The controversy surrounding the accidental inclusion of The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg in a Signal chat involving senior Trump administration officials is quickly unraveling—and not in the way critics hoped. What began as a breathless allegation of “leaked war plans” has now all but collapsed under basic scrutiny and public testimony from key officials, including CIA Director John Ratcliffe.
The Atlantic has conceded: these were NOT “war plans.”
This entire story was another hoax written by a Trump-hater who is well-known for his sensationalist spin. pic.twitter.com/atGrDd2ymr
— Karoline Leavitt (@PressSec) March 26, 2025
To be clear, this was an unforced error. National Security Advisor Michael Waltz has already taken full responsibility for the creation of the Signal group and acknowledged the mistake. But the central narrative pushed by The Atlantic—that classified material or secret strike plans were shared with a journalist—has failed to hold up. Ratcliffe stated unequivocally that no classified information was discussed. The conversations were unclassified, conducted on a government-approved encrypted platform, and consistent with standard communication protocols.
The Atlantic beclowns itself as they concede— by releasing this— that no “war planning” was going on as they had falsely alleged.
Sounds like some terrorists had a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day. https://t.co/bTtKNzy55T
— Steven Cheung (@StevenCheung47) March 26, 2025
Signal itself has long been an accepted tool across government and intelligence communities. Approved for official work use as early as 2017 by the U.S. Senate’s sergeant at arms, it’s widely used for its end-to-end encryption and security. The Democratic National Committee instructed its own operatives to use Signal in 2016. Cybersecurity experts, including those at iVerify, have endorsed the app’s trustworthiness, and even Edward Snowden has stated he uses it for secure communications.
-
No war plans were shared.
-
No classified data was exposed.
-
The app is approved for unclassified communications.
-
The claims made by The Atlantic were exaggerated and misleading.
This is not the first time The Atlantic has run with a high-profile anti-Trump story that disintegrated under basic fact-checking. The infamous “losers and suckers” military smear in 2020 lacked named sources and was refuted by multiple on-the-record witnesses. The story that Trump praised Nazi generals met a similar fate. Now, the Signal chat “leak” joins that list.
This episode appears to be part of a larger effort by the political media establishment to revive a narrative of recklessness and chaos inside the Trump White House—one that’s repeatedly failed to gain traction when tested against actual evidence. With the 2024 election still fresh in memory and Trump now governing again, the urgency to undermine his administration through media channels remains high.
The Atlantic has already abandoned their bullshit “war plans” narrative, and in releasing the full chat , they concede they LIED to perpetuate yet ANOTHER hoax on the American people.
What scumbags! pic.twitter.com/RHSEGici2L
— Taylor Budowich (@Taylor47) March 26, 2025
What’s left in the wake of this failed narrative is a scattering of deflated headlines, a now-embarrassed Democratic contingent that tried to weaponize the story during a Senate Intelligence hearing, and speculation about internal finger-pointing at the White House. Someone is leaking, and if there’s to be fallout, it should be directed at whoever tried to spin this misstep into a crisis—not at officials like Waltz, who took accountability and received backing from the president.
