Trump Stands By Waltz, Hegseth As Dems Gun For Their Jobs After Signal Leak

Congressional Democrats are trying to turn the Jeffrey Goldberg Signal chat revelations in The Atlantic into a major national scandal, and are gunning for the jobs of Trump’s national security adviser Mike Waltz and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

“Nobody was texting war plans, and that’s all I have to say about that,” Hegseth told reporters within hours after the controversy was unleashed Monday. This was as the National Security Council issued an initial statement saying the message thread “appears to be authentic.” Meanwhile…

DEMOCRAT WARNER ASKS INTELLIGENCE AGENCY HEADS TO RELEASE ENTIRE SIGNAL CHAT IF IT IS NOT CLASSIFIED, AS THEY ASSERT

Goldberg, who says he was inadvertently added to the group, apparently by Waltz, described that he was shocked to see ‘war plans’ discussed in real time, regarding Yemen operations.

But Hegseth has rejected the claims that highly sensitive and classified war plans were being discussed. “You’re talking about a deceitful and highly discredited so-called ‘journalist’ who’s made a profession of peddling hoaxes time and time again,” Hegseth said further.

Goldberg later in a MSNBC interview pushed back, saying that “precise details” of the attack on the Houthis were shared in the chat, and viewed by him.

“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… and [shared] with a bunch of civilian leaders,” Goldberg said.

President Trump is meanwhile standing by his national security team, even as Goldberg has claimed to CNN of Hegseth, “He was texting attack plans.”

On Waltz, Trump told NBC’s Garrett Haake, “Michael Waltz has learned a lesson, and he’s a good man.” Trump described that it was one of Waltz’s aides who added Goldberg’s number to the chat.

“It was the only glitch in two months, and it turned out not to be a serious one,” he said.

Democratic Rep. Seth Moulton of Massachusetts is one among many who disagree. “There is no world in which this information should have been shared in non-secure channels,” he said in a written statement. “Hegseth is in so far over his head that he is a danger to this country and our men and women in uniform.”

Press secretary Karoline Leavitt on Tuesday also pushed back, saying these weren’t war plans. She said the White House is “looking into how Goldberg’s number was inadvertently added to the thread.”

Goldberg is still trying to blame Hegseth for everything, when Michael Waltz is the one responsible for the entire snafu.

Now why would that be? Why would Goldberg repeatedly attack a victim of the breach instead of HIS FRIEND WHO SECRETLY INVITED HIM IN?

It’s a real mystery. https://t.co/vjq9hO35P6

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) March 25, 2025

She further described that the White House Counsel’s Office has “provided guidance on a number of different platforms for President Trump’s top officials to communicate as safely and efficiently as possible.”

She called Goldberg “well-known for his sensationalist spin” and said, “Thanks to the strong and decisive leadership of President Trump, and everyone in the group, the Houthi strikes were successful and effective.” She then said, “Terrorists were killed and that’s what matters most to President Trump.”

* * * 

Sean Davis of The Federalist highlights another significant issue: ‘they now know who Waltz talks to when nobody is looking’…

“Hegseth should’ve known.” What nonsense. If you can’t trust the president’s top national security adviser to initiate a conversation without secretly including dishonest and corrupt hoax-peddling journos, that is a problem that begins and ends with the national security adviser.

Signal only shows names now, not numbers. And each user determines how his own name shows up, which means if you are invited into a chat after others have been added—and one of those people is not accurately showing their name—you would have no way of knowing a previously added person was a mole.

Similarly, if a trusted friend or colleague called you to speak with you but secretly had another person on the line, or met with you in person while his phone or other device was recording or relaying the conversation to another party, you wouldn’t blame the person who was being spied on. That would be insane. You would obviously place the entirety of the blame on the individual whose incompetence or corruption or malice was the sole cause of the breach of trust and security.

Trump may still trust Waltz, but I guarantee you very few others who have to work with Waltz trust him right now, and for good reason. Even in direct personal conversations in SCIFs or the White House, I guarantee top officials will be far less open with their views given that they now know who Waltz talks to when nobody is looking. And that is a huge liability for Trump, and the country.