In a breach of protocol that has sent shockwaves through Washington, a leaked text message thread involving high-ranking Trump administration officials has exposed sensitive military plans and ignited a firestorm of controversy.
This incident, which started on March 11th and is still unfolding right now, has raised serious questions about national security, communication practices, and accountability within the administration.
The News Reporter: Jeffrey Goldberg from The Atlantic
The journalist at the center of this scandal is Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic.
On March 13, Goldberg was added to a text messaging group on an app named Signal.
Goldberg revealed that he was accidentally added to the private group chat where Trump administration officials were discussing critical military operations.
Who Else Was on the Text Message Thread?
The text message thread included prominent figures in the Trump administration. Key participants were:
Pete Hegseth, Secretary of Defense
JD Vance, Vice President
Mike Waltz, National Security Adviser (who reportedly added Goldberg to the chat)
Tulsi Gabbard, Director of National Intelligence
John Ratcliffe, CIA Director
Marco Rubio, Secretary of State
Susie Wiles, Trump’s Chief of Staff
Stephen Miller (suspected, identified as “S M” in some reports)
This group, often referred to as the “Houthi PC small group,” was convened to coordinate a military operation targeting Houthi rebels in Yemen.
What Information Was Leaked in the Text Messages?
The leaked messages contained operational details about impending U.S. airstrikes against Houthi militants in Yemen.
According to Goldberg, the information shared by Pete Hegseth included specifics about targets, and the types of weapons to be deployed.
Beyond the military plans, the thread also revealed candid and disparaging remarks about European allies.
Quoted Messages from the Leak
Here are some of the verbatim exchanges reported from the thread:
JD Vance: “If you think we should do it let’s go. I just hate bailing Europe out again.”
Stephen Miller (suspected as “S M”): “As I heard it, the president was clear: green light, but we soon make clear to Egypt and Europe what we expect in return. If the US successfully restores freedom of navigation at great cost there needs to be some further economic gain extracted in return.”
Pete Hegseth: “Agree” (in response to Miller’s message).
These quotes highlight not only the operational discussions but also the administration’s frustration with international partners, particularly Europe, which they accused of not pulling their weight.
The Text Message App Used: Signal App
The administration officials used Signal, a popular encrypted messaging app, to conduct these sensitive discussions. While Signal is known for its privacy features, it is a commercial platform not authorized for transmitting classified or sensitive Department of Defense (DoD) information. This choice has drawn sharp criticism, as it deviates from secure military communication protocols.
What App Should Have Been Used?
Experts argue that sensitive communications should have occurred on a secure, government-approved platform, such as the DoD’s encrypted communication systems (e.g., SIPRNet for classified data or other secure channels). Pentagon regulations explicitly prohibit the use of commercial messaging apps like Signal for non-public DoD information.
Countries’ Responses to the Leak
The leak has prompted reactions from international allies, with Europe being a focal point due to the disparaging comments made in the thread:
United Kingdom: Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s spokesperson addressed the leak during a briefing, emphasizing the UK’s contributions to joint military operations with the U.S. but refraining from directly criticizing Hegseth or Vance. The response reflects a cautious effort to maintain diplomatic.
European Union: EU diplomats have expressed concern that the leaked messages could jeopardize intelligence-sharing with the U.S., with some suggesting that trust in the Trump administration has been eroded by this incident.
These reactions underscore the diplomatic fallout and the potential chilling effect on U.S.-European relations.
The Hearing: What’s Happening Now?
On March 25, 2025, a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing is underway to address global security threats, but the leak dominated the proceedings.
Warner and others, such as Senator Ron Wyden, have called for the resignations of Hegseth and Waltz, arguing that such a breach would typically result in consequences for lower-ranking officials.
Trump stated that the presence of Goldberg in the group chat had “no impact at all” on the situation regarding the strike in Yemen.
He emphasized that Goldberg’s involvement did not influence the decision-making process in any way. The overall dynamics of the strike remained unaffected despite the news reporter’s involvement within the group discussion.
In assessing the event’s impact, it is clear that Goldberg’s inclusion was irrelevant to the outcomes of the actions taken in Yemen.
Security Issues Surrounding the Text Messages
The use of Signal for sensitive discussions presents multiple security risks:
Unauthorized Access: Adding a journalist to the chat demonstrates a failure in basic operational security (OPSEC), potentially exposing plans to unintended parties.
