Consider This from NPR - The fallout from the Signal breach begins

Episode Date: March 25, 2025

In the 24 hours since a bombshell Atlantic article, senators have grilled Trump administration intelligence officials — but there are no signs yet that anyone involved will face any repercussions. The article, by Jeffrey Goldberg, details how he was inadvertently added to a chat on Signal, the encrypted messaging app, where key administration figures were planning a U.S. bombing operation in Yemen.NPR's Ryan Lucas followed a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing, where CIA Director John Ratcliffe and the director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard testified that no classified information was discussed in the chat group. Democrats challenged that assertion.And Willem Marx reports on reaction in European capitals. The Atlantic article included disparaging comments about European allies from Vice President J.D. Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.Email us at [e-mail] more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

If you could boil down how Democrats versus Republicans are reacting to Monday's bombshell Atlantic magazine story into a single 15-second clip, it might be this one, Georgia Democratic Senator John Ossoff questioning CIA Director John Radcliffe. Director Radcliffe, this was a huge mistake, correct? No. A national political... Hold on. No, no, you hold on.

Okay, to back us up a bit, that Atlantic story was written by Jeffrey Goldberg, and in it, he details how he was included, apparently by accident, in a group chat on the encrypted messaging app Signal. He spoke with me about what happened next. I look at the group, it's 18 people or so, and it includes what I take to be the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the National Security Advisor, the Vice President, CIA Director, and so on. Goldberg says he thinks it's a hoax at first, but he stays quiet and watches the conversation

unfold. Eventually, they begin discussing a potential U.S. strike on Houthi targets in Yemen. By Saturday the 15th, the text chain is filled up with what I would call operational military information of the sort that I'm not comfortable sharing. I'm not comfortable sharing, obviously. But just to describe that, information about the targets,

weapons that the U.S. would be using, and how the attacks would be sequenced, right? Yes, I'm sitting in my car in a parking lot in a supermarket at 1144 a.m. Eastern and I get this war plan from Pete Hegseth and I and it basically says In two hours time, you'll begin to see the effects of the bombing. The bombs fall and Goldberg realizes this group chat is indeed very real. And eventually he writes all about it in the article. All of this was, as Goldberg described it, a massive

security breach. These are the most serious jobs in America. They are sending Americans into harm's way to carry out national security missions on behalf of the United America. They are sending Americans into harm's way to carry out national security missions on behalf of the United States. They shouldn't be texting each other operational information and they shouldn't know who they're texting. Well, I mean, this is the universal problem. Know who you're texting. The National Security Council has acknowledged that the messages appear to be authentic.

But 24 hours and counting since that article dropped, there are no signs yet that anyone involved will face any repercussions. Defense Secretary Pete Hegstedt called Goldberg, quote, deceitful and said this on Monday. Nobody was texting war plans. And that's all I have to say about that. The White House said that President Trump retains confidence in his national security team. On Tuesday, Trump defended his national security adviser, Mike Waltz. This was not classified now, but classified information is probably a little bit different.

But I always say you have to learn from every experience. I think it was very unfair the way they attacked Michael. every experience. I think it was very unfair the way they attacked Michael. Consider this. The administration is trying to brush off any potential scandal over the leaked chats. But the fallout is still playing out in Congress and among U.S. allies. From NPR, I'm Elsa Chang. When you take a shower or get ready in the morning, how many products are you using?

Everything from your shampoo to your lotion. In our study, we found that the average woman used about 19 products every day and the average man used about seven. These products might come at a cost. The ingredients they contain can be harmful to our health. Listen to the Life Kit podcast from NPR to learn more about the risks of personal care products. This is Tonya Mosley, co-host of Fresh Air. You'll see your favorite actors, directors, and comedians on late night TV shows or YouTube, but what you get with Fresh Air is a deep

dive. Spend some quality time with people like Billie Eilish, Questlove, Ariana Grande, Stephen Colbert, and so many more. We ask questions you won't hear asked anywhere else. Listen to the Fresh Air podcast from NPR and WHYY. ["Fresh Air"] It's Consider This from NPR. That clip we heard at the very beginning of this episode came from a hearing of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday. It was scheduled long before the story about the signal thread broke, but it happened to

feature two of the group chat's participants, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. NPR's Ryan Lucas was following the hearing where the group chat fiasco was a major topic of discussion, at least on one side of the aisle. Republican senators actually didn't ask about it at all in the public hearing, but Democrats absolutely grilled Gabbard and Ratcliffe on this. Democratic lawmakers called the actions of Trump's national security team here dangerous, incompetent, reckless. And they said that it could have had serious real world consequences. Here's the top Democrat on the

panel, Senator Mark Warner of Virginia. This was not only sloppy, not only violated all procedures, but if this information had gotten out, American lives could have been lost. Now Warner said that's because the the Houthis could have moved their air defenses or repositioned them if they'd had this info and then threatened American aircraft. Absolutely. Okay, well, what did Gabbard and Ratcliffe have to say for themselves? Well Gabbard at first wouldn't even acknowledge that she was in the group chat. Ratcliffe, for his part, did acknowledge that right away.

