For the White House, the fall guy this time is the journalist who read incoming messages on his phone.
Mike Waltz takes ‘full responsibility’ for leaked Houthis attack
National Security Adviser Mike Waltz inadvertently invited a reporter into a Signal chat discussing a military strike against Houthis in Yemen.
Nothing to see here?
That was the message from President Trump as he dismissed the blockbuster disclosure that his top national security officials had inadvertently disclosed war plans to a journalist on a group chat on a commercial app called Signal. “The only glitch in two months” of his second term, he told reporters in the Cabinet Room Tuesday, “and it turned out not to be a serious one.”
At least for now, he has defended his team, including national security adviser Michael Waltz, and attacked the journalist Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of Atlantic magazine.
But the bizarre tale isn’t over, not by a long shot.
On Wednesday morning, the Atlantic published an additional string of text messages with logistical details for the attack on Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen. An hour or so later, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Tulsi Gabbard, director of national intelligence, began testifying before the House Intelligence Committee.
Congressional Democrats pressed them about their denials a day earlier that war plans had been shared.
There are unanswered questions, global repercussions and lessons to be learned about Trump and his highest-ranking advisers.
Here are a few of them.
What happened, exactly? Two major flubs.
Just how a journalist was added to a sensitive group chat by national security officials still isn’t entirely clear.
Waltz said on Fox News late Tuesday that he took “full responsibility” for the breach, but Trump on Newsmax cited a “junior staffer” on the National Security Council who had Goldberg’s number on his phone as the culprit.
“We made a mistake,” Waltz said. Even so, he immediately suggested, without evidence, that Goldberg might have somehow engineered it. “I didn’t see this loser in the group,” Waltz said. “Now, whether he did it deliberately or it happened (by) some other technical mean(s) is something we’re trying to figure out.”
The other serious issue is why military attack plans were being discussed on a commercial app that is more vulnerable to hacking than the government’s secure communications systems.
During the group chat, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth shared details about the timing, weapons and targets for the attack ahead. He has denied sharing any classified information, although former top military and intelligence officials said there was no question that the information was or should have been classified.
“Nobody’s texting war plans,” Hegseth told reporters Tuesday, adding, “I know exactly what I’m doing.”
After Trump officials denied that classified information had been revealed, the Atlantic published additional texts from Hegseth, including precise times for the launch of F-18s and identification of their targets. Disclosure of that information to a foe or to the public could have undermined the surprise attack and put the pilots in danger.
“We are currently clean on OPSEC,” Hegseth wrote then. That is, on operational security.
Who is to blame? Let’s try the messenger.
Trump downplayed the breach and declined to criticize any administration officials involved. “Michael Waltz has learned a lesson, and he’s a good man,” he told NBC’s Garrett Haake.
But the president, who for years has hammered Hillary Clinton for jeopardizing security by using a private email server, had harsh words about Goldberg.
“He’s made up a lot of stories and I think he’s basically bad for the country,” Trump said, calling Goldberg a “sleazebag” and the Atlantic a “failed magazine.”
Since Goldberg became editor in 2016, the Atlantic has won several Pulitzer Prizes and last year reported a profit after several years of losses.
During his first term, Trump had clashed with Goldberg after he wrote a story quoting Trump as saying Americans who died in war were “losers” and “suckers.” Trump denied making the statement; his White House chief of staff confirmed it.
“Jeffrey Goldberg is well-known for his sensationalist spin,” press secretary Karoline Leavitt said on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter. She called it “another hoax, written by a Trump hater.”
Vice President JD Vance said Goldberg had “oversold what he had” and retweeted posts disputing the Atlantic’s characterization of the texts as “war plans,” saying instead they had been “attack plans.”
Hello, Europe? Vance’s independent voice.
Among the interesting asides in the group chat was Vance sharing his independent views of the pending attack. “I think we are making a mistake,” he said, noting that European trade was much more dependent on free passage through the Suez Canal than the United States was.
“I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now,” Vance texted. He said he would keep his concerns to himself but added, “I just hate bailing Europe out again.”
The vice president’s candid role in the debate with Cabinet members − and his suggestion that the president might not understand the geostrategic context − is unusual in this and almost any administration. Trump’s vice president in his first term, Mike Pence, almost never let any daylight show between him and the president, including during meetings with other senior officials.
In the chat that followed, administration officials discussed whether to delay the attack.
Vance spokesman William Martin insisted that Vance and Trump were “in complete agreement.”
Vance’s assertion that Europe wasn’t paying its full share for its military defense is a familiar one from Trump, but the depth of the vice president’s contempt in the chat was notable − and a red flag for NATO leaders already concerned about whether the post-World War II alliance would hold.
“I fully share your loathing of European free-loading,” Hegseth had replied. “It’s PATHETIC.”