The editor-in-chief of The Atlantic magazine revealed in an article on Monday that Trump administration officials revealed to him crucial military details about United States air strikes on Yemen’s Houthi rebel targets on March 15, hours before the attack.
Jeffrey Goldberg, a veteran journalist, said that US government officials accidentally added him to a texting channel where they mapped out the strike.
The US government has acknowledged that the message thread appears to be authentic. The incident has prompted accusations by critics of the Trump administration that senior officials were guilty of a major security breach.
Here is more about what happened, what was revealed, how US officials have responded, and what’s next:
What happened?
“The world found out shortly before 2pm eastern time [18:00 GMT] on March 15 that the United States was bombing Houthi targets across Yemen,” Goldberg wrote, as he opened his Monday article for The Atlantic.
“I, however, knew two hours before the first bombs exploded that the attack might be coming. The reason I knew this is that Pete Hegseth, the secretary of defense, had texted me the war plan at 11:44am [15:44 GMT].”
Here is what happened.
On March 11, Goldberg received a connection request from someone named Michael Waltz on Signal, an encrypted messaging service. Michael “Mike” Waltz is the US national security adviser.
Goldberg wrote that he did not initially think this was the actual Waltz trying to connect with him. He thought it could be someone pretending to be Waltz, who would attempt to get information out of Goldberg.
But the editor added that he had met Waltz in the past. “I didn’t find it particularly strange that he might be reaching out to me, I did think it somewhat unusual,” considering the contentious relationship Trump’s administration has with journalists, Goldberg wrote.
Goldberg accepted the request, still hoping this was the real Waltz, he wrote.
On March 13, Goldberg was added to a messaging group on Signal called “Houthi PC small group”. Goldberg presumed, based on his experience reporting about the US government, that PC here meant Principals Committee – a committee comprising top leaders of the Cabinet, generally associated with security issues.
Who was involved in the group chat?
There were 18 members in the group in total, Goldberg wrote. Besides Waltz, the group included messages from:
* Someone identified as MAR which Goldberg presumed was Secretary of State Marco “Antonio” Rubio.
* An individual identified as JD Vance, Trump’s vice president.
* Someone called TG, which Goldberg presumed was US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.
* An account with the name Scott B, presumably Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent “or someone spoofing his identity,” wrote Goldberg.
* A user called Pete Hegseth, presumably the US defense secretary.
* Someone called John Ratcliffe, presumably the director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
* Another user named Brian. Goldberg did not mention who he presumed this was. Brian Hughes is the National Security Council spokesman, and Brian McCormack is Waltz’s chief of staff. It is unclear if the Brian on the group was either of them.
* Someone identified as “SM,” who Goldberg presumed was Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller.
* An individual identified as Joe Kent, which is the name of Trump’s nominee to run the National Counterterrorism Center.
What exactly did the military chat reveal?
The chat opened on March 13 with Waltz briefing the group that this was a team established “for coordination on Houthis,” and that his deputy was pulling together “a tiger team at deputies/agency Chief of Staff level following up from the meeting in the Sit Room this morning for action items and will be sending that out later this evening.” The Sit Room, or Situation Room is an intelligence management complex in the White House where the latest information on a military or political situation is communicated.
Waltz then requested the members of the chat to name a point of contact from their team to coordinate with Waltz’s team over the next days and the group members began to name individuals from their teams.
At 8:05am (12:05 GMT) on March 14, Waltz wrote: “Team, you should have a statement of conclusions with taskings per the Presidents guidance this morning in your high side inboxes.” A high side inbox refers to classified communication systems.
The messages also seemed to show Vance in disagreement with the approach towards Yemen that Hegseth and Waltz appeared to be pushing. “I think we are making a mistake,” the account named Vance wrote on March 14.
“3 percent of US trade runs through the Suez. 40 percent of European trade does,” the account wrote in a message.
The Vance account added: “I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now … there is a strong argument for delaying this a month.”
Goldberg also wrote that the group received messages from Ratcliffe “that might be interpreted as related to actual and current intelligence operations.”
The Atlantic editor added that Hegseth responded to Vance’s concerns, acknowledging them, but arguing that delaying the operation came with risks that “1) this leaks, and we look indecisive; 2) Israel takes an action first – or Gaza cease fire falls apart – and we don’t get to start this on our own terms”.
Hegseth added: “We can manage both. We are prepared to execute, and if I had final go or no go vote, I believe we should.”
Waltz also chimed in with a message about trade figures and the limited capabilities of European navies.
The Vance account responded, saying “if you think we should do it let’s go. I just hate bailing Europe out again.” To this, the Hegseth account said, “VP: I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It’s PATHETIC.”
On March 15 at 11:44am (8:44 GMT) the Hegseth account posted a “TEAM UPDATE.” Goldberg did not reveal details of this update in his article, saying that if an adversary of the US saw these details, they could harm the American military and intelligence personnel.
However, Goldberg did add that the Hegseth message contained operational details of the March 15 attacks in Yemen, including what targets – including individuals – were to be hit, what weapons were to be used and the sequence of events that would follow.
Goldberg waited in his car in a supermarket parking lot to see if the attacks really did take place at the time scheduled by Hegseth in his message. They did, in Yemeni capital Sanaa, Goldberg wrote he found out through X.
The strikes killed at least 53 people, including children, and wounded others.
What did Goldberg do?
Goldberg exited the group chat and sent Waltz a message on Signal and an email to several US officials with questions about whether the group was real, and whether the officials knew Goldberg was included.
Goldberg wrote that Vance’s spokesperson William Martin wrote that despite the impression created by the messages, Vance was fully aligned with Trump. “Vice President Vance unequivocally supports this administration’s foreign policy,” said Martin, according to Goldberg’s article.
How have US government officials responded?
National Security Council spokesperson Brian Hughes responded in a statement: “This appears to be an authentic message chain, and we are reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain.
“The thread is a demonstration of the deep and thoughtful policy coordination between senior officials. The ongoing success of the Houthi operation demonstrates that there were no threats to troops or national security.”
Hegseth said to reporters on Monday: “I’ve heard how it was characterized. Nobody was texting war plans. And that’s all I have to say about that.”
US State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce declined to comment on the matter at a news conference on Monday.
Trump was also pressed on the scandal during a White House event in Louisiana on Monday. “I don’t know anything about it,” Trump said, adding that he was not a huge fan of The Atlantic. He seemed to confuse the breach for an attempt to subvert the US attack on Yemen.
Could this be a breach of the Espionage Act?
Goldberg wrote that Waltz may have violated the Espionage Act, citing this to several national security lawyers interviewed by The Atlantic.
The Act is a federal law first enacted in 1917 which criminalizes conveying information intended to interfere with operations of US armed forces. Goldberg does not have the security clearance needed for him to view secret information.
Democrats have called for an investigation into this.
“If House Republicans are truly serious about keeping America safe … they must join Democrats in a swift, serious and substantive investigation into this unacceptable and irresponsible national security breach,” US House Minority leader Hakeem Jeffries said in a statement.
Delaware Senator Chris Coons wrote on his X account: “There needs to be an oversight hearing and accountability for these actions.”
