Trump Administration’s War Plans Leaked to Journalist via Signal Group Chat

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A significant security breach occurred within the Trump administration on March 15, when Editor-in-Chief of The Atlantic Jeffrey Goldberg was inadvertently added to a Signal group chat that discussed U.S. military strikes against Houthi targets in Yemen. The chat revealed critical operational details, including weapons deployment and strike sequencing, leading to a surge of concern regarding national security protocols.

The breach was first identified shortly before 2 p.m. Eastern time, just as the U.S. began its airstrikes. However, Goldberg disclosed that he knew about the potential operation two hours earlier, after receiving a detailed message at 11:44 a.m. from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth outlining the war plans.

This unusual series of events began March 11 when Goldberg received a connection request on Signal from a user identified as Michael Waltz, purportedly the national security adviser to President Donald Trump. Despite having met Waltz before, Goldberg suspected that the request could have been from someone impersonating the adviser.

On March 14, Goldberg was included in a chat labeled “Houthi PC small group,” where national security officials exchanged messages related to military actions against the Iran-backed Houthis, a group responsible for attacks on Israel and disruption of international shipping.

The conversation quickly escalated, featuring inputs from high-level officials, including Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. In one exchange, Vance expressed concerns over potential public backlash regarding the timing of the military action, while others insisted on moving forward swiftly to reestablish U.S. deterrence in the region.

On the morning of March 15, Hegseth posted a “TEAM UPDATE” that included sensitive information about imminent airstrikes. The seriousness of this communication was underscored by Goldberg’s warning that the information could have risked the safety of U.S. military personnel if intercepted by adversaries.

As the clock approached 1:45 p.m., Goldberg confirmed on social media that explosions were reported in Sanaa, Yemen, confirming the execution of the strikes minutes after noting the Signal chat details. Following the airstrikes, members of the chat expressed relief and congratulations, with several sharing celebratory emojis.

National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes later confirmed the authenticity of the Signal group, acknowledging the breach and stating that they are “reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain.” While the officials maintained that there were no threats to national security, legal experts warned that the nature of the communications could violate several statutes, particularly concerning the handling of classified information.

The use of Signal for such sensitive discussions has raised significant questions about the security measures in place within the administration. Former officials commented that while Signal is often used for unclassified communication, it is not appropriate for official military discussions due to the risk of interception by foreign adversaries.

This incident underscores the precarious nature of modern-day communication among government officials and raises alarm about the protocols for sharing national defense information. Ongoing investigations are likely to pursue potential implications for those involved in the unauthorized disclosure of military plans.