.jfif)
Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, has hinted that he may release more details about a classified Signal group chat he was mistakenly added to—one that allegedly contained top-secret U.S. military plans. The revelation has sparked a heated national security debate, with officials denying that sensitive information was shared, while Goldberg maintains that he witnessed highly classified material before leaving the chat.
In an interview with The Bulwark on Tuesday, Goldberg acknowledged the backlash following his explosive report but defended his journalistic responsibility.
“I get the defensive reaction,” Goldberg said. “But my obligation, I feel, is to the idea that we take national security information seriously.”
A Shocking Digital Blunder
Goldberg's report, published Monday, details how he was mistakenly added to a Signal chat involving top U.S. intelligence and military officials. According to him, the chat included discussions on the Biden administration’s planned strikes against Houthi targets in Yemen.
Before realizing the error and removing himself, Goldberg claims he saw messages from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that allegedly revealed specific weapons systems, human targets, and other highly sensitive intelligence. However, he refrained from publishing those details due to national security concerns.
The revelation has raised serious questions about the security protocols of high-ranking officials, as well as the potential risks of discussing military operations over encrypted messaging platforms.
Officials Push Back Hard
The White House and the Pentagon have strongly denied the report, with Hegseth calling Goldberg a "deceitful and highly discredited, so-called journalist who’s made a profession of peddling hoaxes time and time again.”
Furthermore, during a congressional hearing on Tuesday, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe both insisted that the Signal chat did not contain classified information. Their statements appear to contradict Goldberg’s account, adding another layer of uncertainty to the unfolding controversy.
Will More Information Be Released?
Despite the official denials, Goldberg has not backed down. He suggested that he might eventually make some of the chat’s contents public—though he remains cautious.
“Maybe in the coming days, I’ll be able to say, ‘OK, I have a plan to have this materiel vetted publicly,’” he said. “But I’m not going to say that now.”
His remarks leave open the possibility that The Atlantic may collaborate with national security experts to determine what, if anything, can be responsibly disclosed.
A Larger Security Concern
Beyond the immediate controversy, the incident underscores potential vulnerabilities in how high-level officials communicate. Encrypted messaging apps like Signal offer strong privacy protections, but this case demonstrates how human error—or an unexpected technical mishap—could expose sensitive intelligence in ways previously unconsidered.
