The “Signalgate” incident occurred between March 11 and 15, 2025. During this time, U.S. government officials used Signal app which is a public communication app to discuss highly sensitive military operations targeting the Houthis in Yemen. Inadvertently, Jeffery Golberg, the editor and chief of The Atlantic, was added to a top-secret meeting with high-ranking individuals, including Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of Defense Peter Hegseth, National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, and CIA director John Ratcliff.

The leaked information pertained to attack plans, including timelines and targets for U.S. strikes. This breach raised concerns about operational security and the use of commercial apps for handling sensitive information. Vice President JD Vance played a central role in these discussions, while Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth shared operational details regarding the military strikes. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz inadvertently added Jeffrey Goldberg to a Signal group discussion about these matters. Additionally, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, and CIA Director William Burns contributed to and participated in this highly confidential mission briefing, which included the name of a CIA officer involved in the efforts.

Instead of utilizing various secure methods to protect this top-secret mission briefing, such as government-approved systems, encrypted devices, and specialized hardware for phones and laptops, they also had alternative options. These included dedicated messaging apps and face-to-face meetings. All of these methods could have helped minimize the risk of sensitive information being intercepted.

Other ways to guard against breaches include the use of SIPRNet, which stands for Secret Internet Protocol Router Network. Alternatively, a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) could be established. A SCIF is a secure area used by government and military personnel that features numerous safeguards, including advanced security measures such as soundproofing, electronic surveillance countermeasures, and strict access control. Personal electronic devices, such as phones and smartwatches, are prohibited inside SCIFs. These facilities can be permanent, located in government buildings, or portable, set up during emergencies or travel. One of the more secure locations is the Situation Room.

The Trump administration initially denied that classified information was shared, but published messages contradicted these claims by revealing specific details. Although the information suggests otherwise, both DNI Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe denied that any top-secret information had been exposed.

When outlets like Salon and Axios highlighted the seriousness of the breach by describing it as a national security failure, it became clear that using the Signal app—with its auto-delete feature—should never have been an option for handling top-secret information. This incident also galvanized public opinion, with many calling for accountability and labeling the situation as a case of malicious carelessness for using an unsecured platform.

Both Democrats and Republicans are expressing concern over the use of the Signal app. Some Republicans, such as Vice President JD Vance, are attempting to defend the administration despite being involved in the SignalGate incident. Meanwhile, Senators James Lankford (R-Okla.), Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), and Jack Reed (D-R.I.), along with Representative Darin LaHood (R-Ill.), have all called for an investigation into the negligence surrounding the use of the Signal app. National security experts have warned about the implications of such a breach, emphasizing that it undermines trust in the administration’s ability to handle classified information.

Some Democrats are advocating for investigations and accountability, particularly concerning one of the key individuals involved: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. He shared information despite being aware that it was inappropriate. Is this merely incompetence, or does it indicate a dereliction of duty?