The Latest Embarrassment: Editor Of The Atlantic Mistakenly Added To Chatroom Where JD Vance And Defense Secretary Hegseth Discuss Bombing The Houthis

Here we go again: the latest embarrassment leading to the latest, long and drawn out distraction that will fill the airways for months in the latest episode of the American soap opera.

Calls for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s resignation are growing today after it was revealed he mistakenly added in the Editor-in-Chief for the magazine The Atlantic, where Hegseth discussed plans to bomb the Houthis in Yemen, minutes before the U.S. then carried out strikes in the region.

One message in the thread included, “I will do all we can to enforce 100 percent OPSEC [operations security]. I welcome other thoughts,” Hegseth wrote.

Last week, President Donald Trump announced that the U.S. would be intensifying attacks against Yemen on the basis that the so-called rebels are disrupting international trade by attacking merchant vessels. The move stands in variance with the President’s claims that he wanted to be a “peacemaker” and stop funding the foreign wars the U.S. has been involved in, even during Trump’s first tenure.

Trump Announces 'Hell Will Rain Down Upon' Houthis In Yemen In Major Military Action, Further Contradicting Claims Of Wanting To Be A Peace President

Per a recent article published today by The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, titled, “The Trump Administration Accidentally Texted Me Its War Plans,” Goldberg revealed how was ‘accidently’ added to a group chat on a private conversation app with high-ranking Trump officials discussing plans to strike Yemen, and it appears no one noticed that Goldberg was mistakenly added.

The conversation took place on an app called Signal, an encrypted messaging app.

The chat included high-ranking members of the Trump administration, including Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, and Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller.

Goldberg described his disbelief and questioned if this another potential disinformation campaign to ensnare journalists. But it did not take long after some of these messages were exchanged surgical strikes were deployed in Yemen coinciding with the discourse.

The entire article can be read on Web Archive, but here is a short excerpt from Goldberg’s report:

After reading this chain, I recognized that this conversation possessed a high degree of verisimilitude. The texts, in their word choice and arguments, sounded as if they were written by the people who purportedly sent them, or by a particularly adept AI text generator. I was still concerned that this could be a disinformation operation, or a simulation of some sort. And I remained mystified that no one in the group seemed to have noticed my presence. But if it was a hoax, the quality of mimicry and the level of foreign-policy insight were impressive.

It was the next morning, Saturday, March 15, when this story became truly bizarre.

At 11:44 a.m., the account labeled “Pete Hegseth” posted in Signal a “TEAM UPDATE.” I will not quote from this update, or from certain other subsequent texts. The information contained in them, if they had been read by an adversary of the United States, could conceivably have been used to harm American military and intelligence personnel, particularly in the broader Middle East, Central Command’s area of responsibility. What I will say, in order to illustrate the shocking recklessness of this Signal conversation, is that the Hegseth post contained operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing.

The only person to reply to the update from Hegseth was the person identified as the vice president. “I will say a prayer for victory,” Vance wrote. (Two other users subsequently added prayer emoji.)

According to the lengthy Hegseth text, the first detonations in Yemen would be felt two hours hence, at 1:45 p.m. eastern time. So I waited in my car in a supermarket parking lot. If this Signal chat was real, I reasoned, Houthi targets would soon be bombed. At about 1:55, I checked X and searched Yemen. Explosions were then being heard across Sanaa, the capital city.

I went back to the Signal channel. At 1:48, “Michael Waltz” had provided the group an update. Again, I won’t quote from this text, except to note that he described the operation as an “amazing job.” A few minutes later, “John Ratcliffe” wrote, “A good start.” Not long after, Waltz responded with three emoji: a fist, an American flag, and fire. Others soon joined in, including “MAR,” who wrote, “Good Job Pete and your team!!,” and “Susie Wiles,” who texted, “Kudos to all – most particularly those in theater and CENTCOM! Really great. God bless.” “Steve Witkoff” responded with five emoji: two hands-praying, a flexed bicep, and two American flags. “TG” responded, “Great work and effects!” The after-action discussion included assessments of damage done, including the likely death of a specific individual. The Houthi-run Yemeni health ministry reported that at least 53 people were killed in the strikes, a number that has not been independently verified.

The Signal chat group, I concluded, was almost certainly real. Having come to this realization, one that seemed nearly impossible only hours before, I removed myself from the Signal group, understanding that this would trigger an automatic notification to the group’s creator, “Michael Waltz,” that I had left. No one in the chat had seemed to notice that I was there. And I received no subsequent questions about why I left—or, more to the point, who I was.

Earlier today, I emailed Waltz and sent him a message on his Signal account. I also wrote to Pete Hegseth, John Ratcliffe, Tulsi Gabbard, and other officials. In an email, I outlined some of my questions: Is the “Houthi PC small group” a genuine Signal thread? Did they know that I was included in this group? Was I (on the off chance) included on purpose? If not, who did they think I was? Did anyone realize who I was when I was added, or when I removed myself from the group? Do senior Trump-administration officials use Signal regularly for sensitive discussions? Do the officials believe that the use of such a channel could endanger American personnel?

