-(4)-1731951738-q80.webp){kind=small}
In a candid moment Tuesday, President Donald Trump acknowledged that a mistake had been made when journalist Jeffrey Goldberg was inadvertently included in a group chat with senior administration officials discussing plans for an attack on Houthi rebels in Yemen. Trump’s comments, delivered during a meeting with U.S. ambassadors, offered insight into the administration’s handling of the incident, which has sparked significant controversy.
The president attributed the mistake to the imperfections of modern technology, emphasizing that such errors are an unfortunate part of our digital age.
The incident centers around Goldberg, the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, who revealed on Monday that he had been invited to join a Signal group chat on March 11 by National Security Adviser Mike Waltz. Two days later, Goldberg participated in the chat titled “Houthi PC small group,” where detailed information about the Yemen attack, including weapon systems, targets, and timing, was shared ahead of the military operation.
The attack on Houthi rebels in Yemen, which took place on March 15, marked a significant military action, and the inclusion of Goldberg in the chat has raised serious questions about the handling of classified information within the Trump administration.
Trump’s response to the controversy came after a federal judge issued a ruling halting the deportation of a Columbia University student who had been inadvertently added to a text chain involving top administration officials discussing the details of the attack. The president was asked whether anyone would be fired in light of Goldberg’s involvement in the Signal chat, and he responded in a calm and measured manner, suggesting that issues like this can arise in any system.
“We pretty much looked into it, it’s pretty simple to be honest,” Trump said. “It’s just something that can happen, it can happen. You can even prepare for it, it can happen. Sometimes people are hooked in and you don’t know they’re hooked in. … It’s not a perfect technology, there is no perfect technology.”
The president went on to defend the decision to use Signal, the encrypted messaging app, despite the controversy surrounding Goldberg’s unintentional inclusion. He explained that the app was chosen because it was the best available technology at the time.
“We always want to use the best technology. This was the best technology for the moment,” Trump said, before reiterating that no classified information was exchanged in the chat, and therefore, he believed the situation was not as serious as some critics were making it out to be.
Despite his defense of Signal, Trump also seemed to acknowledge the shortcomings of the technology. “Again, it wasn’t classified so they probably viewed it as being something that wasn’t that important,” he added.
The implication here was clear: while the technology itself was not perfect, the information shared was not considered a major security risk.
When pressed on whether Waltz, who was in the room with Trump during the meeting, made a mistake, the president stood by his national security adviser, stating that he believed Waltz was doing his best under the circumstances. “No, I don’t think he should apologize. I think he’s doing his best,” Trump said. “It’s equipment and technology that’s not perfect, and probably he won’t be using it again.”
Waltz, for his part, responded affirmatively to the president’s defense, acknowledging that the incident had revealed flaws in the system that would likely lead to changes in how communications are handled in the future. “Yes, sir,” Waltz said, seemingly in agreement with Trump’s assessment of the situation.
The president also took aim at the media, accusing journalists of focusing too heavily on the Goldberg story rather than highlighting other accomplishments of his administration. Waltz echoed this sentiment, arguing that the media had missed the broader picture by fixating on the inclusion of Goldberg in the group chat.
Trump’s defense of Waltz was further emphasized when he claimed that his national security adviser had “learned a lesson” from the incident. The president acknowledged that while the technology used for communication may not have been ideal, it was often necessary to prioritize speed over security in certain situations.
“Sometimes you have to move very quickly, and there are other devices that are very good, but they are very, very cumbersome, and you’re not able to use them from a practical standpoint,” Trump said.
Trump continued to lean into the success of the Yemen attack, pointing out that it had been executed effectively and that the information shared in the Signal chat was not classified. He also remarked that the situation would have been different if classified materials had been shared, indicating that the severity of the incident would have escalated considerably under those circumstances.
“I always say, you have to learn from every experience,” Trump said. “I think it was very unfair the way they attacked Michael. He’s a good person. The person that was on just happens to be a sleazebag so maybe that’s just coincidence, I don’t know,” Trump added, referring to Goldberg’s involvement in the chat.
The president’s remarks were a direct attack on Goldberg, whom he accused of harming the country with his reporting.
Trump’s defense of Waltz extended beyond the immediate incident, with the president emphasizing the importance of protecting individuals like Waltz who are doing their best in challenging circumstances. “I don’t think we should allow people that are very good, like that man sitting right at the end of the table who is doing a good job,” Trump said, gesturing to Waltz. “We shouldn’t allow them to be hurt by it.”
In the aftermath of the controversy, Trump announced that he would initiate an investigation into what happened, but he made it clear that the issue was not one for the FBI to handle. Instead, he framed it as a security matter regarding the potential for Signal to be used as a communication tool in sensitive discussions.
The investigation would focus on whether another method of communication should be considered in the future, given the complications surrounding the use of Signal.
Waltz echoed the president’s comments, noting that technical experts and legal teams were already looking into the situation. “If it was up to me, everybody would be sitting in a room together,” Trump said. “The room would have solid lead walls, a lead ceiling and lead walls.”
He joked about the impracticality of such an approach but reiterated that secure communication was paramount, especially when dealing with sensitive national security matters.
“People do get on those lines, whether it’s Signal or anything else,” Trump said, acknowledging that no technology is immune to security breaches. The president’s comments suggested a pragmatic understanding of the challenges of modern communications in an era of digital vulnerability.
The controversy surrounding the Signal chat involving Jeffrey Goldberg and the Trump administration’s handling of classified information has sparked a broader debate over the use of modern technology in national security matters. As technology continues to evolve and play a greater role in government communications, the potential for mistakes, leaks, and breaches increases.
The Trump administration’s reliance on encrypted messaging apps like Signal to facilitate quick and secure communication raises questions about whether such platforms are truly secure enough for the sensitive information exchanged in these high-level discussions.
Senator Mark Warner (D-Va.), the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, voiced strong criticism of the Trump administration’s use of Signal for discussing military operations. In a hearing on Tuesday, Warner called for the resignation of both Waltz and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, arguing that their actions were reckless and put national security at risk.
The White House has attempted to downplay the significance of Goldberg’s inclusion in the group chat, insisting that no classified materials or “war plans” were discussed. Hegseth, in particular, has echoed these claims, asserting that the information shared in the chat was not classified and therefore not a major security threat.
However, Goldberg himself has stated that war plans were indeed discussed in the chat, and he has suggested that he may eventually share more details about the contents of the conversation.
Trump, for his part, said he would consult with military officials to determine whether it would be a problem if Goldberg were to release all the information shared in the chat. The president’s repeated attacks on Goldberg, whom he labeled a “bad” journalist, suggested that he was more concerned with discrediting the reporter than addressing the potential risks posed by the leak.
The Signal chat incident involving Jeffrey Goldberg and the Trump administration serves as a reminder of the complexities and vulnerabilities inherent in modern communication technology. As the debate over national security and the use of digital tools continues, the Trump administration faces difficult questions about how to balance speed, security, and accountability in government communications.
For now, the investigation into the incident continues, with the future of Signal and other digital platforms in the realm of national security still uncertain. As the technology landscape evolves, the administration will need to address the ongoing challenges of maintaining secure communication in an increasingly connected world.
