Jeffrey Goldberg, editor in chief of The Atlantic, was apparently included in a Trump administration group chat on Signal in which top officials debated and then discussed details of attacks against Houthi rebels in Yemen.
The initial invite to the group apparently came from national security adviser Mike Waltz. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reportedly sent the group details including weapons used, targets, and timing — two hours ahead of the attacks, which began March 15.
Others in the group were Vice President Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe.
In the stunning report, Goldberg claimed Waltz connected with him on Signal on March 11 and, two days later, he was invited to join a chain called the “Houthi PC small group,” in which they discussed strikes against the Houthi militant group in Yemen — seemingly unaware of the journalist's presence in the group.
He wrote that he initially had strong doubts the text group was real, “because I could not believe that the national-security leadership of the United States would communicate on Signal about imminent war plans.”
Goldberg also said he “could not believe that the national security adviser to the president would be so reckless as to include him in the discussions with senior U.S. officials."
He said he realized the text chain could be real after the person who was supposedly Hegseth messaged to the group that the first detonations in Yemen would be felt in two hours, at 1:45 p.m., which was in line with what took place.
Hegseth later said that the surprise strikes, which hit multiple targets across three days, were part of an “unrelenting” campaign until the Iran-backed group stops attacking vessels in the Red Sea, a vital maritime corridor.
Brian Hughes, the spokesperson for the National Security Council, confirmed the message chain was authentic.
“This appears to be an authentic message chain, and we are reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain,” wrote Hughes. “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.”
In his account, Goldberg laid out the timeline for how the administration officials within a few days reached their conclusive plan to bomb the Houthis, beginning March 13 when Waltz instructed participants on the group chat to provide the best point of contact from their team “over the next couple days and over the weekend.”
“Team – establishing a principles [sic] group for coordination on Houthis, particularly for over the next 72 hours,” Waltz reportedly messaged.
The next day, March 14, Waltz texted the group at 8:05 a.m. that “you should have a statement of conclusions with taskings per the Presidents [sic] guidance this morning in your high side inboxes.” The term “high side” typically refers to classified computer systems.
He added that the State and Defense departments developed suggested notification lists for regional allies and partners, with the Joint Chiefs of Staff to send countries a more specific sequence of events in the coming days.
Vance, who was traveling to Michigan at the time, told the group: “I think we are making a mistake” with the strikes, arguing that 3 percent of U.S. trade runs through the Suez Canal, as does 40 percent of European trade.
“There is a real risk that the public doesn’t understand this or why it’s necessary. The strongest reason to do this is, as POTUS said, to send a message,” Vance says.
“I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now,” Vance continued, arguing the strikes could risk spiking oil prices.
“I am willing to support the consensus of the team and keep these concerns to myself. But there is a strong argument for delaying this a month, doing the messaging work on why this matters, seeing where the economy is, etc,” he finishes.
Hegseth replies to Vance that he understands his concerns but says that “messaging is going to be tough no matter what – nobody knows who the Houthis are – which is why we would need to stay focused on: 1) Biden failed & 2) Iran funded.”
The Pentagon chief argues in favor of following through on an attack as to not look indecisive.
Vance then appears to acquiesce to Hegseth, telling him: “If you think we should do it let’s go. I just hate bailing Europe out again.”
Hegseth responded: “I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It’s PATHETIC. But Mike is correct, we are the only ones on the planet (on our side of the ledger) who can do this. Nobody else even close. Question is timing. I feel like now is as good a time as any, given POTUS directive to reopen shipping lanes. I think we should go; but POTUS still retains 24 hours of decision space.”
The next day, March 15, Hegseth at 11:44 a.m. sends the group operational details about the Yemen strikes, which Goldberg does not detail due to U.S. military and intelligence safety concerns.
“What I will say, in order to illustrate the shocking recklessness of this Signal conversation, is that the Hegseth post contained operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing,” Goldberg writes.
Vance was the one person in the group to then reply to Hegseth, telling him, “I will say a prayer for victory.”
News of the highly sensitive information breach quickly drew damning comments from the left, who lambasted the administration for both its carelessness in handling the communications and calling hypocrisy on Trump repeatedly demanding that Hillary Clinton be jailed for using a private email server for official business when she was secretary of State.
“You don’t even have to do the ‘what about her emails’ thing. In any other admin, R or D, there would be an immediate FBI investigation, and there should be here as well,” President Obama’s former spokesperson Matthew Miller wrote on X.
Senate Armed Services Ranking Member Jack Reed (D-R.I.), called the breach, if true, “one of the most egregious failures of operational security and common sense I have ever seen.”
“Military operations need to be handled with utmost discretion, using approved, secure lines of communication, because American lives are on the line,” Reed said in a statement. “The carelessness shown by President Trump’s cabinet is stunning and dangerous. I will be seeking answers from the Administration immediately.”
Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) called the officials’ incompetence “so severe that it could have gotten Americans killed,” and called on Hegseth to explain himself to Congress and be held accountable.
“There is no world in which this information should have been shared in non-secure channels,” Moulton posted to X. “Hegseth is in so far over his head that he is a danger to this country and our men and women in uniform.”
Even some GOP lawmakers were stunned by the events, including Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who said the incident “sounds like a huge screw up. I mean, is there any other way to describe it?”
He told reporters that he would hope the intelligence community would look into the matter as “somebody dropped the ball.”
Updated at 3:01 p.m. EDT
