The Trump administration is facing political uproar after the White House confirmed that a journalist was inadvertently added to an unsecure group chat in which US national security officials planned a military strike in Yemen.
The Atlantic magazine’s Jeffrey Goldberg reported that he was included on a Signal message group where Vice-President JD Vance and Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth were apparently among members.
He said he saw classified military plans for US strikes on Houthi rebels, including weapons packages, targets and timing, two hours before the bombs struck.
The report sparked a firestorm of criticism from Democrats and concerns among several Republicans.
Critics call for investigation over leak
Goldberg said he was added to the message chain, apparently by accident, after receiving a connection request from someone who appeared to be White House National Security Adviser Michael Waltz.
“If they were going to pick an errant phone number, I mean at least it wasn’t somebody who supported the Houthis, because they were actually handing out information that I believe could have endangered the lives of American service people who were involved in that operation,” he told PBS in an interview.
President Donald Trump told reporters on Monday afternoon that he was not aware of the Atlantic article.
“The attacks on the Houthis have been highly successful and effective,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement.
“President Trump continues to have the utmost confidence in his national security team, including National Security Advisor Mike Waltz.”
The defence secretary also defended the military operation discussed in the chat, citing its success. When pressed by reporters, Hegseth criticised Goldberg as a “deceitful and highly discredited” journalist and resisted questions about the content of the messages.
House of Representatives Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican, said the breach was a mistake, but argued that the chat showed “top level officials doing their job, doing it well”.
Democratic lawmakers demanded an investigation, casting the episode as a national security scandal.
“This is one of the most stunning breaches of military intelligence that I have read about in a very, very long time,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said.
Senate Armed Services Committee chairman Roger Wicker, a Mississippi Republican, said his panel planned to investigate the matter.
“It’s definitely a concern,” he added. “It appears that mistakes were made.”
Vance disagrees with Trump
On 11 March, Atlantic editor-in-chief Goldberg writes in his article that he received a connection request on the encrypted messaging app Signal from an account that purported to be Waltz’s.
He said he initially wondered if the group chat messages might be a hoax until four days later, Saturday 15 March, when he was sitting in a supermarket car park, watching Signal communications about a strike.
When he checked X for updates about Yemen, he wrote, he was stunned to see reports of explosions in the capital city of Sanaa.
A Houthi official posted on X at the time that 53 people had been killed in the US air strikes.
Signal is generally used by journalists and Washington officials because of the secure nature of its communications, the ability to create aliases, and to send disappearing messages.
Two days later, Goldberg said he was added to a Signal chat entitled “Houthi PC small group”.
A number of accounts that appeared to belong to cabinet members and national security officials were included in the 18-person chat, Goldberg reported.
Accounts labelled “JD Vance”, the name of the vice-president; “Pete Hegseth,” the defence secretary; and “John Ratcliffe,” director of the Central Intelligence Agency; were among names in the chain.
Top national security officials from various agencies also appeared in it, including Tulsi Gabbard, Trump’s director of national intelligence, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
At one point during the communications over the strikes, the account labelled “JD Vance” seemed to disagree with Trump, Goldberg reported.
“I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now,” the Vance account wrote at approximately 8:15 on 14 March.
“There’s a further risk that we see a moderate to severe spike in 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.”
In a statement to the BBC on Monday, Vance spokesman William Martin said the vice-president “unequivocally supports this administration’s foreign policy.
“The president and the vice-president have had subsequent conversations about this matter and are in complete agreement,” Martin said.
The National Security Council confirmed much of the Atlantic report.
Spokesman Brian Hughes told the BBC: “At this time, the message thread that was reported appears to be authentic. We are reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain.
“The thread is a demonstration of the deep and thoughtful policy co-ordination between senior officials.”
Messages blast ‘pathetic’ Europe
Goldberg reported that the officials also discussed the potential for Europe to pay for US protection of key shipping lanes.
“Whether it’s now or several weeks from now, it will have to be the United States that reopens these shipping lanes,” the account associated with Waltz wrote on 14 March.
The message continued, saying that at Trump’s request, his team was working with the defence department and state department “to determine how to compile the cost associated and levy them on the Europeans”.
At one point in the thread the Vance account griped that the strikes would benefit the Europeans, because of their reliance on those shipping lanes, adding: “I just hate bailing Europe out again.”
The user identified as Hegseth responded three minutes later: “VP: I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It’s PATHETIC.”
