What is ‘Signalgate?’

Washington is abuzz with “Signalgate,” the furor over a string of text messages from top members of the Trump administration discussing plans of a forthcoming attack on Yemen on the Signal messaging app.

One member of the cell phone text thread — the “Houthi PC small group” — was Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic magazine. He was apparently adding by accident.

Democrats claim the messages were a major security breach; Republicans and members of the Trump administration say otherwise.

The messages, which now reportedly have been posted in their entirety by The Atlantic, were scheduled to disappear in one week, a key feature of the Signal app. Not all the messages were released: the magazine said it withheld the name of a CIA intelligence officer serving as chief of staff to CIA Director John Ratcliffe. 

Who is Involved in ‘Signalgate?”

These are the people — that we know of — who were included in the group text chat:

Vice President Vance

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth 

National Security Adviser Michael Waltz

Central Intelligence Agency director John Ratcliffe

White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller (identified as SM on Signal chat)

Secretary of State Marco Rubio (identified as MAR on chat)

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard (identified as TG on chat)

Trump’s envoy for Ukraine and the Middle East Steve Witkoff

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (identified as Scott B on chat)

The chief of staff of the National Security Council, Brian McCormack

White House chief of staff Susie Wiles

The nominee to run the national counterterrorism center and acting chief of staff to Ms. Gabbard, Joe Kent

Editor-in-chief of The Atlantic magazine, Jeffrey Goldberg

What Were the Principals Discussing in the Conversation?

The officials on the text thread discussed operational details concerning the start of bombing on Houthi positions, as well as how to “message” the attacks to the media and American people. The attacks were carried out by American forces in the Middle East under the direction of Central Command.

The Conversation in Full

Thursday, March 13

Waltz: “Team — establishing a principles group for coordination on Houthis, particularly for over the next 72 hours. My deputy Alex Wong is pulling together a tiger team at deputies/agency Chief of Staff level following up from the meeting in the Sit Room [Situation Room] this morning for action items and will be sending that out later this evening.”

“Pls provide the best staff POC [point of contact] from your team for us to coordinate with over the next couple days and over the weekend. Thx.”

MAR [Rubio]: “Mike Needham for State.”

Vance: “Andy baker for VP [vice-president].”

TG [Gabbard]: “Joe Kent for DNI.”

Scott B [Bessent]: “Dan Katz for Treasury.”

Hegseth: “Dan Caldwell for DoD [department of defense.]

McCormack: “Brian McCormack for NSC (national security council).”

Friday, March 14

Waltz: “Team, you should have a statement of conclusions with taskings per the Presidents guidance this morning in your high side inboxes.”

State and DOD, we developed suggested notification lists for regional Allies and partners.”

“Joint Staff is sending this am a more specific sequence of events in the coming days and we will work w DOD [Department of Defense] to ensure COS [chief of staff], OVP [Office of Vice President] and POTUS [President of the United States] are briefed.”

Vance: “Team, I am out for the day doing an economic event in Michigan. But I think we are making a mistake.”

“3 percent of US trade runs through the suez [canal]. 40 percent of European trade does. There is a real risk that the public doesn’t understand this or why it’s necessary.”

“The strongest reason to do this is, as POTUS said, to send a message. But 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.”

Kent: “There is nothing time sensitive driving the time line. We’ll have the exact same options in a month.”

“The Israelis will likely take strikes & therefore ask us for more support to replenish whatever they use against the Houthis. But that’s a minor factor. I will send you the unclass data we pulled on BAM shipping.”

Ratcliffe: “From CIA perspective, we are mobilizing assets to support now but a delay would not negatively impact us and additional time would be used to identify better starting points for coverage on Houthi leadership.”

Hegseth: “VP: I understand your concerns — and fully support you raising w/ POTUS. Important considerations, most of which are tough to know how they play out (economy, Ukraine peace, Gaza, etc). I think messaging is going to be tough no matter what — nobody knows who the Houthis are — which is why we would need to stay focused on: 1) Biden failed & 2) Iran funded.”

