Ever since the story broke on Monday that leading Trump Administration figures had discussed plans to attack the Houthis in Yemen over the commercially available texting up Signal — and had accidentally added a reporter, Jeffrey Goldberg, to the chat, after which he published parts of the discussion — the Trump Administration has shared a series of justifications and defenses.
While National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, who invited Goldberg into the chat, has expressed responsibility, he also suggested in a TV interview that Goldberg may have somehow “hacked” into the Signal chat. Based on other stories he’s written over the years, attempts have also been made to impugn Goldberg’s integrity.
Various officials have argued since Monday that no classified material was included in the chat and that what Goldberg described in the original story as “war plans” were not that. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Radcliffe, both of whom were part of the “Houthi PC small group” chat, testified to Congress on Tuesday that there was no classified material on the chat.
Numerous administration officials have asserted that @TheAtlantic is lying about the content of the texts. Now you can see for yourself and judge. https://t.co/JowyFqvDlI
— nxthompson (@nxthompson) March 26, 2025
Stay up-to-date with the latest news!
Subscribe and start recieving our daily emails.
“Nobody was texting war plans. And that’s all I have to say about that,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said after the story was published.
Now, The Atlantic, which did not include the specific “war plans” in the first story, has published a follow-up that does include them.
“The statements by Hegseth, Gabbard, Ratcliffe, and Trump—combined with the assertions made by numerous administration officials that we are lying about the content of the Signal texts—have led us to believe that people should see the texts in order to reach their own conclusions,” Goldberg and Shane Harris write. “There is a clear public interest in disclosing the sort of information that Trump advisers included in nonsecure communications channels, especially because senior administration figures are attempting to downplay the significance of the messages that were shared.”
The Wednesday story has Hegseth discussing the use of specific weapons — “1215et: F-18s LAUNCH (1st strike package) “1345: ‘Trigger Based’ F-18 1st Strike Window Starts (Target Terrorist is @ his Known Location so SHOULD BE ON TIME – also, Strike Drones Launch (MQ-9s)” — used in the attack.
This is The Atlantic’s justification for publishing the plans:
There is zero fucking chance this was “unclassified.” https://t.co/xJhb0GewH2 pic.twitter.com/ELulBpNc5z
— Michael Weiss (@michaeldweiss) March 26, 2025
“This Signal message shows that the U.S. secretary of defense texted a group that included a phone number unknown to him—Goldberg’s cellphone—at 11:44 a.m. This was 31 minutes before the first U.S. warplanes launched, and two hours and one minute before the beginning of a period in which a primary target, the Houthi “Target Terrorist,” was expected to be killed by these American aircraft. If this text had been received by someone hostile to American interests—or someone merely indiscreet, and with access to social media—the Houthis would have had time to prepare for what was meant to be a surprise attack on their strongholds. The consequences for American pilots could have been catastrophic.”
Photo courtesy of X screenshot