He said that he was in the chat, but he tried to downplay the gravity of the situation. He said that government officials are allowed to use Signal to communicate and coordinate for work. At the same time, I will say that our colleague Tom Bowman is reporting that the Pentagon warned a week ago against using Signal even for unclassified information. Now Ratcliffe and Gabbard both repeatedly said at the hearing today that none of the information was classified in this group chat, but lawmakers were very, very skeptical of that. Here's Senator Angus King, an independent from Maine. And if that's the case, please release that whole tech stream so that the public can have a view of what actually transpired on this discussion.

It's hard for me to believe that targets and timing and weapons would not have been classified. Now questions about that specific information there. Ratcliffe directed actually to the Secretary of Defense, who was not at the hearing. But Ratcliffe did at one point acknowledge that those sorts of things should only be discussed on classified channels. And look, the government does have its own secure communication systems for these sorts of things. Now, the FBI director, Cash Patel, was at this hearing as well. Democrats asked him whether the FBI is investigating this breach. And Patel said that he didn't have any update on that. Okay. So what happens next at this point? Anything? Well, the administration is very much trying to say that this is all much ado about nothing.

But I will say the information discussed in the chat is exactly the sort of intelligence a sophisticated adversary like Russia or China would want on the US. And the officials in the chat are all top of the target list of foreign intelligence services. Now, as for what's next, Democrats on the Intelligence Committee made this clear today

that they want to get to the bottom of it and they have very much vowed to get to the end of this. That is NPR's Ryan Lucas. Thank you, Ryan. Thank you. And we'll note that NPR's CEO, Catherine Maher, is chair of the board of Signal Foundation, which runs the Signal messaging app. Ryan mentioned that adversaries like China or Russia might be interested in the contents

of the Signal Chat. Well, US allies might as well. Willem Marx in London has been following European reaction to the leaked texts. The UK is America's closest ally for intelligence sharing and has played a small, significant role in operations against Tufi forces in Yemen at the centre of the recent revelations from journalist Jeffrey Goldberg. So it was unsurprising British politicians fielded thorny inquiries about the security lapse, including UK Minister for the Armed Forces Luke Pollard, who faced repeated questions in parliament. One lawmaker asked what would happen to UK officials if they shared sensitive

military details in a similar fashion. Here's Pollard's response. My general rule would be that if there's operational decisions that are being taken, we should all, regardless of our role within defence, take our information sharing seriously and there would be a clear consequence and disciplinary process for anyone that wouldn't be following those procedures. It's not acceptable, is it? The UK's Deputy Prime Minister, Angela Reyna, avoided any undiplomatic language when she was repeatedly pressed on the topic in a BBC interview. We've been sharing intelligence and information for many decades and we continue to do that through our secure networks. It is for the US and the US President and the government to explain

and decide what they're doing in regards to their security and that signal messaging group." Across Europe the focus has been on the Trump administration's sometimes scornful attitude towards European defense capabilities, as Germany's most read newspaper Das Bildt reported in its audio version. Aside from the laxity with which the world's most powerful politicians shared top-secret military strikes in an unsecured chat group, a reporter from Das Bild wrote, the unfriendly

words towards Europe from the Americans are further proof that the US no longer considers us a vital ally. But Europe should not be surprised, said Pierre Ascii, an editorial writer speaking on French public radio. For Europeans, there's a sense of a broken relationship in discovering the extent of American hostility, Ascii said. But like in love, there is life after a breakup,

and it's important to make the most of your new life. There was some satisfaction at the lapse, too, including in the audio version of Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera. We can't have someone in the Oval Office who doesn't understand the meaning of the word classified, the newspaper quoted President Trump as saying during the 2016 presidential election campaign.

Then it showcased his opponent in that race, Hillary Clinton, reacting this week on social media. You've got to be kidding. The breakdown in transatlantic ties, the messages reveal, is troubling though, says Ian Lesser, a distinguished fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States think tank. It's really unprecedented and these are not challenges the European institutions are well set up to deal with. Perhaps individual leaders in Europe will react in different ways to it, but Brussels

itself, the European Union itself, NATO certainly with the US as part of it, is simply not well set up to address this multifaceted challenge. As European government step up the defense spending many in Europe say their militaries must soon be more ready to operate without US help. That was Willem Marx in London. This episode was produced by Connor Donovan, Mia Venkat and Michelle Aslam. It was produced by Connor Donovan, Mia Venkat, and Michelle Aslam. It was edited by Christopher Intaliata, Anna Yukinonoff, and Nick Spicer. Our executive producer is Sammy Yenigan.

It's Consider This from NPR. I'm Elsa Chang. At Planet Money, we'll take you from a race to make rum in the Caribbean. Our rum from a quality standpoint is the best in the world. To the labs dreaming up the most advanced microchips. It's very rare for people to go inside. To the back rooms of New York's Diamond District. What, you're looking for the stupid guy here?

They're all smart, don't worry about it. Planet Money from NPR. We go to the story and take you along with us wherever you get your podcasts.