The Atlantic released screenshots of the private Signal chat in which top Trump administration officials shared plans to strike the Houthis in Yemen.
In a Wednesday article published shortly before Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliff started their testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, the Atlantic posted screenshots of US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth providing extremely detailed updates for strikes on Houthi terrorists.
In the messages, Hegseth provided detailed information about when US forces would strike Houthi targets, as well as what planes and drones would be used.
At the testimony, Gabbard said, “The conversation was candid and sensitive, but as the president and national security adviser stated, no classified information was shared. There were no sources, methods, locations, or war plans that were shared.
“The president and national security adviser (Mike) Waltz held a press conference yesterday with a clear message: it was a mistake that a reporter was inadvertently added to a Signal chat with high-level national security principals having a policy discussion about imminent strikes against the Houthis and the effects of the strike," she added, as reported by CNN.
What did Hegseth text?
Hegseth's text started with the title "TEAM UPDATE" and included these details, according to The Atlantic:
“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)”
“1536 F-18 2nd Strike Starts – also, first sea-based Tomahawks launched.”
“MORE TO FOLLOW (per timeline)”
“We are currently clean on OPSEC”
Atlantic in the chat
This comes after the Atlantic's Editor in Chief, Jeffery Goldberg, reported that he was added to the Signal chat with several senior administration officials. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz did not deny the incident but said that he did not know why Goldberg was added to the chat.
"I can tell you for 100%... I don't text him, he wasn't on my phone," he said in a Tuesday Fox News interview.
Goldberg noted in a Wednesday article with Atlantic reporter Shane Harris that the messages occured "31 minutes before the first US warplanes launched, and two hours and one minute before the beginning of a period in which a primary target, the Houthi 'Target Terrorist,' was expected to be killed by these American aircraft.
"If this text had been received by someone hostile to American interests — or someone merely indiscreet and with access to social media — the Houthis would have had time to prepare for what was meant to be a surprise attack on their strongholds. The consequences for American pilots could have been catastrophic."
The Trump administration hasn't denied adding Goldberg to the group chat, but members have downplayed the significance of the blunder.
“There weren’t details, and there was nothing in there that compromised, and it had no impact on the attack, which was very successful,” Trump said during a phone interview on The Vince Show, as reported by CNN.
“It’s something that is not a big deal, other than you want to find out who did it and how they did it because you don’t want to happen, you know, in the future, you can’t have that happen."
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that Trump “continues to have confidence” in Waltz and his team.
“What I can say definitively, is what I just spoke to the president about, and he continues to have confidence in his national security team,” Leavitt said.
On Tuesday, Gabbard and Ratcliff told the Senate Intelligence Committee that no classified information was released in the chat.
“My communications, to be clear, in the Signal message group were entirely permissible and lawful and did not include classified information," Ratcliff told members of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
“There was no classified material that was shared in that Signal group,” Gabbard said.
Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell confirmed that Hegseth had shared information on the strikes.
While a defense official had earlier told CNN that the strike's details were classified at the time of the operation, but Parnell denied the claims.
“It’s no surprise hoax-peddlers at the Atlantic have already abandoned their ‘war plans’ claim. These additional Signal chat messages confirm there were no classified materials or war plans shared," he said.
"The Secretary was merely updating the group on a plan that was underway and had already been briefed through official channels. The American people see through the Atlantic’s pathetic attempts to distract from President Trump’s national security agenda."
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. https://t.co/BUGbX6gZDZ
— JD Vance (@JDVance) March 26, 2025
Democratic officials in the House pushed back against the Trump administration's assertions that no classified information was released.
“Everyone here knows that the Russians or the Chinese could have gotten all of that information, and they could have passed it on to the Houthis, who easily could have repositioned weapons and altered their plans to knock down planes or sink ships,” Rep. Jim Himes (D- Con.) said during the Wednesday House hearing.
“I think that it’s by the awesome grace of God that we are not mourning dead pilots right now.”
Trump administration pushes back
Waltz responded to the Atlantic article on social media and asserted that no war plans were released in the chat.
“No locations. No sources & methods. NO WAR PLANS,” he wrote in a Wednesday post on X/Twitter. “Foreign partners had already been notified that strikes were imminent,” he went on. “BOTTOM LINE: President Trump is protecting America and our interests.”
In the Tuesday article, Goldberg and Harris noted that the military faced an editorial dilemma on whether or not to release the screenshots because it did not want to endanger the lives of American military personnel. However, in light of Gabbard, Waltz, and Ratcliff's statements, the editorial board decided "that people should see the texts in order to reach their own conclusions."
Goldberg said in an interview with MSNBC that his publication did redact sensitive pieces of information in the follow-up article.
“We did redact one piece of information because we felt, on our own, that we felt it was best to do. And the CIA asked us, but, you know, at a certain point, the administration is saying that there’s nothing classified or secret or sensitive in these, so at a certain point, I just felt, you know, let our readers decide for themselves,” he said.
The Atlantic said that it had "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."
After the Atlantic published the story with the messages, the White House pushed back against Goldberg's original claims.
“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,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a post on X/Twitter.
Goldberg said that he did not understand Leravitt's claims.
“I don’t even know what that means ... What are they arguing, that an attack is different than a war?" Goldberg told MSNBC on Tuesday.
“She’s playing some sort of weird semantic game."
Reuters contributed to this report.