White House Chaos: The Signal Chat Error That Rocked U.S. National Security
- Teo Drinkovic
- Mar 25
- 3 min read
How a Mistaken Chat Addition Revealed Critical National Security Failures; The Details Behind The Top Security Breach In U.S. History Spark a National Debate Over Military Safety
We already knew that the Trump administration was full of oversights and errors, and that President Trump himself was prone to mistakes and clumsy remarks. However, no one expected a breach like the one that recently occurred.
According to a statement from the White House, Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor of The Atlantic, was inadvertently added to a highly confidential group chat on the Signal messaging app on Monday. This chat included high-ranking American officials discussing an attack against the Yemeni Houthis.
An unnamed source from the White House revealed that officials vented their anger at national security adviser Mike Waltz—one even allegedly calling him a “fu***ng idiot” after it was discovered he had added a prominent journalist to the secret group chat. “Everyone in the White House can agree on one thing: Mike Waltz is a fu***ng idiot,” the source told Politico.
This incident is being regarded as one of the most serious security lapses in modern American military history, regardless of how the President and his team have attempted to downplay the debacle.
In his article on Monday, journalist Jeffrey Goldberg detailed how the situation unfolded. He described a conversation among 18 officials, including the head of diplomacy, Marco Rubio, Vice President J.D. Vance, and former CIA Director John Ratcliffe.
The trouble reportedly began on March 11, when national security adviser Mike Waltz contacted Goldberg via Signal and accidentally added him to a group chat titled “Houthi PC small group,” where officials were discussing a potential attack on Yemeni Houthis.
Two days later, messages began arriving—one from Pete Hegseth on March 15—that included details of imminent attacks. Goldberg initially dismissed the messages as inauthentic until the bombs started falling and the attacks actually occurred.
Among the topics discussed was a subject that has long stirred discontent in Washington: the United States’ relationship with its ally, Europe. According to Goldberg, the loudest critic in the group was Vice President J.D. Vance, who pointed out that most of the trade through the Suez Canal benefits Europe (about 40%), while only about 3% benefits America.
He concluded that the American public would hardly accept risking the lives of soldiers and valuable resources for Europe’s benefit.
Allegedly, Vance sent a message stating, “It pisses me off that we’re once again saving Europe.” In response, Pete Hegseth, the U.S. Secretary of Defense, supposedly replied, “I completely share your disgust toward European freeloading. It’s pathetic.”
Further messages revealed a strong American discontent with the role of “world policeman,” as Europe enjoys global security benefits without paying the price.
The situation became even clearer when, according to Goldberg, Stephen Miller—an advisor to Donald Trump—wrote that “Europe must give something in return.” The chat even reportedly discussed concrete methods to charge Europe for its so-called “debt.”
One thing is clear: such discussions should never take place via messaging apps, no matter how secure they may be. If such communication is necessary, the disappearing messages feature should be used, and the recipients rigorously verified.
Unfortunately, the recklessness of those involved has exposed their true intentions and attitudes, both toward adversaries and allies. Mike Waltz, in particular, has suffered the most, as such mistakes are inexcusable for someone in his position.
Many of his colleagues now believe he should resign to help salvage President Trump’s credibility.
In today’s digital world, every mistake comes at a steep price, and once something is posted online, it remains there forever.
The American administration now faces ridicule for allowing such a breach, and this incident serves as a stark reminder of the caution required when discussing matters critical to national security and the need to prevent such lapses in our own circles.
Well done! Great article! Bravo!