Trump’s team accidentally shared war plans with journalist

Trump’s team reviewed accidental disclosure of airstrike plans to journalist via Signal thread, sparking criticism and demands for investigation.

In Short

The Trump administration is investigating how Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic was mistakenly added to a group chat about U.S. airstrike plans in Yemen. The incident has drawn widespread criticism from both Democrats and Republicans for mishandling classified information and raised serious national security concerns.

The Trump administration is currently reviewing how Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, was inadvertently added to a Signal group chat discussing U.S. airstrike plans against Houthi militants in Yemen.

The National Security Council confirmed the authenticity of the message thread and announced an investigation into how Goldberg’s number was included. Goldberg initially expressed skepticism about the texts and considered the possibility of disinformation campaigns.

He received messages from high-ranking officials, including Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, later sharing some exchanges and screenshots in his article.

Left the group

Goldberg noted that he left the group after concluding the conversation was genuine. Within the discussion, a user identified as “JD Vance” raised concerns about the airstrike plans and their broader implications.

Following the article’s publication, Democratic lawmakers condemned the incident, calling it a serious national security breach. Criticism extended to the transmission of classified information through unsecured channels, with demands for investigations.

Even some Republicans criticized the administration’s handling of classified information. Amidst this, Trump stated he was unaware of the situation when questioned. The unfolding events highlight significant concerns about national security practices within the administration.

Democrats have likened the incident to amateurish behaviour, suggesting the need for tighter safeguards in handling sensitive information moving forward.