In a shocking turn of events, The Atlantic has released an entire Signal chat among senior national security officials from the Trump administration, revealing highly sensitive military details about a recent strike against Yemen’s Houthis. The chat log, which was made public on Wednesday, contained precise timestamps of warplane launches and the exact moments bombs would hit their targets—before the pilots even took off.
The Stunning Signal Chat Revelation
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was at the center of this controversy, as he openly posted detailed attack timelines in a chat that included not just government officials but also Jeffrey Goldberg, The Atlantic's Editor-in-Chief. The disclosure has ignited a firestorm in Washington, with both current and former U.S. officials stunned that such critical information, which should have been classified, ended up in an unsecured chat.
Hegseth, who is currently traveling in the Indo-Pacific, has dodged direct questions about whether he knowingly leaked classified material. His only response so far has been to dismiss concerns, stating that he did not reveal "war plans." However, what he did post was jaw-dropping in its specificity and included details that are typically guarded to protect operational security.
Inside the Leaked Messages
Among the messages Hegseth shared in the chat were:
-
12:15 ET: "F-18s LAUNCH (1st strike package)"
-
13:45: "'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)"
-
14:10: "More F-18s LAUNCH (2nd strike package)"
-
14:15: "Strike Drones on Target (THIS IS WHEN THE FIRST BOMBS WILL DEFINITELY DROP, pending earlier ‘Trigger Based’ targets)"
-
15:36: "F-18 2nd Strike Starts – also, first sea-based Tomahawks launched."
-
"MORE TO FOLLOW (per timeline)"
-
"We are currently clean on OPSEC"
-
"Godspeed to our Warriors."
These messages raise serious national security concerns, as they provided a real-time breakdown of a sensitive military operation. The level of detail shared was highly unusual, and experts believe such information should never have been posted in an unclassified communication channel.
The White House Response
Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has insisted that no classified information was shared in the Signal chat. However, her statement hasn't stopped scrutiny over why such detailed military plans were being discussed on an app known to have security vulnerabilities.
Signal is an encrypted messaging app, but that doesn’t mean it’s impenetrable. U.S. defense officials had already warned personnel about its potential risks. Just one day before the strikes, the Defense Department specifically cautioned staff that Russia was attempting to hack Signal, according to a U.S. official speaking on the condition of anonymity.
One of the biggest concerns with Signal is its vulnerability to device compromise. If a hacker gains access to a user’s phone, they can link their own device to that user’s Signal account and monitor messages in real time. This means that, in theory, a foreign adversary could have been watching these sensitive military discussions unfold.
Who Holds Responsibility?
The fallout from this revelation has put the spotlight on Hegseth, as well as the broader Trump administration's handling of sensitive military data. The Senate Intelligence Committee pressed Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe on Tuesday, but both officials deflected responsibility, stating that it was up to Hegseth to determine whether the information he shared was classified or not.
Meanwhile, The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg has maintained that he reached out to the White House before publishing the messages. According to him, the administration expressed a preference that the messages not be published but did not explicitly forbid it.
Legal Battles Brewing
This incident isn’t just causing political and security headaches—it’s also landing key officials in legal trouble. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, along with two other Trump administration officials, are now facing a lawsuit from The Associated Press on First and Fifth Amendment grounds. The AP argues that these officials are retaliating against the news agency for editorial decisions they disagree with. The lawsuit also points to an executive order demanding that the Gulf of Mexico be referred to as the "Gulf of America," which the AP has refused to comply with.
The Bigger Picture
The controversy surrounding the leaked Signal chat raises broader concerns about cybersecurity, operational security, and transparency within the U.S. government. If high-ranking officials are willing to share such sensitive details on an unsecured app, what does that say about the security protocols in place?
Moreover, this situation has fueled ongoing debates about press freedom, government overreach, and how intelligence leaks should be handled. While some argue that The Atlantic acted irresponsibly by publishing the chat, others contend that the public has a right to know about such serious breaches in national security.
What’s Next?
As the dust settles, it remains to be seen whether there will be any consequences for Hegseth or others involved in the leak. The Senate Intelligence Committee is expected to continue its inquiries, and the lawsuit from The Associated Press could further escalate tensions between the press and the Trump administration.
For now, one thing is clear: this incident has exposed serious vulnerabilities in how the U.S. government handles classified information, and the repercussions are just beginning to unfold.
Login