICO reports that internal discussions among White House officials are considering ejecting Waltz, with Trump to make the decision within the next few days.
For his part, Trump took to his social media platform Truth Social to deride The Atlantic, posting a link to an article from conservative satirical website The Babylon Bee entitled "4D Chess: Genius Trump Leaks War Plans To 'The Atlantic' Where No One Will Ever See Them." He also shared a screenshot of an X post from his close advisor Elon Musk, in which the billionaire shared the same article and wrote, "Best place to hide a dead body is page 2 of The Atlantic magazine, because no one ever goes there."
Hegseth specifically lashed out at Goldberg, accusing him of "peddling hoaxes" and attempting to discredit him despite the Signal messages having been confirmed to be authentic. However, Hegseth also broke rank by outright denying The Atlantic's report.
"Nobody was texting war plans, and that's all I have to say about that," Hegseth said on Monday.
Meanwhile, Democrats are criticising the incident, with some calling for an investigation.
"Incompetence so severe that it could have gotten Americans killed," Rep. Seth Moulton wrote on X. "There is no world in which this information should have been shared in non-secure channels."
JD Vance badmouthing Elon Musk was a deepfake, but the Signal chat was not
Excluding information which Goldberg noted could cause harm, his Atlantic article provided a thorough account of the messages exchanged in the Signal group chat. Interestingly, this included Vance expressing some disagreement with President Donald Trump — a rarity for him as of late.
Vance expressed dissent about the planned attacks, stating that bombing the Houthis in Yemen to defend international shipping routes would be "bailing Europe out." His reasoning was that a larger percentage of Europe's trade passes through the Suez Canal as compared to the U.S.' trade.
"I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now," Vance reportedly wrote on Signal. "I am willing to support the consensus of the team and keep these concerns to myself."
The vice president's private opinions recently came to attention via a separate incident, with AI-generated audio of Vance criticising Musk going viral over the weekend. In the clip, the deepfaked vice president's voice stated that Musk was "cosplaying as this great American leader" and "making us look bad."
Vance responded to the audio on X, calling it "a fake AI-generated clip," while his communications director William Martin stated that it is "100% fake and most certainly not the Vice President." Several deepfake detection tools and companies have also concluded that the audio was likely generated by AI.
In contrast, Vance's Signal messages have been confirmed to be authentic.
"Vice President Vance unequivocally supports this administration’s foreign policy," Martin said in a statement to The Atlantic. "The President and the Vice President have had subsequent conversations about this matter and are in complete agreement."
The vice president and president disagreeing behind closed doors is a much different matter to doing so in the public eye, where a united front is important. Even so, it's an interesting look at the Trump administration's emoji-filled internal communications, disagreements, and military planning — as well as the ill-advised platform on which they're conveyed.
Topics Cybersecurity Donald Trump
