Listen To Story Above

Through a peculiar twist of fate, *The Atlantic* found itself at the center of what initially appeared to be a major scandal, but quickly fizzled into something far less dramatic. The story began when journalist Jeffrey Goldberg revealed in his article *”The Trump Administration Accidentally Texted Me Its War Plans”* that he had been inadvertently included in a high-level Signal chat group.

The chat included prominent figures like National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, Vice President J.D. Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and White House chief of staff Susie Wiles. The incident immediately sparked calls for resignations, particularly targeting Waltz and Hegseth, with the latter tersely stating, “Nobody was texting war plans. And that’s all I have to say about that.”

The situation took an illuminating turn during Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s appearance before the House Intelligence Committee. In an exchange with Rep. Greg Steube of Florida, Gabbard systematically dismantled the notion that classified information had been compromised.

“Were there any sources described in the Signal chat?” Steube asked Gabbard.

“No, congressman,” she responded.

“Were there any methods described in the Signal chat?” he asked.

“No,” she responded.

“Were there any locations?” he asked.

“No,” she responded, again.

“Therefore, due to the fact that there were no sources, no methods, no locations described in the Signal chat, it does not make the discussion classified, is that correct?” he asked.

“That is up to the secretary of Defense’s determination,” Gabbard said.

“The Democrats are obviously making the assertions that what was in the Signal chat was classified and claiming that Secretary Hegseth put this ‘war plan’ out to the world — which he clearly did not. Were there any names in the Signal chat?”

Gabbard’s credentials as a veteran and former member of multiple congressional committees focused on national security lend significant weight to her assessment. Her expertise in identifying genuine operational plans makes her testimony particularly compelling.

Even *The Atlantic* appeared to backtrack, subtly modifying their language when publishing the complete Signal chat, now titled *”Here Are the Attack Plans That Trump’s Advisers Shared on Signal.”* This revision caught the attention of White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt.

While the incident certainly warranted attention and criticism, it hardly merited the dramatic “-gate” suffix. Given Gabbard’s comprehensive testimony and *The Atlantic’s* own rhetorical retreat, the event seems more like a temporary disruption than a lasting scandal. The initial presentation appears increasingly questionable, with the outlet’s evolving language suggesting the sensitive nature of the information may have been overstated.