CNN
—
It’s one of the most shocking national security indiscretions in years.
The revelation that President Donald Trump’s national security team discussed military strikes in Yemen on an unclassified group chat suggests a cavalier attitude toward America’s secrets and the safety of US forces on a deadly mission.
The group message, revealed Monday in an article by Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg – who was somehow added to the chat by accident – hints at a lax national security process and incompetence as the nation faces a world of threats.
The use of Signal, an encrypted app that is nonetheless carried on phones that are vulnerable to penetration by foreign intelligence services, also suggests contempt for strict laws on the handling of classified material that would land more junior officials in deep trouble.
“This was grossly negligent,” Ryan Goodman, a former Defense Department special counsel, told CNN’s Erin Burnett on Monday. “That is actually the terms of the criminal statute – ‘having gross negligence in mishandling classified information’ … if it is disclosed to somebody who is unauthorized. And on their call was a journalist. That means there was in fact a disclosure.”
The lack of public contrition, let alone resignations, from top officials, reflects a White House that operates in a culture of impunity and has stacked the Justice Department and FBI – which might normally be expected to launch immediate investigations – with ultra-loyalists to the president.
Amid calls from Democrats for probes and oversight, House Speaker Mike Johnson shrugged off the seriousness of the matter, underscoring how the GOP in Congress has abrogated its power in deference to its strongman president.
And Trump insisted that he didn’t know anything about the chat – instead attacking the Atlantic, against which he holds a grudge for its reporting during his first term.
The president also amplified a mocking social media post about the debacle by his Department of Government Efficiency chief Elon Musk. And Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth – who the Atlantic said posted sensitive strike plans to the chat – lashed out at Goldberg after landing in Hawaii, calling him a “deceitful and highly discredited” journalist and denying anyone was “texting war plans.”
The comments, which contradicted the richly reported details of the report, represented a familiar attempt by the Trump administration to create an alternative truth to discredit criticism.
But the reported facts about the chat – which the White House said appeared to be authentic – are damning. Beth Sanner, a former senior intelligence official, said on CNN’s “The Lead” that while the Signal thread may not have been penetrated by an enemy intelligence service, the risk of senior officials using cellphones to communicate on such a sensitive matter was acute.
“It means that there is a pattern here of just a complete lack of understanding of what classified information is and what needs to be protected,” Sanner said of the Trump national security team. “Instead of asking how did this journalist get on, maybe they should be asking themselves, why are they on this?”
That question is likely to be put Tuesday to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, who were both included on the message chain, according to the Atlantic, and who will testify at a worldwide threats hearing in the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
Intelligence scandals obsess Washington because in a government town, everyone – officials, lawmakers, analysts and journalists – understands their gravity – and the oppressive weight of the law on such matters. But for many Americans outside the Beltway – who may be more concerned with paying for expensive groceries, health care and putting their kids through college – such issues can seem distant.
But apart from the risks to service personnel in combat, a drama like this paints a wider picture of an administration’s character and operations, which usually reflect the personality of the person behind the Resolute Desk.
The Signal chat scandal involves detailed operational plans and other likely highly classified information about US military strikes on Yemen in a group thread to which Goldberg had been been added – apparently by national security adviser Mike Waltz.
The administration offered no public explanation for the existence of the thread, which raised multiple questions that are likely to grow more politically damaging as new details emerge.
Among them:
— The idea that Trump’s top officials would discuss a matter of such sensitivity outside a highly classified setting is mind-boggling. The group chat reportedly included Vice President JD Vance, Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Waltz, White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, Gabbard and Ratcliffe, among others. Even more surprising is the fact that Hegseth posted operational details of the strikes in Yemen, including information on targets, weapons and attack sequencing, The Atlantic reported.
— The White House did not explain why the officials did not use facilities available for classified discussions, including secure phones or computer systems or venues such as the White House Situation Room or the sensitive compartmented information facilities (SCIFs) available in their agencies, throughout Washington and when they travel abroad.
— There is no sign that multiple strikes against Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen were compromised. But discussing such matters outside classified settings risks the safety of American forces in combat. It’s an especially poor look for Hegseth, who vowed to restore “common sense” to the leadership in the Pentagon and to do everything protect “war fighters.”
— The incident appears to validate the fears of critics who warned that Trump filled the most senior national posts with officials who lacked experience but instead were chosen for effect, including Hegseth, a former Fox News anchor. The inadvertent move by Waltz, an experienced and combat-decorated Green Beret, to add Goldberg to the Signal chat is especially baffling.
— The chat also raises the question of what other top secret national security discussions have unfolded outside classified settings. Given the chatty tone of the group thread, it’s hard to believe this is the only such conversation.
— And judging by the reporting in The Atlantic, it’s possible that the discussion broke the law, namely the Espionage Act, which criminalizes the publishing of classified material or its removal from its proper place of custody. “If we had an independent Justice Department, I am sure they would be looking into this,” said Goodman. “If this were lower-level officials, I am sure they would be looking into this.”
— The lax attitude to national security secrets comes straight from the top, although the president wasn’t involved in the chat reported by Goldberg. Trump, after all, was criminally charged with hoarding national security documents in insecure conditions at his Mar-a-Lago resort after leaving office in 2021. The case was controversially thrown out by a Trump-appointed Florida judge last year. And early in his first term, the president shared highly classified information with the Russian foreign minister and Russian ambassador to the US at the White House. Soon afterward, US intelligence agencies extracted one of their top covert sources inside the Russian government, administration officials told CNN at the time.
— There is a strong touch of hypocrisy over the sharing of classified information on a third-party app by senior officials. After all, Trump and several of the aides incessantly hammered 2016 Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton over classified information found on her private server following her service as secretary of state. And several current officials have already launched leak inquiries, including Hegseth at the Pentagon.
— Many Republicans were willing to dismiss the extraordinary breach of classified material as a trifle. Johnson breezily said the administration would “tighten up and make sure it doesn’t happen again.” Alabama Sen. Tommy Tuberville, a close Trump ally, said, “We all make mistakes” and told CNN’s Manu Raju that it was part of “transition and growing” for the new administration. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, however, promised to “figure out what went on” in the Signal chat.
— The account of the texts in the Atlantic contains fascinating details. It suggests that Vance, despite his staunch public support for Trump’s positions, was not initially on board with the strikes against the Houthis. And the vice president, Hegseth and senior White House official Stephen Miller shared contempt for America’s allies, agreeing they should be forced to remunerate the US for the strikes since they would boost their economies by restoring freedom of navigation after months of Houthi attacks on shipping. “VP: I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It’s PATHETIC,” Hegseth apparently typed.
— Democrats, who are struggling for traction against Trump, seized on The Atlantic’s report to try to paint a picture of a reckless administration. “The secretary of defense, who was on that chain, has got to be the most unqualified person ever to lead the Pentagon in American history,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said. And Delaware Democratic Sen. Chris Coons told CNN’s Phil Mattingly that there should be an immediate oversight hearing and accountability.
— Trump was briefed on the Atlantic story on Monday afternoon, two sources familiar with the situation told CNN’s Alayna Treene. The president expressed disdain for Goldberg, who was behind another story in Trump’s first term, which said Trump referred to American war dead as “suckers” and “losers.”
But so far, Trump is standing behind his team and has no plans to fire Waltz, the sources said.
Forcing anyone out might require the president to admit that he erred in picking some key national security officials that many of his critics – and even some Republican senators – warned were not up to the job.
