Maybe you've seen this already. It seems to be everywhere today so we might as well talk about it. Just over a week ago the Trump administration announced a series of strikes on the Houthis in Yemen.

The US has launched a "decisive and powerful" wave of air strikes on Houthi rebels in Yemen, President Donald Trump has said, citing the group's attacks on shipping in the Red Sea as the reason.

"Funded by Iran, the Houthi thugs have fired missiles at US aircraft, and targeted our Troops and Allies," Trump said on social media, adding that their "piracy, violence, and terrorism" had cost "billions" and put lives at risk.

Planning for the strike had been carried out secretly the week before but in this case something appears to have gone wrong. Mike Watlz, the Trump administration's national security adviser, accidentally added Atlantic journalist and editor Jeffrey Goldberg to a Signal chat where the strike was being discussed. Today Goldberg wrote about the experience, describing in detail how he was added to the chat and initially thought it was a hoax.

On Tuesday, March 11, I received a connection request on Signal from a user identified as Michael Waltz. Signal is an open-source encrypted messaging service popular with journalists and others who seek more privacy than other text-messaging services are capable of delivering. I assumed that the Michael Waltz in question was President Donald Trump’s national security adviser. I did not assume, however, that the request was from the actual Michael Waltz. I have met him in the past, and though I didn’t find it particularly strange that he might be reaching out to me, I did think it somewhat unusual, given the Trump administration’s contentious relationship with journalists—and Trump’s periodic fixation on me specifically. It immediately crossed my mind that someone could be masquerading as Waltz in order to somehow entrap me. It is not at all uncommon these days for nefarious actors to try to induce journalists to share information that could be used against them...

Two days later—Thursday—at 4:28 p.m., I received a notice that I was to be included in a Signal chat group. It was called the “Houthi PC small group.”

Goldberg then kept quiet and the next morning, Friday, a discussion played out about among a small group of top administration officials, including VP Vance, whether or not this was the best time for a strike on the Houthis.

At this point, a fascinating policy discussion commenced. The account labeled “JD Vance” responded at 8:16: “Team, I am out for the day doing an economic event in Michigan. But I think we are making a mistake.” (Vance was indeed in Michigan that day.) The Vance account goes on to state, “3 percent of US trade runs through the suez. 40 percent of European trade does. There is a real risk that the public doesn’t understand this or why it’s necessary. The strongest reason to do this is, as POTUS said, to send a message.”

After listening in on this for the morning, Goldberg became convinced it wasn't a prank but that he'd somehow been invited in to a real chat without anyone knowing. That was confirmed the next morning when SecDef Hegseth sent a message about a strike that would take place a couple hours later.

At 11:44 a.m., the account labeled “Pete Hegseth” posted in Signal a “TEAM UPDATE.” I will not quote from this update, or from certain other subsequent texts. 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, particularly in the broader Middle East, Central Command’s area of responsibility. What I will say, in order to illustrate the shocking recklessness of this Signal conversation, is that the Hegseth post contained operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing.

And sure enough a couple hours later, Goldberg saw reports that there were explosions taking place in Yemen. Not long after, Goldberg removed himself from the chat. He then contacted several people who were involved to ask if they had invited him on purpose or by accident. His question was answered with an admission that he had "inadvertently" been added.

Brian Hughes, the spokesman for the National Security Council, responded two hours later, confirming the veracity of the Signal group. “This appears to be an authentic message chain, and we are reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain,” Hughes wrote. “The thread is a demonstration of the deep and thoughtful policy coordination between senior officials. The ongoing success of the Houthi operation demonstrates that there were no threats to troops or national security.”

So this is generating a lot of condemnation and memes today, partly because this was an accident and partly because Goldberg is claiming that outside experts say details of the operation should never have been discussed on Signal in the first place. Some examples:

From an operational security perspective, this is the highest level of fuckup imaginable. These people cannot keep America safe. https://t.co/xhYuJXAenx

— Pete Buttigieg (@PeteButtigieg) March 24, 2025

NOTICE TO WHITE HOUSE STAFF: There is a room in the building and secure systems where you are supposed to have these discussions. SIGNAL ain’t it. Your recklessness put the lives of those pilots at risk. You got lucky! Time to reevaluate the way you are doing things. https://t.co/YqKr0SraWQ

— Senator Mark Kelly (@SenMarkKelly) March 24, 2025

In my 30 years of experience working with the Intelligence Community, I have never before seen such horrifying incompetence in the securing of our nation’s intelligence.

How dare they put our Troops at risk with this cavalier behavior. There must be accountability. https://t.co/143OFQfpOY

— Nancy Pelosi (@SpeakerPelosi) March 24, 2025

Pete Hegseth texting out war plans like invites to a frat party. https://t.co/vPqblS7znv

— Tim Walz (@Tim_Walz) March 24, 2025

This is blatantly illegal and dangerous beyond belief.

Our national security is in the hands of complete amateurs.

What other highly sensitive national security conversations are happening over group chat? Any other random people accidentally added to those, too? https://t.co/voZY5a38tc

— Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) March 24, 2025

There are approximately a million more tweets like this from all the usual suspects eager to dump on the Trump administration. Sec. Hegseth was asked about it today and attacked Jeffrey Goldberg's credibility.

Secretary Hegseth responds to Jeffrey Goldberg's story in The Atlantic:

"You're talking about a deceitful and highly discredited so-called journalist who's made a profession of peddling hoaxes...Nobody was texting war plans and that's all I have to say."pic.twitter.com/xExp6jgXRa

— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) March 24, 2025

I'm not sure this works given that the veracity of the group chat has already been confirmed. Unless someone wants to deny that the fact that Goldberg is a partisan hack is a side issue. Contrast Sec. Hegseth's response with that of Speaker Johnson.

House Speaker Mike Johnson defended the Trump administration after top officials, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Vice President JD Vance, allegedly discussed the details of a highly sensitive operation to bomb Houthi targets in Yemen in a group chat that… pic.twitter.com/FPmkDLCFAb

— CBS News (@CBSNews) March 24, 2025

The real question is why did this screw up happen in the first place. The best theory so far is this one:

Emily has almost certainly cracked the case: The USTR Jamieson Greer has the same initials as Goldberg and would logically be included in any strike message impacting shipping + as a member of the NSC https://t.co/lgNiDIxHfE

— Saagar Enjeti (@esaagar) March 24, 2025

That makes sense and so far I don't see anyone contradicting it, but who knows what tomorrow will bring. This is getting a lot of attention today so expect more pushback of some kind tomorrow.