“Waiting a few weeks or a month does not fundamentally change the calculus. 2 immediate risks on waiting: 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. We can manage both. We are prepared to execute, and if I had final go or no go vote, I believe we should. This [is] not about the Houthis. I see it as two things: 1) Restoring Freedom of Navigation, a core national interest; and 2) Reestablish deterrence, which Biden cratered. But, we can easily pause. And if we do, I will do all we can to enforce 100% OPSEC [operations security]. I welcome other thoughts.”

Waltz: “The trade figures we have are 15% of global and 30% of container. It’s difficult to break that down to US. Specific because much of the container either going through the red sea still or around the Cape of Good Hope our components going to Europe that turns into manufactured good for transatlantic trade to the United States.”

“Whether we pull the plug or not today European navies do not have the capability to defend against the types of sophisticated, antiship, cruise missiles, and drones the Houthis are now using.”

“So whether it’s now or several weeks from now, it will have to be the United States that reopens these shipping lanes. Per the president’s request we are working with DOD and State to determine how to compile the cost associated and levy them on the Europeans.”

Waltz: “As we stated in the first PC [Principals Committee] we have a fundamental decision of allowing the sea lanes to remain closed or to re-open them now or later, we are the only ones with the capability unfortunately. From a messaging standpoint we absolutely ad this to of horribles [sic] on why the Europeans must invest in their defense.”

Vance: “If you think we should do it let’s go. I just hate bailing Europe out again.”

“Let’s just make sure our messaging is tight here. And if there are things we can do upfront to minimize risk to Saudi oil facilities we should do it.”

Hegseth: “VP: I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It’s PATHETIC. But Mike is correct, we are the only ones on the planet (on our side of the ledger) who can do this. Nobody else even close. Question is timing. I feel like now is as good a time as any, given POTUS directive to reopen shipping lanes. I think we should go; but POTUS still retains 24 hours of decision space.”

SM [Miller]: “As I heard it, the president was clear: green light, but we soon make clear to Egypt and Europe what we expect in return. We also need to figure out how to enforce such a requirement. EG, if Europe doesn’t remunerate, then what? If the US successfully restores freedom of navigation at great cost there needs to be some further economic gain extracted in return.”

Hegseth: “Agree.”

Saturday, March 15

Hegseth: “TEAM UPDATE:”

“TIME NOW (1144et): Weather is FAVORABLE. Just CONFIRMED W/ CENTCOM we are a GO for mission launch.

“1215et: F-18s LAUNCH (1st strike package)

“1345: ‘Trigger Based’ F-18 1st Strike Window Starts (Target Terrorist is @ his Known Location so SHOULD BE ON TIME) – also, Strike Drones Launch (MQ-9s)

“1410: More F-18s LAUNCH (2nd strike package)

1415: “Strike Drones on Target (THIS IS WHEN THE FIRST BOMBS WILL DEFINITELY DROP, pending earlier ‘Trigger Based’ targets)

15:36: “F-18 2nd Strike Starts — also, first sea-based Tomahawks launched.”

“MORE TO FOLLOW per timeline. We are currently clean on OPSEC. Godspeed to our Warriors.”

Vance: “I will say a prayer for victory.”

Waltz: “VP. building collapsed. Had multiple positive ID. Pete, Kurilla, the IC, amazing job.”

Vance: “What?”

Waltz: “Typing too fast. The first target — their top missile guy — we had positive ID of him walking into his girlfriend’s building and it’s now collapsed.”

Vance: “Excellent.”

Waltz: [Posted fist, American flag and fire emojis.]

MAR [Rubio]: “Good Job Pete and your team!!”

Waltz: “The team in MAL did a great job as well.”

SM [Miller]: “Great work all. Powerful start.”

Hegseth: “CENTCOM was/is on point. Great job all. More strikes ongoing for hours tonight and will provide full initial report tomorrow. But on time, on target, and good readouts so far.”

Wiles: “Kudos to all — most particularly those in theater and CENTCOM! Really great. God bless.”

Witkoff: [Posted two hands praying, one flexed bicep and two American flag emojis.]

TG [Gabbard]: “Great work and effects!”