U.S. President Trump and his intelligence chiefs have downplayed the impact of a security breach in which a journalist was invited to join a Signal group chat, where he allegedly saw plans by national security officials to orchestrate airstrikes in Yemen.
Read Also...:
Top US officials shift blame for Signal chat leak to Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth
03-26, 2025
Trump says national security advisor doesn't need to apologise after journalist was added into group text discussing war plans
03-26, 2025
FBI launches task force targeting anti-Tesla 'domestic terrorism'
03-26, 2025
Papua New Guinea shuts down Facebook in test to stop 'pornography, misinformation, hate speech'
03-26, 2025Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe denied sharing any classified information in the message chain during a Senate hearing. However, Democrats on the committee rebuked the two cabinet members for "incompetence" on national security matters.
At the White House, Trump appeared alongside National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, a central figure in the leak. The president stood by Waltz, insisting the incident did not impact military operations. The leak has caused a stir in Washington, leading to a lawsuit and raising questions about why senior officials were discussing such sensitive matters on a potentially vulnerable civilian application.
Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, who was inadvertently added to the 18-person group, said he initially thought it was a scam. But he said once the planned strike in Yemen was carried out, he realized the information was real. The March 15 airstrike killed approximately 53 people, with U.S. officials saying the target was Iranian-aligned Houthi rebels who threatened maritime trade and Israel.
Besides Ratcliffe and Gabbard, members of the Signal group chat included Vice President JD Vance, White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. The controversy overshadowed Tuesday's Senate Intelligence Committee hearing, which was originally focused on drug cartels and human trafficking. During the sometimes heated session, Ratcliffe said he was unaware of any specific operational information about weapons, targets, or timing being discussed in the chat, as Goldberg reported. When asked if he thought the leak was a huge mistake, Ratcliffe replied, "No."
Gabbard repeatedly stated that "no classified information was leaked" and insisted there was a distinction between an "inadvertent disclosure" and a "malicious leak." Senate Democrats slammed the two officials. Michael Bennet of Colorado accused those involved in the chat of being sloppy, incompetent, and disrespectful of the U.S. intelligence community. Jon Ossoff of Georgia described the incident, dubbed "Signal-gate" in Washington, as "embarrassing." Ossoff said, "It's completely unprofessional. There's no apology. There's no recognition of the gravity of this mistake."
Republicans on the committee were far more muted in their concerns. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said, "We dodged a bullet." Senator Roger Wicker, a Mississippi Republican who heads the Senate Armed Services Committee, later told reporters that lawmakers would investigate the Signal chat leak. Wicker told reporters he hoped the investigation would be bipartisan and that the committee would have full access to the group chat's transcripts. "We need to find out if it's totally true, and then make recommendations," he told NewsNation network. "But I hope we get cooperation from the administration." Senator Jim Risch, an Idaho Republican who heads the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, also said he expected the matter to be investigated. "Obviously, this will be investigated, and we'll know more as the facts unfold," he was quoted as saying by The Hill.
Trump and his White House team have described the controversy as a "coordinated effort" to distract from the president's accomplishments. Trump called NBC News on Tuesday morning to defend his national security advisor, reportedly admitting that Goldberg was added to the group chat. "Mike Waltz learned a lesson, he's a good guy," Trump said. He also said Goldberg's addition to the group was a "glitch" that had "no impact whatsoever" on operations. The Republican president said it was an aide to Waltz who invited the journalist to the chat. "A staffer put his number on there," said Trump, who has long been critical of Goldberg's reporting, dating back to the 2020 election.
At a later event at the White House, Trump appeared alongside Waltz. "To the best of my knowledge, there was no classified information," the president said. "They used an app, if you want to call it an app, a lot of people use it, a lot of government people use it, a lot of media people use it." Waltz, in his own brief remarks, turned the tables on Goldberg. He said he has never had any contact with the journalist and accused him of wanting to focus on "more hoaxes" instead of the Trump administration's accomplishments.
But some national security experts believe the leak was a major operational blunder, and archival experts warn it violated laws regarding the preservation of presidential records. On Tuesday, the non-partisan watchdog group American Oversight sued individual officials involved in the chat, alleging violations of the Federal Records Act and the Administrative Procedure Act. The group said that by setting the chat to automatically delete messages, the group violated a law requiring White House officials to submit their records to the National Archives. According to documents obtained by BBC's U.S. partner CBS, the National Security Agency only last month warned employees about vulnerabilities in Signal. Signal issued a new statement on Tuesday, dismissing claims of "vulnerabilities" in its messaging platform. "Signal is open source, so our code is regularly scrutinized, in addition to undergoing regular formal audits," the statement said, calling the app "the gold standard for private, secure communication."
Mick Mulroy, a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (DASD) for the Middle East and a retired CIA paramilitary officer, told the BBC that conducting sensitive discussions on an "insecure commercial application" was "unacceptable." "And everyone in the chat knew that," he added. "You don't need to be in the military or intelligence community to know that that information is exactly what the enemy wants to know."