Brian Hughes, the spokesman for the National Security Council, responded two hours later, confirming the veracity of the Signal group. “This appears to be an authentic message chain, and we are reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain,” Hughes wrote. “The thread is a demonstration of the deep and thoughtful policy coordination between senior officials. The ongoing success of the Houthi operation demonstrates that there were no threats to troops or national security.”

After the report made national headlines, when asked during a press conference, a State Department spokesperson declined to address the situation.

President Donald Trump was also asked to comment on this during a speech at the White House, but the Commander-in-Chief said he did not know about the incident but still disparaged The Atlantic nonetheless. The Atlantic is decidedly a leftist publication, and has criticized Trump and the GOP on numerous occasions.

House Speaker Mike Johnson stook up for Hegseth and his constituents.

“They're going to track that down and make sure that doesn't happen again. What you did see though, I think, was top-level officials doing their their job, doing it well, and executing on a plan with precision. That mission was a success. No one was jeopardized because of it. We're grateful for that, but they will, certainly, I'm sure, make sure that that doesn't happen.

“I think the administration has acknowledged it was a mistake…and they'll tighten up and make sure it doesn't happen again.”

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who was originally a familiar face and consultant at Fox News since 2014, eventually responded to the report.

Hegseth referred to Goldman as a “deceitful and highly discredited so-called journalist, who has made a profession of peddling hoaxes time and time again.” Hegseth looked into the camera and said “nobody was texting war plans.” However, as noted in Goldberg’s report, the White House already confirmed the authenticity of the messages.

There have since been calls for Hegseth and Matthew Waltz to resign, particularly by Democrats.

This lapse in national security is reminiscent of the accusations made almost a decade ago when former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was using a private server to send emails, as pointed out by The Register, which added:

Another question worth asking is why the group’s members used Signal, and why they set at least some of the messages to auto-delete, which may be a violation of federal records-keeping laws.

Using Signal is also extraordinary given that a constant refrain of President Trump's 2015 presidential election campaign was the need to "lock up" Hillary Clinton for using a private server for her emails.

[Military analyst and retired Australian Army Major General Mick Ryan]: “By communicating on devices which were transmitting information about a future operation in real time to a journalist, the conversation may also have been compromised by other foreign interested parties. As a result, might the entire operation to strike the Houthis have been compromised, and the lives of military personnel put at risk?”

The incident is doubly embarrassing for Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who on March 14 Xeeted: “Any unauthorized release of classified information is a violation of the law and will be treated as such.”

---

AUTHOR COMMENTARY

Lamentations 2:15 All that pass by clap their hands at thee; they hiss and wag their head at the daughter of Jerusalem [America], saying, Is this the city [nation] that men call The perfection of beauty, The joy of the whole earth?

Here we go again: the latest embarrassment leading to the latest, long and drawn out distraction that will fill the airways for months in the latest episode of the American soap opera. That’s what the first four years with Trump amounted to: endless Hollywood drama aired on television and dominated social media headlines. We all remember it, just endless drama that wasted everyone’s time. Just another day in the ‘greatest country on earth, the envy of the world,’ as we are constantly told we are supposed to believe.

Don’t get me wrong, I am not trying to downplay the embarrassment of this, but I think we can all understand that this is the latest performance act for the clown show; and this tomfoolery is presumably going to be drug out for weeks and months.

You know me by now, those who have been following my work for any real length of time, know that I am incredibly pessimistic and cynical towards anything in all forms of media, and how seemingly everything printed and aired is designed to manipulate our actions with half-truths and hyperboles - and how interesting is it that Goldberg twice acknowledged “that this could be a disinformation operation, or a simulation of some sort;” and “that these texts were part of a disinformation campaign, initiated by either a foreign intelligence service or, more likely, a media-gadfly organization, the sort of group that attempts to place journalists in embarrassing positions, and sometimes succeeds.”

Is all of this just another dog and pony show to cause civil and political discourse, to divide and conquer like the media and government always does? Will this be the latest problem, reaction, solution to then justify new communication networks that further track us; to justify advancing digital ID systems and AI surveillance? I guess we will find out soon enough.

In the meantime, pay attention to the stuff that will now once again get little or no press coverage as this story is blasted across television and social media for weeks and months on end…

Ephesians 5:15 See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, [16] Redeeming the time, because the days are evil.

---

[7] Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? [8] Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also? [9] For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? [10] Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope. (1 Corinthians 9:7-10).

The WinePress needs your support! If God has laid it on your heart to want to contribute, please prayerfully consider donating to this ministry. If you cannot gift a monetary donation, then please donate your fervent prayers to keep this ministry going! Thank you and may God bless you.