The Signalgate, the scandal generated after the director of The Atlantic magazine published an incredible article detailing how the top officials of the US Government discussed this month through an insecure messaging group the plans for the bombing of Yemen and mistakenly included him, has caused the first serious earthquake within the Trump Administration. With no immediate consequences but with scars, as revealed by the massive campaign launched from the White House to downplay what happened, minimize possible consequences, and try to discredit Jefrrey Goldberg, the journalist. "It's the only failure in two months," the president acknowledged on Tuesday, publicly reprimanding those responsible.
When Goldberg realized what was happening a few days ago, he couldn't believe it "because it's completely unbelievable," he repeatedly said on television yesterday. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz added him to a Signal group. And for a few days, he witnessed how all government officials, except the president himself, discussed on his screen military plans to attack the Houthis, sharing obviously classified information about the exact moment the bombings would start, how they would be, with what weaponry, and which American forces were involved. How they celebrated when the first bombs were confirmed with heart emojis, fires, biceps, or the American flag. But also how the vice president or the Defense Secretary raged against Europe and even how JD Vance clashed with Trump's ideas, saying he wasn't "sure if the president is aware of the inconsistency of this with his current message about Europe" or the "additional risk of seeing a moderate or severe increase in oil prices. I am willing to support the team's consensus and keep these concerns to myself. But there are strong arguments to delay this a month, to inform about its importance, to analyze the economic situation, etc.," he said trying to halt the attack.
Faced with all that, the journalist thought he was a victim of some kind of deception, from a foreign power or even from the government itself, as Trump has a grudge against him. Just yesterday, when asked for the first time, Trump said, "I don't know anything about it. I'm not a big fan of The Atlantic. It's a magazine that's going bankrupt. But I don't know anything about it." Goldberg feared it was a trap to discredit him if he published something that was false. Or to sue him if he published something considered secret and could endanger troop security. But no, everything was real. The administration of the world's leading nuclear power was indeed discussing these issues in a secure application, breaking protocols, probably laws, and with a journalist as a witness.
The earthquake was immediate, with some aftershocks on the other side of the Atlantic, as the published conversations show the clear animosity that figures like Vance or Hegseth privately show towards Europe, beyond their speeches in Brussels or Munich, provocative tweets, or what they say in interviews for domestic consumption. There is resentment, deep anger even at the possibility of doing something that could be beneficial for NATO and EU allies. "I hate rescuing Europe again," Vance writes about how the military operation they are planning could benefit European ships. "Vice President, I fully share your rejection of European opportunism. It's PATHETIC. But Mike is right: we are the only ones on the planet (on our side) who can do this. No one else even comes close," Hegseth says in the conversation. Even one of the president's closest advisors, Stephen Miller, intervenes to say that Europe must be quickly explained "what we expect in return. We must also determine how to enforce this requirement. For example, if Europe does not pay, then what? If the United States manages to restore freedom of navigation at a high price, additional economic benefit is necessary in return."
In Washington, dozens of congressmen and senators demanded explanations and resignations. Television networks and newspapers are all open not only because of the bizarre nature but also because of the potential implications. Legal and political. Everyone has commented because it's a bizarre topic, but also because in the past, anything similar would have involved resignations, dismissals, and a thorough investigation, for example by the FBI, now led by one of Trump's most loyal henchmen, Kash Pattel.
It's not far-fetched to say that Trump is president today because he was for the first time in 2017, and that happened in no small part because the revelation that Hillary Clinton had consulted emails on a private server may have cost her the election. With FBI Director James Comey opening two investigations, one of them two weeks before the elections. "It has to be a joke," she wrote yesterday upon reading the article in the magazine.
Aware of the seriousness, the possible repercussions, or that their high-ranking officials and especially Hegseth are on thin ice, the administration has closed ranks. Defense Secretary, exposed, lashed out on Monday against Goldberg, saying he was "someone who calls himself a journalist, a liar, and very discredited. Someone who has been spreading lies over and over again, including, I don't know, the Russia, Russia, Russia lies! So this is a guy who sells garbage. This is what he does." White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt has followed the same line, stating that "Jeffrey Goldberg is known for his sensationalist approach. No 'war plan' was discussed. No classified material was sent to the group." And heavyweights in Security or Defense matters, like Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, acknowledged it was a serious mistake but tried to turn the page. "This is a coordinated effort to distract from the successful measures taken by President Trump and his Administration to make America's enemies pay and keep Americans safe," the White House said in a statement.
Mockery from Trump-friendly networks
While networks friendly to the president, the same ones that for months lambasted Hillary Clinton, mocked it saying it was a silly mistake, something that has happened to all of us at some point, President Trump defended his National Security Advisor, Michael Waltz, who created the chat, but with a warning. "Mike has learned a lesson and is a good man," he said in a phone interview with NBC News on Tuesday. "The only failure in two months and it turned out not to be serious," he wanted to settle, blaming a member of the National Security Advisor's team for the material error with the phone.
However, the implications are very serious. This Tuesday, the Senate Intelligence Committee summoned CIA Director John Ratcliffe and National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard, both members of that Signal group. Gabbard, like the White House, maintained that "No classified information was shared," despite Goldberg clearly stating that the Defense Secretary had shared it and that he had it in his possession. The CIA director tried to evade responsibility, saying that when he took office, the messaging application was already installed on his computer. But he carefully chose his words and emphasized that he had not shared classified information, without addressing whether the Pentagon, through Hegseth, had done so. Pressed by Democratic senators, Gabbard admitted that some of the exchanges in the chat took place when she was abroad, but did not respond if she used her personal phone for those chats or a government one, and insisted that Signal did not mention any specific Houthi targets, but rather had a more general discussion.
In any case, according to the Espionage Act of 1917, national Defense information does not have to be classified to be considered to endanger the country's security. If the journalist shares the information that was in the group and the officials have lied, they would be exposed to serious legal consequences. "At the very least, it was careless, unprofessional, and incompetent behavior," reproached Virginia Senator Mark Warner. "Just because they are irresponsible with the material, doesn't mean I will be too," journalist Goldberg said on Tuesday about why he doesn't publish all the chat content if officials claim there is nothing classified.
Gravity is evident because as many experts and former high-ranking officials point out, the system is designed by default so that things like this cannot be done. Computers, phones, and devices that have classified information cannot have vulnerable applications. Therefore, to share military plans, a group must deliberately export them from one system to another. "They intentionally introduced highly classified information into an unclassified device. I would have lost my security clearance in the Air Force for this and for much less," criticized Republican congressman Don Bacon. "I guarantee you, with 99.99% certainty, that Russia and China are monitoring those two phones. So I think it is a security violation, and there is no doubt that Russia and China saw this shortly after the attacks on Yemen or the Houthis."