The Atlantic has published private Signal group chat messages between national security leaders from the Trump administration, offering a detailed look at internal discussions about an airstrike on Houthi targets in Yemen. The release follows accusations from top Trump officials that the magazine misrepresented the nature of the conversations.
The messages, inadvertently shared with The Atlantic’s Editor-in-Chief Jeffrey Goldberg, have now been made public to allow readers to assess their significance firsthand. While administration officials, including CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, have stated that the messages were not classified, the decision to publish them raises serious questions about journalistic ethics and national security.
What the Messages Reveal
The published chat logs provide more detail than Goldberg’s initial reporting, shedding light on discussions between key figures, including Vice President Vance, about the timing and execution of the airstrike. These exchanges clarify the level of deliberation within Trump’s inner circle, including what weapons would be used and when the attack would take place.
Goldberg and The Atlantic’s national security reporter Shane Harris defended their decision to release the texts, arguing that transparency is essential given the administration’s attempts to discredit their reporting.
“The statements by Hegseth, Gabbard, Ratcliffe, and Trump—combined with the assertions made by numerous administration officials that we are lying about the content of the Signal texts—have led us to believe that people should see the texts in order to reach their own conclusions,” Goldberg and Harris wrote.
Backlash from the White House and Trump Officials
The Trump administration has responded aggressively, with President Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and other top officials slamming The Atlantic for publishing what they claim were sensitive but not classified discussions. Hegseth has denied any wrongdoing and insisted that the group chat did not contain classified information.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt issued a statement reiterating the administration’s opposition to the publication of the messages.
“As we have repeatedly stated, there was no classified information transmitted in the group chat,” Leavitt said. “However, as the CIA Director and National Security Advisor have both expressed today, that does not mean we encourage the release of the conversation. This was intended to be an internal and private deliberation amongst high-level senior staff and sensitive information was discussed. So for those reason[s]—yes, we object to the release.”
Despite these objections, Leavitt did not specify what parts of the messages the White House considered sensitive or why their publication—more than a week after the airstrike—would impact national security.
Legal and Political Ramifications
While the information has been repeatedly described as not classified, its release could still carry legal consequences for The Atlantic. The Espionage Act prohibits the unauthorized dissemination of national defense information, and some legal experts argue that even non-classified but sensitive military details could fall under its scope.
During a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Tuesday, Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) characterized the accidental exposure of the messages as a “huge mistake.” However, Ratcliffe firmly disagreed, responding with a simple “no.” Both he and Gabbard reiterated that no classified material was discussed, though they acknowledged that details of an upcoming U.S. airstrike would typically be considered highly sensitive.
Media vs. The Trump Administration
The publication of the messages adds fuel to the ongoing battle between Trump and the media. The former president and his allies have long accused mainstream outlets of bias, and this latest controversy has only deepened that divide.
Leavitt took to social media on Wednesday morning to accuse The Atlantic of sensationalism, pointing out that the publication initially referred to the messages as an “attack plan” rather than a “war plan.”
“The Atlantic has conceded: these were NOT ‘war plans.’ This entire story was another hoax written by a Trump-hater who is well-known for his sensationalist spin,” she wrote on X.
What’s Next?
The fallout from The Atlantic’s decision to publish the messages is far from over. Legal experts will likely debate whether the release constitutes a violation of national security laws, while the political repercussions could continue to shape public perception of both the Trump administration and the press.
