The controversy surrounding leaked Signal messages involving senior Trump administration officials has deepened after The Atlantic on Wednesday published new excerpts from the group chat detailing US attack plans on Yemen. The messages, accidentally exposed when The Atlantic’s editor Jeffrey Goldberg was mistakenly added to the Signal group chat, have fueled criticism over a major security lapse. Despite administration claims that no classified information was shared, the newly revealed texts include details about US bombings, drone launches, targeting information, and even specific weaponry to be used in strikes on the Houthi militia. The messages—exchanged between figures such as Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth, intelligence officials, and Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff—also discuss weather conditions, attack timings, and confirmation of a "target terrorist" being killed. The use of casual emojis in these discussions has raised further concerns about the administration's handling of sensitive military operations. Goldberg argued that he published the follow-up piece as the texts should be released in the public interest after Trump officials downplayed the information. “There is a clear public interest in disclosing the sort of information that Trump advisers included in nonsecure communications channels, especially because senior administration figures are attempting to downplay the significance of the messages that were shared,” the magazine said. BREAKING: Jeffrey Goldberg from The Atlantic @TheAtlantic has just released the FULL Text Message Chain. I have provided all texts in this post and the thread below: CHECK MATE! 🧵 pic.twitter.com/UvSj4jJdHi — Brian Krassenstein (@krassenstein) March 26, 2025 Before publishing, his team contacted the US agencies involved in the group chat, some of whom objected to the release. The Signal chat began at 11:44 AM EDT on March 15, just 31 minutes before the first US warplanes launched, with Pete Hegseth announcing an incoming update, followed by mentions of weapons, the target, and its location. A follow-up message provided further details on weapons and attack timings, and at 1:48 PM EDT, Mike Waltz shared real-time intelligence about the US attack in Yemen, prompting a wave of positive responses from chat members. Later that afternoon, Hegseth posted an update confirming that the attacks would continue through the night. However, yesterday in it's first report, The Atlantic argued that it did not want to jeopardise national security. But numerous Trump administration officials, responding to the scandal, have said that none of the information on the Signal chat chain was “classified information” – despite the Atlantic describing it as operational details of the US strike on Yemen’s Houthi militia, which has been attacking shipping in the Red Sea. 'Oversold' The White House has continued to downplay the severity of the leak. National intelligence director Tulsi Gabbard and CIA director John Ratcliffe, both participants in the chat, reiterated that the messages did not contain classified information. Trump, addressing the scandal on Tuesday, called the leak “the only glitch in two months” and insisted no classified information was shared. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt echoed this stance but still urged The Atlantic not to release the messages. Representative Mike Waltz and other Trump allies dismissed the uproar, in a post on X this morning after the Atlantic released another slate of messages, Waltz, who created the Signal group chat, wrote: "No locations. No sources & methods. NO WAR PLANS. Foreign partners had already been notified that strikes were imminent. BOTTOM LINE: President Trump is protecting America and our interests." No locations. No sources & methods. NO WAR PLANS. Foreign partners had already been notified that strikes were imminent. BOTTOM LINE: President Trump is protecting America and our interests. — Mike Waltz (@MikeWaltz47) March 26, 2025 Vice-President JD Vance also responded to the messages, saying that Goldberg "oversold what he had". But one thing "really stands out" from the latest article, Vance said, adding: "Remember when he was attacking [CIA chief John] Ratcliffe for blowing the cover for a CIA agent? Turns out Ratcliffe was simply naming his chief of staff." It’s very clear Goldberg oversold what he had. But one thing in particular really stands out. Remember when he was attacking Ratcliffe for blowing the cover for a CIA agent? Turns out Ratcliffe was simply naming his chief of staff. — JD Vance (@JDVance) March 26, 2025 White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has also dismissed the latest article in the Atlantic as "another hoax written by a Trump-hater who is well known for his sensationalist spin". Writing on X, Leavitt said the article had conceded that the contents of the chat were not war plans. The Atlantic has conceded: these were NOT “war plans.” This entire story was another hoax written by a Trump-hater who is well-known for his sensationalist spin. pic.twitter.com/atGrDd2ymr — Karoline Leavitt (@PressSec) March 26, 2025
