War Plans, Whoopsies, and Mixed Signals

It would seem a security breach, or at least PR blemish, occurred within the Trump administration when Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, was inadvertently added to a Signal group chat titled “Houthi PC small group.” Whoopsie-daisy.

This wasn’t a casual chat about the weather. This was a high-stakes conversation involving some of the most important officials in the U.S. government, including National Security Adviser Michael Waltz, Vice President JD Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and a few others—who were discussing plans for U.S. military airstrikes against Houthi rebels in Yemen.

Yowza. It is a little embarrassing for sure. The incident, detailed by Goldberg in an article published on March 24, 2025, sparked widespread controversy and raised questions about how such a thing could happen. The best I can tell, a less principal, principal–like Mike Waltz’s wife–created the thread and added the members to it. She does have a national security background and is an aide to Waltz, but still, I bet dinner was awkward at home last night.

It all started on March 11, 2025, when Goldberg received a Signal connection request from someone with the name “Michael Waltz.”

A mere two days later, Goldberg found himself added to a group chat where U.S. officials were coordinating airstrikes against the Houthi rebels. The kind of details they were discussing included serious policy discussions—like Vance voicing concern that the strikes would benefit Europe more than the U.S.—and operational details, including targets and timing, shortly before the strikes actually happened. I’ll let others who are more qualified squabble over what constitutes a “war plan” or not.

Goldberg, says he was naturally skeptical at first, but quickly realized he wasn’t in some run-of-the-mill conspiracy theory forum when the bombings happened exactly as planned in the chat. So, in what can only be described as an exit strategy worthy of Homer Simpson shrinking into the shrubs, he bailed out of the group faster than you can say “doh!”

Hegseth dismissed Goldberg’s reporting, calling him “discredited” and denying that any “war plans” were shared. I thought his statement could have been tidier, as it was not at all a denial. In fairness, I don’t know that it could be.

The National Security Council initially confirmed the chat’s legitimacy and stated they were reviewing how an “inadvertent number” was added. The real mystery was how Goldberg was included at all. Speculation has suggested a mix-up with Jamieson Greer, the U.S. Trade Representative, who shares the initials “J.G.”  No one has confirmed this theory, which probably means it’s just the best guess for now.

Naturally, Democrats will act like this is a five-alarm fire.

I feel like two-ish is more appropriate. Democrats, like Senate Leader Chuck Schumer, called it a “stunning breach of military intelligence,” demanded investigations, and crossed fingers for firings. Meanwhile, some Republicans, like Rep. Mike Lawler, were more concerned about the fact that this entire conversation was happening on an unsecured app. Here’s the thing though–whether they acknowledge it or not–Signal is used a lot and for some pretty high-level conversations, political or otherwise.

And why is that?

Because our own intelligence has become so suspect and poorly regarded.

Because our own government can’t fully be trusted until it is rid of its swampy defectors and holdovers? Mmhmm.

Pardon me, if an embarrassing mistake doesn’t raise my hackles. Especially, when the ones pointing the fingers are part and party to the PURPOSEFUL LEAKING of actual WAR PLANS before ISRAEL launched attacks in its own defense in 2024. Y’all remember that, right? Biden’s darlings were leaking Israel’s operational details TO THEIR ENEMIES… who are our enemies because Israel is our ally.

So, learn your lessons, fall on your swords…But I say again the party that concealed a defunct president for four years doesn’t get to be outraged about much in my book.

While this issue raises serious questions about the use of Signal—a commercial app—and the lack of secure government systems for such sensitive conversations. I still think it is probably embarrassing and not much more. It’s certainly sparked some lively debates about competence and security protocols. And isn’t that amazing how quickly those hearings “over leaks” came together this morning? In what, 24 hours? How’d that hearing about the SCOTUS leak turn out? Anybody on the hook for that one? Or Trump’s tax records that someone in the IRS leaked? Two wrongs don’t make a right, but it does help to gauge genuine outrage.

If nothing else, this is all a reminder that in the world of politics, someone’s always one accidental group chat away from a full-blown scandal. At least this one didn’t have any unfortunate pics. (I’m looking at you Weiner…Anthony, I mean. Anthony Weiner. Never mind.)