(The Center Square) – The White House maintained Wednesday that the Signal chat that mistakenly included the Atlantic’s editor-in-chief about attack plans against the Houthis did not contain classified information. But it went a step further, saying the ensuing scrutiny over the issue was a misinformation campaign peddled by an “anti-Trump hater.”
“The media continues to be focused on a sensationalized story from the failing Atlantic magazine that is falling apart by the hour,” said White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt.
Leavitt went on to reiterate what the administration has said “all along,” that classified information was not included in the messaging thread.
“There were no locations, no sources or methods revealed, and there were certainly no war plans discussed,” Leavitt said in Wednesday’s briefing.
On Monday, The Atlantic broke news of how its editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, had mistakenly been included on a text thread between a number of cabinet members and administration higher-ups in the encrypted Signal messaging app. The thread included times of planned attacks against the Yemeni rebel group the Houthis, as well as some of the weapons involved. The administration has admitted it was a mistake but has said no classified information was shared and that it is looking into how it happened.
“Here are the facts. The national security adviser has taken responsibility for this matter, and the National Security Council immediately said alongside the White House counsel’s office that they are looking into how a reporter’s number was inadvertently added to this messaging thread,” Leavitt said.
“There is arguably no one in the media who loves manufacturing and pushing hoaxes more than Jeffrey Goldberg,” Leavitt said, calling him an “anti-Trump hater” and pointing out he is a registered Democrat.
Leavitt blamed Democrats and the media.
“If this story proves anything, it proves that Democrats and their propagandists in the mainstream media know how to fabricate, orchestrate and disseminate a misinformation campaign quite well,” she said.
NBC News’ Peter Alexander challenged Leavitt on the administration’s statement that the texts contained no classified information, referencing how the Department of Defense defines the term.
“The DOD manual details classified information as ‘significant military plans,’ saying that is secret, that that’s classified,” Alexander said. “So what is it about what Pete Hegseth wrote that makes you say ‘this is not classified?’”
Leavitt responded by saying that she’s simply saying what those involved have said.
“It’s not just me saying that, Peter, it’s the secretary of defense himself,” Leavitt replied.
Alexander followed up asking if Leavitt would then characterize the messages as “military operation plans.”
“I would characterize this messaging thread as a policy discussion — a sensitive policy discussion, surely – amongst high-level cabinet officials and senior staff,” Leavitt said.
Later, Philip Wegmann of Real Clear Politics asked why it appears those involved may not face serious job repercussions.
“Enlisted soldiers, sailors and marines would face consequences if they shared this type of information inadvertently with a reporter. Can you tell us more why the president is so willing to give Mike Waltz a mulligan here?” Wegmann asked.
Leavitt said she had answered versions of that question already.
Leavitt attempted to draw attention throughout the briefing to the military’s achievements under the second Trump administration, as well as what the administration sees as the former military failures and Goldberg’s unreliability.
