Was the Signal Chat A Mistake or A Political Tool?

Democrats – and by extension America’s enemies – were handed a gift last week when Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, exposed breach of security of the Trump administration. Earlier in March 2025, Goldberg was accidentally added to a conversation on Signal between senior national security officials that should have been confidential.

The U.S. officials included on the call were Vice President J.D. Vance, Secretary of Defense Pet Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, National Security Advisor Michael Waltz, and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. They were discussing sensitive – not classified – military plans about an imminent attack against Houthi rebels located in Yemen.

Democrats and their allies in the media have made a big deal about the breach of security, acting as though it was the worst thing that has ever happened in America. The fact is that the mission went off without any loss of life or equipment, and it has been declared to be successful. Democrats forget the terrible things that happen under their direction – Bengasi where an ambassador was killed and Afghanistan where we lost 13 military members during the withdrawal to name just two. They jumped all over Trump and Republicans even as the Trump administration is working hard to clean up messes all over the world that happened during the Biden administrations.

The bottom line is that the Signal discussion was either classified, or Goldberg should be charged with sharing classified information with the general public. He is a dirtbag for staying in the discussion when he understood what it was, and he is a bigger dirtbag for using the discussion for political purposes.

The mistake should not have happened. Goldberg should not have been added to the chat. Someone in that group chat should have noticed that the conversation was veering close to classified material. A positive thing for Goldberg is that, for whatever reason, he did not disclose the information until after the mission was completed. However, Yassin Fawaz, a contributor on American Thinker, added other information and made an interesting point. 

The fact that Goldberg was added to this chat was an unfortunate mistake, but the way The Atlantic and its allies have handled the leak is telling. This wasn’t a situation where a massive intelligence breach occurred because of a careless or malicious act by the Trump administration. Instead, it was a technical error – someone mistakenly added Goldberg to the group chat. However, while Goldberg may have been initially added by mistake, his decision to remain in the group was neither accidental nor innocent – it was a deliberate and malicious act. His continued participation in the conversation suggests an intent to exploit sensitive information, reflecting a deeper agenda to undermine the administration. [Emphasis added.]

It is crucial to recognize the broader context of what’s going on here. The real issue is not the accident that led to Goldberg’s inclusion in the chat but the weaponization of this mistake by the media and individuals who seem intent on destabilizing the administration. Goldberg and The Atlantic have taken this unintentional error and turned it into an attack on Trump’s leadership, yet this leak serves a greater purpose in their eyes: advancing a narrative that undermines America itself. [Emphasis added.]

It’s important to note that mistakes happen. Even highly secure systems can be vulnerable to human error. Imagine, for instance, if a government official had mistakenly dialed Goldberg’s number while discussing the plans – he could have simple overheard the conversation. The fact that Goldberg was added to the chat doesn’t change the fact that the leak serves a greater narrative – one that is critical of the Trump administration, portraying it as chaotic and incompetent.

Yet, the true nature of this leak isn’t about the technical mistake; it’s about how certain individuals are taking advantage of this mistake to push an anti-American agenda. The media and their allies in the political establishment have jumped on the opportunity to embarrass the administration, but this leak was not an act of exposing government wrongdoing – it was about creating a false narrative of disarray. Goldberg, with his anti-Trump stance, turned a minor oversight into a major scandal, amplifying it for political gain. In doing so, he isn’t just criticizing an administration; he is actively attempting to weaken the nation’s standing on the global stage…. [Emphasis added.]

Goldberg and The Atlantic may be quick to point out the leak, but they are silent on the larger picture. The Trump administration’s actions have consistently protected American interests, restored the military’s strength, and ensured that the U.S. has a more prominent position on the world stage….

This leak, and the media’s sensationalism around it, is not just about a mistake – it’s about undermining the Trump administration and American power…. [Emphasis added.]

This leak, while unfortunate, should serve as a wake-up call not just to the Trump administration but to the American public. The real threat here is not the leak itself, but the way it is being used to push an anti-America narrative. The true objective of the individuals behind this story is to create a divide, to paint the Trump administration as inept, and to erode the trust Americans have in their government. [Emphasis added.]

It’s time for the American people to see through this….

We must see the Signal leak for what it truly is: a political tool designed to create chaos and promote a narrative that undermines American leadership. Rather than focusing on sensationalizing the leak, it’s crucial to recognize the broader context. The Trump administration has delivered real results for the country, and its leadership continues to be a force for positive change in the world. [Emphasis added.]