Atlantic Magazine has published a new message from group chat among top US officials, debating details of the specific operation of its plan to bomb Yemen and accusing Trump administration officials of lying to Congress by insisting that the message does not contain classified information.
The first revelation by the magazine and its editor Jeffrey Goldberg sparked a major protest in the US as it was accidentally added to the chat with a messaging app signal.
The Trump administration is facing atrophy attack on a disastrous leak of confidential information, including a House Intelligence Committee hearing on Wednesday, featuring two participants in the chat.
However, the magazine initially did not include specific details of the attack, but said it didn’t want to put national security at risk. But as many Trump administration officials have argued that none of the information shared is classified — attacking shipments in the Red Sea despite including clear details of the US strike against Yemen’s Houthi militia — the Atlantic said in a new article Wednesday it was releasing the information.
It recreated numerous messages from a text chat between Pentagon chief Pete Hegzes, who said on Tuesday “no one has texted the war plan.”
They included details of target information for US bombing, drone launches, and attack information, including descriptions of weather conditions.
They also mention the specific weapons they use, the timing of the attack, and the reference to the “target terrorists,” perhaps Houthi’s militant. There is further debate about confirmation that the target has been killed, and there is the use of some emojis.
“There is a clear public interest in disclosing the kind of information that includes Trump advisors on unsecured communications channels, especially as senior management figures try to underestimate the importance of shared messages,” the magazine said.
“If this text had been received by someone hostile to American interests, or simply ignored and accompanied by access to social media, Houthis would have had time to prepare for something intended to be a surprising attack on their base.
“The outcome for the American pilots may have been catastrophic.”
Trump administration officials have repeatedly argued that the message does not contain classified information. On Tuesday, after the initial article was published, Gabbard and Ratcliffe said the leaks did not contain classified information.
The Atlantic also cited an email response from White House Press Secretary Caroline Leavitt. After the magazine contacted the Trump administration, he said it was considering making the entire email chain public. The chat doesn’t contain any sorted information, but the White House said it didn’t want the message to be released.
“As I’ve said again, there was no classification information sent to the group chat,” writes Leavitt. “However, as the CIA directors and national security advisors have expressed today, it does not mean that they encourage the release of conversations.”
What is a signal?
show
Signal is a messaging app founded in 2012 that allows users to send text, photos, videos and documents and create audio and video calls. Use end-to-end encryption. This protects messages against hackers and cyber attacks through an extra layer of security. Several other privacy features, including the ability to automatically delete messages, have made it more frequent and sensitive information available to communities such as journalists and activists.
Signals are run by a non-profit Signal Foundation, relying on donations to functions, providing a different business model than other encrypted messaging services such as Meta-owned WhatsApp. It does not track user data to the same extent as META, and publishes the code to allow for public auditing of security measures. Signal, like any messaging app, remains vulnerable to human error through methods such as phishing attacks and spyware that allow hackers to access the user’s devices. The president of Signal Foundation called the addition of Atlantic’s editor-in-chief a user error rather than an issue with app security.
Thank you for your feedback.
When asked about the leak on Tuesday, Donald Trump said “it wasn’t a classified information,” but added that the leak was “the only glitch in two months.”
After the latest message was published, Leavitt claimed in X “these were not ‘war plans’. “This whole story was another hoax written by the Trump hater famous for his sensational spin.”
Waltz also wrote on social media: “There is no place, there is no source or way. There is no war plan.”
Sign up for This week at Trumpland
A deep dive into the policies, controversy and eccentricity surrounding the Trump administration
Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online advertising, and content funded by external parties. For more information, please refer to our Privacy Policy. We use Google Recaptcha to protect our website and the application of Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
After the newsletter promotion
Later at a White House press briefing, Leavitt said Elon Musk’s government team was investigating how the incident occurred. “For your original questions about who is leading, I’ll look at the messaging thread: the National Security Council, the White House Lawyer’s Office, and of course, Elon Musk’s team,” she told reporters.
“Elon Musk offered to put his technical experts on this to figure out how this number was added again to the chat, to ensure that this number is held accountable and that this will never happen again,” added Leavitt.
She also said that senior Trump administration officials who mistakenly share military plans in a group that includes journalists are mistakenly affirmed app. Leavitt said it was loaded into government calls for the State Department and Central Intelligence Agency’s Pentagon.
However, Democrats used an Intelligence Email Committee hearing on Wednesday to request an explanation of how operational military plans are not classified.
Illinois Democrat Raja Krishnamoulti assisted with a message from Hegus sharing the exact details of the strike.
“This is categorized information. It is a weapon system, a sequence of strikes, and details on the operation,” Krishnamorthi said. “This text message is clearly categorized information. Director-General Hegseth has disclosed information classified as a military plan. He must resign immediately.”
Jim Himez, the top Democrat on the committee, asked Gabbard why he told the senator the day before that details of timing, targets and weapons were not shared.
“My answer yesterday was based on my recollections, or lack of that, on the details posted there,” Gabbard replied.
“What was shared today reflects the fact that I wasn’t directly involved in that part of the signal chat and I answered last time, reflecting its effectiveness, the very short effect that the national security advisers shared.”
Meanwhile, Ratcliffe said: “We used the right channel to convey sensitive information. We were allowed to do so. We didn’t forward any sensitive information.”
Last week, NPR reported that the Pentagon had specifically warned staff against the use of signals due to security vulnerabilities. The pentagonal “Opsec Special Bulletin” sent on March 18 warned that Russian hacking groups could aim to exploit the vulnerability.
It also raises questions about whether some of Signal Chat participants used personal phone calls.
Steve Witkov, a special envoy to the Middle East, Trump, was in Moscow to discuss Ukraine with Putin, Ukraine, and wrote that in Russia, “I had only had a secure phone numbered by the government,” explaining that “I hadn’t chatted until I returned to our personal relief.”
Signal chat messages have been set to be automatically deleted within 4 weeks. The Federal Records Act generally requires that government communication records be maintained for two years.
The Atlantic generally did not release information about military operations if it could harm US officials, but accusations from the Trump administration that it was “lying” led them to believe that “people should look at the text to reach their conclusions.”
“There is a clear public interest in disclosing the kind of information that includes Trump’s advisors on unsecured communications channels, particularly as senior manager figures try to underestimate the importance of shared messages,” the magazine wrote.
