Photo: Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post/Getty Images
On Tuesday, Trump-administration officials denied that they had shared sensitive material about an ongoing military operation in a Signal group chat that mistakenly included The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg.
“There was no classified material that was shared in that Signal group,” Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national security, said while testifying before Congress.
But on Wednesday, The Atlantic followed up on its bombshell report, publishing the detailed plans that were shared to the text chain, which involved a planned strike against the Houthis in Yemen. The magazine redacted only the name of a CIA operative named in the text chain by CIA director John Ratcliffe. In the texts, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth laid out the series of events with specific time stamps and descriptions of the fighter jets that would be used in the operation:
“TEAM UPDATE: TIME NOW (1144et): Weather is FAVORABLE. Just CONFIRMED w/CENTCOM we are a GO for mission launch.
1215et: F-18s LAUNCH (1st strike package)
1345: ‘Trigger Based’ F-18 1st Strike Window Starts (Target Terrorist is @ his Known Location so SHOULD BE ON TIME – also, Strike Drones Launch (MQ-9s)
1410: More F-18s LAUNCH (2nd strike package)
1415: Strike Drones on Target (THIS IS WHEN THE FIRST BOMBS WILL DEFINITELY DROP, pending earlier ‘Trigger Based’ targets)
1536: F-18 2nd Strike Starts – also, first sea-based Tomahawks launched.
MORE TO FOLLOW (per timeline)
We are currently clean on OPSEC
Godspeed to our Warriors.
The planned attack commenced shortly after the messages were sent. Despite the staggering level of detail reportedly shared by Hegseth, the White House landed on a new target for its spin: The Atlantic’s headline. Rather than address the content of the Hegseth text, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt pointed to the publication’s use of the term attack plans in its latest report, suggesting it was walking back its earlier contention that officials shared “war plans” in the group chat.
“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 said on social media.
Trump’s national security adviser, Mike Waltz, who Goldberg says invited him to the Signal chat, echoed Leavitt’s words in his own post. “No locations. No sources & methods. NO WAR PLANS. Foreign partners had already been notified that strikes were imminent,” he wrote. “BOTTOM LINE: President Trump is protecting America and our interests.”
The published text seems to conflict with the congressional testimony of top Trump national security officials who asserted under oath that specific details of the military operation weren’t shared. During an exchange with Arizona senator Mark Kelly, Gabbard was asked if there was any mention of any weapon or weapon system being used in the operation in the chat.
“I don’t recall specific names of systems or weapons being used,” she said.
