It was quite a shocking mistake when key folks from Donald Trump’s team, like Vice President JD Vance, accidentally invited Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic magazine, into a top-secret chat on Signal. This wasn’t just any chat; it was where they were planning military air raids on a group called the Houthis in Yemen. It makes people worry about how safe our country’s secrets are.
The Atlantic spilled the beans on March 24, saying that big shots like Pete Hegseth, who’s in charge of defense, Mike Waltz, who advises on national security, and Marco Rubio, who handles state stuff, were all talking shop about Yemen on this encrypted app. They had a group called “Houthi PC Small Group,” and Jeffrey Goldberg was a part of it without them even realizing it was a mistake.
When the news broke, Pete Hegseth tried to brush it off, saying to the press in Hawaii, “Nobody was texting war plans, and that’s all I have to say about that.” But Jeffrey Goldberg disagreed. He went on CNN and said, “No, that’s a lie. He was texting war plans.”
This goof-up has ticked off people on both sides of the aisle. Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Leader, said it’s “one of the most stunning breaches of military intelligence I have read about in a very, very long time.”
The chat’s most significant revelation wasn’t just the security slip-up—it was actually Vice President JD Vance’s take on the airstrikes. Unlike Trump and his tough-talking crew, JD Vance was playing it safe, saying in the chat: “I think we are making a mistake. I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now.”
He was worried that this could lead to economic woes, like higher gas prices, and recommended putting things on hold for a month to get their story straight. Despite his misgiving, he ended up agreeing with Hegseth: “If you think we should do it, let’s go. I just hate bailing Europe out again.”
So, JD Vance is leaning more towards being cautious about the US getting too involved in European security situations—something he’s talked about quite a bit, like when he criticized our NATO friends at the Munich Security Conference.
‘In Britain and across Europe free speech, I fear, is in retreat’
US Vice President JD Vance spoke at the Munich security conference and took a swipe at Brussels, Germany, Sweden and the UK.https://t.co/Ci0hPtWFvG
📺 Sky 501, Virgin 602, Freeview 233 and YouTube pic.twitter.com/X1aVj7aSSX
— Sky News (@SkyNews) February 14, 2025
When the chat details were out, the reaction was fast. Karoline Leavitt, the White House mouthpiece, put out a statement saying that Donald Trump had complete faith in his security team. But House Armed Services Committee member Rep. Pat Ryan (D-NY) was not happy at all.
He called the situation a “FUBAR” and demanded Congress start looking into it right away.
And even though Vance’s right-hand man, Will Martin, said the VP “unequivocally supports this administration’s foreign policy,” some reports by Politico showed that Vance and Trump had several chats about the airstrikes after that. It sounds like there might be a bit of tension simmering between the big boss and his second-in-command.
Vance’s disagreement from within might hint at more significant issues in the way Donald Trump handles foreign affairs. While President Trump often has positioned himself as a strongman on military matters, Vance seems to be part of a growing group of Republicans who lean towards staying out of international troubles, especially if they’re mostly helping Europeans.
Very interesting that JD Vance’s go-to foreign policy position is to just unilaterally surrender whenever something is hard to explain to a voter, as if that should be of upmost priority in making national security decisions. pic.twitter.com/Gl02T4VXyX
— Kareem Rifai 🌐 (@KareemRifai) March 24, 2025
This difference in views is noticeable when you consider that the Republican party has been moving away from always wanting to jump into situations overseas. So far, Trump has managed not to butt heads with JD Vance, but if they keep having policy clashes, it could lead to some serious problems in the way the administration is run.
And let’s not forget about the secret info part of this mess. Using Signal, which isn’t something the government officially says is okay for talking about sensitive stuff, shows a significant oversight in keeping things safe and secure. Even though the app keeps messages private, personal phones can still get hacked, which makes using them for this kind of chat risky.
Shane Harris, who’s been reporting on national security for a long time, said on BlueSky:
In 25 years of covering national security, I’ve never seen a story like this: Senior Trump officials discussed planning for the U.S. attack on Yemen in a Signal group–and inadvertently added the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic. www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc…
— Shane Harris (@shaneharris.bsky.social) March 24, 2025 at 9:41 PM
This situation doesn’t just stir up trouble in the White House; it also has effects on how other countries see us. If our allies think the Trump folks are careless with secrets, it could put a strain on relationships with NATO members and countries we share intel with, like the UK and Australia.
