Four lingering questions about Trump officials' Signal chat
White House National Security Adviser Mike Waltz
- Published
For the past 48 hours, top White House officials have faced questions from lawmakers and the press about how a journalist came to join a sensitive group chat for an upcoming military operation - and why President Donald Trump's national security team was sharing sensitive information in an unsecure manner.
The Atlantic first reported details of the group chat on the platform Signal after its editor in chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, was added to it. He followed the thread as top Trump administration officials discussed upcoming military strikes against the Houthis in Yemen.
The Atlantic then on Wednesday published the entire text thread that showed the detailed and potentially classified rundown for a March air raids.
While the thread appears to have contained sensitive information, there is still much that remains unknown. Here are four lingering questions regarding so-called "Signal-gate".
Was the information classified or not?
The Trump administration maintains the information shared in the chat was not classified.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Wednesday that "no war plans" were discussed on the chat. Instead, she characterised the information shared as "sensitive policy discussions".
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard told lawmakers during a congressional hearing that the Signal chat was "candid and sensitive", though "no classified information was shared".
But under questioning, she and CIA Director John Ratcliffe appeared uncertain about the classification of the attack plan. They later emphasised that Hegseth had the power to classify and declassify the type of details that were shared.
Hegseth has denied sharing classified material, but experts are sceptical that this type of sensitive information would not carry that kind of designation.
Jamil Jaffer, executive director of the National Security Institute at George Mason University, said that Hegseth did not send "an operational plan for World War Three, or for the Pacific region".
"But at the same time," Mr Jaffer said, "these are operational details that could, if released publicly, put American lives at risk or jeopardise the success of the operation."
Who added Goldberg to the group and why?
Watch: ‘Why did they invite me?’ - Goldberg says Trump officials should accept mistake
In his original article, Mr Goldberg reports that on 11 March he initially "received a connection request on Signal from a user identified as Michael Waltz", Trump's national security adviser.
Two days later, he writes that he received a notice that he was to be included in a Signal group titled the "Houthi PC small group."
Mr Goldberg reports that the group received a message from Waltz, which also noted one of his deputies was "pulling together" a team of top staffers relevant to the discussion.
On Tuesday, Trump suggested that a "lower level" staffer for Waltz added Mr Goldberg to the chat.
However, Waltz himself told Fox News' Laura Ingraham: "I take full responsibility. I built the - I built the group."
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who was also in the group, said on Wednesday that someone had made a "mistake" in adding Mr Goldberg.
Will there be a congressional investigation?
It remains to be seen whether the Republican-controlled Congress will launch oversight investigations.
Republican lawmakers have emphatically supported the Trump administration's agenda to this point, so it seems improbable that they would support investigations into the Signal chat.
Democrats in the House are reportedly trying to force a vote on a "Resolution of Inquiry" that would require the Trump administration to hand over records related to the incident, according to Reuters, but they do not have a majority.
While some Republicans have raised concerns over the leak, few have appeared eager to cross the president.
Watch: Is the Signal chat leak involving Trump officials a big deal?
How extensive is the Trump administration's use of Signal?
The use of Signal to discuss the Houthi strikes posed broader questions about how Trump's top staffers are sharing and discussing sensitive information.
Gabbard testified on Wednesday that Signal came "pre-installed on government devices".
She cited guidance from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which mentioned Signal as an example of a messaging service with end-to-end encryption.
Ratcliffe earlier testified to Congress that Signal had been installed on his devices when he took over the CIA.
But it remains uncertain if security officials had provided guidance about using Signal for discussing military operations like the strikes against the Houthis.
"Whether these circumstances were approved or not is still not clear," Mr Jaffer said.
CBS News, the BBC's US partner, has reported that the US National Security Agency had warned employees against using Signal due to "a vulnerability" that they had identified.
Follow the twists and turns of Trump's second term with North America correspondent Anthony Zurcher's weekly US Politics Unspun newsletter. Readers in the UK can sign up here. Those outside the UK can sign up here.