Intelligence officials remain defensive about Yemen-bombing group chat

Despite growing evidence to the contrary, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard insisted March 26 that the details shared over the Signal app — including to a journalist for The Atlantic — did not amount to an unauthorized release of classified information. Her insistence came a day after she appeared before the Senate Intelligence Committee, first refusing to confirm her inclusion in the group chat, then claiming she did not recall details of the conversation.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe, who also took part in the group chat, similarly defended his and others’  actions and denied wrongdoing again before lawmakers. 

“As CIA director, one of the responsibilities is to kill terrorists. And that's exactly what I did, along with President Trump's excellent national security team,” Ratcliffe said. “I used an appropriate channel to communicate sensitive information. It was permissible to do so. I didn't transfer any classified information and, at the end of the day, what is most important is that the mission was a remarkable success.”

Those denials followed similar ones from Trump administration officials and spokespeople, who insisted that The Atlantic had exaggerated just how detailed and damaging the information might have been. So just hours before the hearing convened — and after double-checking that no official would call the information classified — the magazine published the transcript of the entire conversation. 

“1215et: F-18s LAUNCH (1st strike package)”, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had texted. “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)”

At the hearing, Democratic lawmakers sharply questioned Gabbard and Ratcliffe.

“People in the most dangerous and sensitive jobs on the planet put extremely specific, pre-decisional discussions about a military attack on Signal, which could be intercepted by the Russians and the Chinese,” said Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., the committee’s ranking member. “And they could have passed it on to the Houthis, who easily could have repositioned weapons and altered their plans to knock down planes or sink ships. I think that it's by the awesome grace of God that we are not mourning dead pilots right now.”

The officials testifying before the House largely remained defensive.

“The conversation was candid and sensitive, but as the president [and] national security adviser stated, no classified information was shared,” Gabbard said. “This was a standard update to the National Security Cabinet that was provided alongside updates that were given to foreign partners in the region. The Signal message app comes pre-installed on government devices.”

Sources familiar with government mobile device policies said on background that the statement that such an app comes “pre-installed” is inaccurate. 

Questions to the Defense Information Systems Agency, which manages mobile devices for much of DOD, were referred to the Office of the Secretary of Defense Public Affairs, which did not respond to a request for comment.

In the House hearing, Gabbard maintained that because no methods, locations or sources were described in the chat, the discussion was not classified — even as she agreed with Himes that, per official ODNI policy, “information providing indication or advanced warning that the U.S. or its allies are preparing an attack should be classified as top secret.” She added that the classification would be at Hegseth’s  discretion since he has the “authority over DOD information.”

Whether the Signal chat itself is “DOD information” is another point that is contested. 

To some of the lawmakers, it’s also a moot point.

“The idea that this information, if it was presented to our committee, would not be classified…that's ridiculous. I’ve seen things much less sensitive be presented to us with high classification,” said Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-Texas. “Having sat on this committee for nine years, that somebody would come in with that information and give us something that says ‘unclassified,’ you can walk out of this room with this information and give it to whomever you want…y’all know that’s a lie. It's a lie to the country.”

Gabbard and Ratcliffe were joined in testimony by several national-security leaders who did not participate in the group chat:, FBI Director Kash Patel, Defense Intelligence Agency Director Lt. Gen. Jeffrey Kruse and National Security Agency Director Gen. Timothy Haugh. ]]>