The Atlantic magazine’s editor in chief has insisted he saw “minute-by-minute accounting” of how the US intended to bomb Yemen — despite Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth adamantly denying that sensitive war plans were ever discussed in the bombshell group text scandal.
The mag’s top editor, Jeffrey Goldberg, revealed Monday that he was inadvertently included in a Signal message chain earlier this month in which top Trump administration officials — including Hegseth and Vice President JD Vance — discussed strikes against the Houthi terror group in Yemen.
The Atlantic magazine’s editor in chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, has insisted he saw a “minute-by-minute accounting” of how the US intended to bomb Yemen. MSNBCIn an interview with MSNBC’s “Inside with Jen Psaki” just hours after the stunning breach of national security surfaced, Goldberg doubled down — claiming he saw a play-by-play of “what was about to happen” with the strikes.
“Look, I’m going to be responsible here and not disclose the things that I read and saw. I will describe them to you,” Goldberg said.
“The specific time of a future attack; specific targets, including human targets meant to be killed in that attack; weapon system; even weather reports.
“I mean, the precise detail, and then a long section on sequencing: ‘This is gonna happen, then that is gonna happen. After that happens, this happens, then that happens, and then we go and find out if it worked,'” he added.
Goldberg hit back after Hegseth poured cold water on the editor’s reporting, arguing that sensitive “war plans” were not being discussed in the Signal chat group and that the editor had a history of being “deceitful” and was “highly discredited.”
| THEY SAY … | BUT … |
|---|---|
| National security adviser Michael Waltz said, “I’ve never met, don’t know” and “never communicated with” Atlantic editor Jeffery Goldberg. President Trump says it was “one of Michael’s people” who added Goldberg to the Signal chat. | Atlantic top editor Jeffrey Goldberg says he received a Signal request “from a user identified as Michael Waltz.” Waltz told Fox News he created the group and somehow Goldberg’s contact number got “sucked” onto someone else’s name in his address book. |
| Officials including Trump insist no “classified information” was discussed. | Even if it doesn’t fit the definition of “classified,” it was certainly sensitive and the administration is against releasing the portions Goldberg held back. “Information about an active operation would presumably fit the law’s definition of ‘national defense’ information,” Goldberg says. |
| “I do not remember mention of specific targets,” said Tulsi Gabbard, director of national intelligence. | “It was, ‘At 1:45, this is going to happen. At 1:52, this is going to happen,’ ” Goldberg insists. “The plan included precise information about weapons packages, targets and timing.” |
| It was an ordinary discussion and did not compromise national security, the White House insists. | “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,” Goldberg says. |
| Some commentators have suggested that Goldberg, a well-known liberal adversary of Trump, was added to the group on purpose by an aide trying to undermine the administration. | The White House hasn’t backed that theory and presumably they would very easily know exactly who added Goldberg. |
“I mean, you know, he can say that it wasn’t a war plan, but it was a minute-by-minute accounting of what was about to happen, organized by CENTCOM, Central Command, which is the military oversight group of the Middle East, the broader Middle East,” Goldberg said.
“It’s interesting because as I’m reading it at 11:44 a.m. on Saturday morning, the 15th, seeing that the Houthis are not going to know about this for another couple of hours, and I know about it, and I’m thinking to myself, I mean, honestly, I’m thinking to myself, well, I’m glad that Mike Waltz didn’t invite a Houthi into the group or a Russian spy or an adversary of the United States,” he continued.
Goldberg hit back after Hegseth poured cold water on the editor’s reporting. Obtained by the NY Post
He claimed he saw a play-by-play of “what was about to happen” with the strikes after Pete Hegseth argued sensitive “war plans” were not being discussed in the Signal chat group. Obtained by the NY Post
Goldberg had earlier revealed he was added to the Signal chain, titled “Houthi PC small group,” on March 11. Obtained by the NY PostGoldberg had earlier revealed he was added to the Signal chain, titled “Houthi PC small group,” on March 11 — before the strikes in Yemen were carried out on March 15.
He noted that he received the Signal invitation from Trump’s national security adviser, Mike Waltz.
Just hours after the saga spilled into public view, Hegseth attacked Goldberg as “deceitful” and a “discredited so-called journalist” while alluding to previous reporting critical of Trump from the publication.
Here is the latest on the Yemen Signal group-chat:
- ‘I’m floored’: Experts reveal ‘really scary’ info shared by Trump officials in Signal group chat
- House Dems hint at perjury rap for intel chiefs over Signal chat leak: ‘A lie to the country’
- Steve Witkoff did not use Signal while in Russia, White House says
- Atlantic publishes more ‘war plan’ Signal texts, including minute-by-minute details and weapons to use in Yemen strikes
- Atlantic editor Jeff Goldberg weighs ‘obligation’ of releasing more ‘war plans’ texts – as he reveals undercover CIA agent’s identity was exposed
- Trump feels ‘very comfortable’ after being briefed on Houthi attack text scandal, blames ‘lower level’ Waltz staffer for mishap
- Trump national security team messaged plans for Yemen strikes to Atlantic editor-in-chief in stunning breach
The leaked messages made the front page of the New York Post.
Hegseth tried to pour cold water on Goldberg’s reporting and discredit him, arguing that sensitive “war plans” were not being discussed in the Signal chat group and that the editor had a history of being “deceitful and highly discredited.” REUTERSHe stopped short, though, of explaining why Signal was being used to discuss the sensitive operation — or how Goldberg ended up on the message chain.
“Nobody was texting war plans, and that’s all I have to say about that,” Hegseth said.
National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes told The Post the Signal chain that included Goldberg “appears to be an authentic message chain” and that officials were reviewing how an “inadvertent number” was added to the chain.
“Nobody was texting war plans, and that’s all I have to say about that,” Hegseth said. Fox NewsMeanwhile, White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt insisted that the president still has the “utmost confidence” in Waltz and the national security team despite the saga.
Earlier Monday, Trump had told reporters: “I don’t know anything about it. You’re telling me about it for the first time.”
He added that The Atlantic was “not much of a magazine.”
