How Atlantic Editor Jeffrey Goldberg Was Accidentally Added to a Top-Secret Group Chat

And what lawmakers are saying about the extraordinary breach of security.

Pete Hegseth

Getty Images

We’ve all accidentally sent a text to the wrong person, but the Trump administration appears to have taken that to a whole new level. Lawmakers from both parties are now expressing outrage after the administration inadvertently shared classified information with a journalist.

Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, revealed on Monday in an article for the publication that he was mistakenly included in a group chat on the private messaging app Signal. The chat involved U.S. national security officials, such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who were discussing details of attacks on the Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen.

Goldberg’s piece began, “The world found out shortly before 2 p.m. Eastern Time on March 15 that the United States was bombing Houthi targets across Yemen. However, I knew two hours before the first bombs dropped that the attack might be coming. This knowledge came because Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth had texted me the war plan at 11:44 a.m.”

But are officials even allowed to discuss this type of information on encrypted messaging platforms? An unnamed former Justice Department official told CNN that Pentagon regulations explicitly state that messaging apps, including Signal, “are NOT authorized to access, transmit, or process non-public DoD information.”

So we decided to dig deeper to understand exactly how this happened.

How did The Atlantic journalist Jeffrey Goldberg receive war plans from Pete Hegseth?

According to Goldberg, it all began on March 11 when he randomly received a connection request on Signal from a user identified as Michael Waltz, who happens to be Trump’s national security advisor. 

At first, Goldberg thought nothing of it — he had met Waltz in the past. Still, two days later, he said he was invited to join a chain called the “Houthi PC small group,” which is an apparent reference to a “principals committee” that typically includes Cabinet members and other senior national security officials. The chat also appeared to include Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, among others.

Goldberg admitted that he initially doubted the text group was even real, writing that he “could not believe that the national security adviser to the president would be so reckless as to include the editor in chief of The Atlantic in such discussions with senior U.S. officials, up to and including the vice president.”

What did Trump officials discuss on Signal? 

Officials seemed unaware of Goldberg’s presence in the Signal chat as they debated the timing of launching airstrikes targeting the Houthi rebels, who have been attacking commercial ships and warships in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden for over a year.

At one point, an account named “JD Vance” raised concerns that taking action against the Houthis would primarily benefit Europe, especially at a time when Trump had been pressuring European allies to contribute more to their own security.

“I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now,” Vance wrote, according to Goldberg. “There’s a further risk that we see a moderate to severe spike in oil prices.”

Goldberg noted that Hegseth quickly responded, acknowledging Vance’s concerns and expressing full support for the vice president addressing them with Trump. The defense secretary then suggested that “messaging will be tough no matter what,” pointing out that “nobody knows who the Houthis are.” He advised those planning the operation to focus on convincing the American public that “1) Biden failed, and 2) Iran funded it.” These seemed to refer to the Biden administration’s inability to stop the Houthi attacks, which had escalated partly due to the Israel-Gaza conflict.

As the bombing campaign moved forward, Hegseth’s account shared details Goldberg believed could jeopardize the safety of U.S. troops and intelligence officers, particularly those stationed in the Middle East. “What I will say, in order to illustrate the shocking recklessness of this Signal conversation, is that the Hegseth post contained operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing,” Goldberg wrote.

With the strikes on the Houthis scheduled for 1:45 p.m. ET, Goldberg decided to wait in his car in a supermarket parking lot to see if it was real. “Around 1:55, I checked X and searched Yemen. Explosions were then being heard across Sanaa, the capital city,” he wrote.

But before removing himself from the chat, he checked the Signal app to find a series of congratulatory messages from Waltz and others. “No one in the chat seemed to notice I was there. And I received no questions about why I left — or, more pointedly, who I was,” he said.

How is Congress reacting to The Atlantic report?

Trump said he didn’t know about the apparent security breach, but the White House has since confirmed it and said they’re looking into Goldberg’s article. “The message thread looks authentic, and we’re figuring out how the wrong number ended up in the chain,” National Security Council spokesperson Brian Hughes said in a statement. 

The acknowledgment from the Trump administration did little to quell the backlash. Democratic Sen. Mark Warner, who leads the Senate Intelligence Committee, went on X to accuse the Trump administration of “playing fast and loose with our nation’s most classified info.”

On the House side, Rep. Chris Deluzio is calling for a “full investigation,” while Rep. Sara Jacobs thinks “people should be fired for this.”

Even some Republicans are sounding the alarm over the leak. GOP Rep. Don Bacon, a member of the Armed Services Committee, pointed out that while it’s not uncommon to accidentally text the wrong person, the real issue is “sending this info over non-secure networks” that could be tapped by Russia or China.

With tensions rising, it’s clear this breach has raised serious concerns about the handling of sensitive information — and whether the systems in place are enough to protect it.