Commercial Platform Risks: Signal, while encrypted, is not designed to meet the stringent requirements for handling classified information, raising the possibility of interception by sophisticated adversaries like Russia or China.
Who Leaked the Thread to the Public?
The leaker, in this case, was not an insider whistleblower but rather Jeffrey Goldberg himself, who stumbled into the chat by mistake.
National Security Adviser Mike Waltz is believed to have accidentally added Goldberg’s number to the group, a blunder confirmed as authentic by National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes.
Goldberg’s decision to publish the story, while withholding some specifics to avoid further harm, thrust the incident into the public eye.
The Trump-Hegseth text message leak has exposed vulnerabilities within the administration.
With Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic breaking the story, the involvement of figures like Pete Hegseth and JD Vance, and the use of Signal instead of secure channels, this incident has sparked a heated debate about competence and accountability.
Based on the available information as of March 25, 2025, here are the latest updates regarding the Senate hearing related to the text message leak involving the Trump administration’s use of the Signal messaging app.
Key Speakers and Statements at the Senate Hearing:
CIA Director John Ratcliffe.
What He Said: During the Senate Intelligence Committee hearing, Ratcliffe testified that “no classified material was shared” in the Signal group chat. He emphasized that his communications in the chat were “entirely permissible and lawful” and did not include classified information. Ratcliffe also noted that the use of Signal is allowed in certain cases, defending the administration’s practices.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard
What She Said: Gabbard echoed Ratcliffe’s stance, testifying before the Senate Intelligence Committee that “no classified material was shared” in the group chat. Her testimony aimed to downplay the severity of the leak, aligning with the administration’s position that the incident did not compromise national security.
Senator Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas), Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee
What He Said: In his opening statement, Cotton avoided directly addressing the Signal leak, instead focusing on broader national security challenges. He criticized the intelligence community for becoming “too bureaucratic and political” and urged a recommitment to collecting clandestine intelligence. His omission of the leak was notable, given the hearing’s context, though he later appeared on Fox & Friends to discuss the hearing, indicating its significance.
Senator Ron Wyden (D-Oregon)
What He Said: At the hearing, Wyden called for the resignations of National Security Adviser Michael Waltz and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, arguing that the leak demonstrated reckless handling of sensitive information. He stated, “I’m of the view that there ought to be resignations, starting with the national security adviser and the secretary of defense,” highlighting the potential danger if such details fell into enemy hands.
Senator Mark Warner (D-Virginia), Vice Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee
What He Said: Warner described the leak as “sloppy, careless, incompetent behavior” during the hearing. He remarked that if a lower-ranking officer had shared similar secret plans, “they would be fired,” underscoring the administration’s apparent double standard. Outside the hearing, he had previously posted on social media that the administration was “playing fast and loose with our nation’s most classified info.”
Additional Context from Related Statements:
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York)
What He Said: While not speaking directly at the hearing, Schumer addressed the issue on the Senate floor on March 24, 2025, calling the leak “one of the most stunning breaches of military intelligence I have read about in a very, very long time.” On March 25, he reiterated this on the Senate floor, warning that “if these details fell into the hands of America’s enemies, it could get people killed” and severely harm military operations. He urged a full investigation.
Senator Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi), Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee
What He Said: Though not speaking at the Intelligence Committee hearing, Wicker told reporters on March 24 that he was “very concerned” about the leak and confirmed that his committee would investigate it on a bipartisan basis. This suggests potential follow-up beyond the March 25 hearing.
Representative Don Bacon (R-Nebraska)
What He Said: On March 25, Bacon told reporters he deferred to the White House on whether Waltz or Hegseth should face repercussions but called the White House’s claim that no war plans were shared “baloney.” He insisted that “classified information was put on an unclassified system,” and the administration should “own up to it,” though he dismissed the need for an Armed Services Committee investigation.
Further developments may emerge as investigations continue or additional hearings are scheduled.
As the Senate hearing unfolds and countries like the UK and EU weigh in, the fallout from this breach will likely reverberate for months, shaping how national security operates.
For the latest updates on this developing story, stay tuned as investigations deepen and the administration grapples with the consequences of the security lapse.
Leave a Reply