HEGSETH, VANCE, AND MORE LEAK HOUTHI WAR PLANS IN GROUP CHAT
When you’re discussing military plans, it’s typically a good idea to keep your cards close to your chest. However, several top officials in the Trump administration have accidentally leaked sensitive information involving attacks against the Houthi in Yemen through a messaging app called Signal.
Alleged Text Group Featuring High-Ranking Officials Leaked Houthi War Plans
Depending on the nature of its creation, it’s no surprise that being in a group chat with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Vice President JD Vance could lead to discussions about the military.
However, when The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg was added to the 18-person chat on Signal, he would become part of a discussion involving attacking targets in Yemen.
An account named Mike Waltz, the same name as the White House’s National Security Adviser, spoke about “weapons packages, targets, and timing” involving the attack right before it occurred.
Despite reports of the exchanges being authentic, President Donald Trump denied knowing about the incident and proceeded to insult the publication.
“I don't know anything about it. I'm not a big fan of The Atlantic. To me, it's a magazine that's going out of business. I think it's not much of a magazine. But I know nothing about it,” said President Trump.
Despite the alleged hiccup, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt reiterated that President Trump maintains trust in his national security team.
Hegseth denied that war plans were shared but would not confirm whether the information in question was classified.
How Goldberg Discovered the Group Chat Was Legit
Chances are, you’ve sent an inadvertent text or two to the wrong person and while this can lead to several embarrassing or negative scenarios for any of us, with national security on the line, stories like this from The Atlantic are a reminder of just how high the stakes are.
“The Trump Administration Accidentally Texted Me Its War Plans” by Goldberg explains how the author received a request to connect on Signal on March 11, 2025, from a user named Mike Waltz.
Two days later, Goldberg was added to a group chat called “Houthi PC small group” that featured 18 people, including various high-ranking officials, including the Vice President, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.
“I had very strong doubts that this text group was real because I could not believe that the national-security leadership of the United States would communicate on Signal about imminent war plans,” wrote Goldberg.
While in the group, the account belonging to Vice President Vance would express concern about attacking the terrorist group because it could help Europe and oil prices might rise.
“I am not sure the (President) is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now. There's a further risk that we see a moderate to severe spike in oil prices. I am willing to support the consensus of the team and keep these concerns to myself. But there is a strong argument for delaying this a month, doing the messaging work on why this matters, seeing where the economy is, etc.,” wrote Vance.
In response, Goldberg reported that Hegseth was supportive of Vance’s sentiments, stated that “nobody knows who the Houthis are,” and wanted to focus on connecting the group with Biden’s failure and funding from Iran.
While the journalist wouldn’t publish anything that could “harm American military and intelligence personnel,” he did mention that operational details, including the time of the strikes, 1:45 p.m. ET, were mentioned.
“So I waited in my car in a supermarket parking lot. If this Signal chat was real, I reasoned, Houthi targets would soon be bombed. At about 1:55, I checked X and searched Yemen. Explosions were then being heard across Sanaa, the capital city,” wrote Goldberg.
At this time, Goldberg checked the chat in Signal to find messages congratulating each other on the success of the attack.
“The Signal chat group, I concluded, was almost certainly real. Having come to this realization, one that seemed nearly impossible only hours before, I removed myself from the Signal group, understanding that this would trigger an automatic notification to the group's creator, ‘Michael Waltz,’ that I had left. No one in the chat had seemed to notice that I was there. And I received no subsequent questions about why I left—or, more to the point, who I was," wrote Goldberg.
What Is Signal?
Signal is an app growing in popularity for people who want private, secure messaging without ads or trackers.
It’s free, open-source, and uses end-to-end encryption—meaning only you and the person you're talking to can read your messages, not even Signal itself.
Plus, the platform offers disappearing messages and voice and video calls and works across devices.
Sounds perfect, right? Well, while it's certainly an overall safe platform, there are still security risks that may arise.
One issue users don't love is the requirement to have a phone number to sign up, which led Signal to introduce usernames recently. However, phone numbers are still tied to accounts, maintaining potential security risks.
Overall, Signal is one of the most secure messaging apps out there, but like any technology, it’s not perfect, and user errors can also contribute to lapses in security, as our government is learning with this latest faux pas.
The Public and Congress React to Houthi Text Leak
As the news continues to unfold regarding the leak, public reaction and the opinions of those in Congress have ranged from awkward laugh reacts on social media to Democratic lawmakers demanding an investigation take place.
Keep in mind that in addition to this security risk, messages can be set to disappear in Signal, with Waltz allegedly having some set to leave the app after a week and others after a four-week period—which could violate federal law that mandates official records are preserved.
Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) said that if the allegations are true, it “represents one of the most egregious failures of operational security and common sense I have ever seen.”
In a statement, Reed said, “Military operations need to be handled with utmost discretion, using approved, secure lines of communication, because American lives are on the line. The carelessness shown by President Trump's cabinet is stunning and dangerous. I will be seeking answers from the Administration immediately.”
On the other side of the political aisle, Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA) defended the incident and believed punishment wasn’t necessary.
"The administration is addressing what happened, apparently, an inadvertent phone number made it onto that thread. They're going to track that down and make sure that doesn't happen again," said Johnson.
Speaking on the conversation, House Speaker Johnson also added that this was just “top-level officials doing their job, doing it well and executing on a plan with precision. That mission was a success. No one was jeopardized because of it. We're grateful for that, but they will certainly, I'm sure, make sure that that doesn't happen again.”
What becomes of the incident is yet to be seen as it’s likely Democrats will seek punishment while facing stark resistance from Republicans.
Thankfully, nothing was jeopardized in the Houthi attack, but this lapse has exposed not only an embarrassing mishap but a true risk to national security and military readiness on an international stage.
Suggested reads:
JOIN OUR NEWSLETTER