Can Donald Trump shrug off the Signal chat leak?

Summary

---

Americast – Can Donald Trump Shrug Off the Signal Chat Leak?

BBC News | March 26, 2025

---

Episode Overview

This Americast episode dives into the fallout from the White House Signal chat leak, sparked by the accidental inclusion of The Atlantic's editor, Jeffrey Goldberg, in a private group chat of senior Trump administration officials. The leak revealed details of US planning for military strikes on Houthi targets in Yemen—details that blew up into a scandal once published. Hosts Sarah Smith, Justin Webb, Marianna Spring, and Anthony Zurcher explore the substance and optics of the leak, political and security implications, messaging app security, and reactions across Washington, social media, and Europe.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. What Happened? The Signal Chat Leak Breakdown

• The Accidental Invite
  • Jeffrey Goldberg, The Atlantic editor, was "accidentally" added to a Signal group discussing imminent bombing plans in Yemen. The group included senior government officials.
  • Initially, the White House claimed no classified information was shared; The Atlantic then published the actual messages for transparency.
    • Sarah Rainsford: “Americasters will all know that the Atlantic editor, Jeffrey Goldberg, accidentally got added to this WhatsApp group where they were discussing plans for bombing Houthi targets in Yemen…” [02:47]
• Content of the Leak
  • The published messages contained timing, aircraft type, and targeting information about the strikes, leading many to view them as de facto war plans.
    • Justin Webb: “One of those messages says ‘this is when the first bombs will definitely drop.’ That, Anthony, sounds to me like a war plan.” [03:52]

2. The Security Question: Why Use Signal?

• Signal’s Fallibility
  • Signal is known for encryption but not foolproof—if a device is compromised, encrypted messages can still be read.
  • Anthony Zurcher: “Signal would not protect me. It doesn’t protect your phone from getting hacked... Any phones we turned on [in China] could not be used... for the remainder of our trip.” [05:01]
• Government Protocol vs. Reality
  • Outside secure government channels (like SCIFs), "fat thumb" mistakes (mis-adding contacts) can happen—this time, with major consequences.
    • Anthony Zurcher: “…It’s astounding. Yes, we all make that mistake... but we don’t need to… [discuss] national security secrets with moms, wives, or random accidental contacts.” [13:13]

3. How Senior Trump Officials Behave in Private

• Group Chat Vibes
  • The chats mirror ordinary workplace banter—emojis, confusion, irreverence—but on matters of life and death.
    • Justin Webb: “There’s something about this message group that anyone who’s ever been on a message group… you just lose concentration. You think, what on earth are they talking about?” [07:16]
• Revealing Dynamics & Europe
  • J.D. Vance consistently expresses skepticism about the strikes and American involvement in European security, both in public and on the chat.
    • Justin Webb: “What he says in public and what he says in private is pretty much the same thing… these Europeans are useless. They don’t protect themselves.” [09:23]
    • Sarah Rainsford: “Donald Trump doubled down on that yesterday… he said, yeah, 100% agreed with that sentiment.” [10:06]

4. The Fallout: Responsibility, Narrative, and Potential Consequences

• Who’s To Blame?
  • National Security Advisor Mike Waltz admits he set up the chat and takes "full responsibility," but offers a confused, defensive explanation for how Goldberg was added.
    • Mike Waltz: “A staffer wasn’t responsible… I take full responsibility. I built the group… My job is to make sure everything’s coordinated.” [12:45]
  • The panel is skeptical about Waltz’s claim of simple contact mismanagement.
    • Anthony Zurcher: “The fact that they were kind of freewheeling… possibly to avoid any kind of government records requirements… is what is truly dramatically remarkable about this.” [13:39]
• Mike Waltz’s Job on the Line?
  • Panel believes Waltz is "most vulnerable" due to lack of MAGA credentials and ease of replacement (doesn’t need Senate confirmation).
    • Sarah Rainsford: “If anybody is caught as on a shoggly peg, it is Mike Waltz’s… Trump will probably wait till the end of this week… before making a decision.” [17:49]
• Trump’s Response
  • Trump publicly backs Waltz, but notes technology wasn’t perfect and hints at returning to in-person meetings.
    • [Trump]: “No, I don’t think he should apologize. I think he’s doing his best. It’s equipment and technology that’s not perfect and probably he won’t be using it again…” [19:15]

5. Media, Social Media, & Political Spin

• Admin Pushback
  • Strong denials from officials—asserting no “war plans” shared—matched with sometimes over-the-top social media posts in ALL CAPS.
    • Sarah Rainsford: “Mike Waltz… on X… ‘no locations, no sources and methods, and then in all caps, NO WAR PLANS.’” [24:14]
• Social Media Reactions
  • Marianna Spring’s Undercover Voters:
    • Trump supporters’ feeds filled with attacks on The Atlantic or downplaying the story as a plot by “the global elite.”
    • Critics see the scandal as damning evidence.
    • Marianna Spring: “…People love to be able to read the messages… it’s catnip for online sleuths… the populist right… [says] it’s not a big deal, move on.” [21:29]
• Double Standard Noted
  • Anthony Zurcher points out the irony: Trump and team now use arguments he previously mocked Hillary Clinton for during Emailgate.
    • Anthony Zurcher: “…It’s very rich that Donald Trump’s talking about using devices and technology after 2016 when he just railed against Hillary Clinton…” [22:45]
• Hillary Clinton Responds
  • Brief but biting: “You’ve got to be kidding me” with an eyes emoji. [23:55]

6. International Implications & Republican Party Reactions

• Strained Transatlantic Relations
  • Hostility toward European allies exposed. European capitals are reportedly alarmed by the administration’s derision.
  • Justin Webb: “It’s okay to tease the Canadians and maybe bully the Greenlanders, but do you really want to rip up relationships so extremely with all of your allies?” [31:46]
  • Some Republicans (e.g., Pete Sessions) uneasy about the rhetoric toward Europe.
    • Pete Sessions: “The relationship… must not be done where America takes on the world all by itself.” [31:23]
• Congressional Oversight Unlikely
  • With both chambers controlled by Republicans, real investigation into the leak is seen as improbable.
    • Anthony Zurcher: “…Republicans control both chambers… it’s gonna be much more difficult for anyone to get into what some of these unanswered questions are about.” [27:24]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the Reality of Government Messaging:

  • “This is incredibly senior people… chatting away in a group chat and using emojis to discuss these kind of things.”
    — Marianna Spring [03:19]

• On Information Security Irony:

  • “It is just stunning that they could have this kind of lackadaisical attitude towards information security…”
    — Anthony Zurcher [28:44]

• On European Policy Consistency:

  • “He is intellectually consistent. So there is a sort of political point… that is being absolutely felt around Europe.”
    — Justin Webb [09:23]

• On Foreign Policy Discord:

  • “If this mess up is about anything, it seems to me it’s about that [European relations].”
    — Justin Webb [32:41]

• On the Scale of the Scandal:

  • “I think this is a pretty big salad. …It illustrates the haphazard, fly by the seat of their pants way this administration operates.”
    — Anthony Zurcher [28:44]

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• [02:47] — The accidental invite: Jeffrey Goldberg added to Signal group
• [03:52] — "This is when the bombs will drop": Was it a war plan?
• [04:58] — Signal’s security limits explained
• [07:16] — How the chats resemble everyday group messages
• [09:23] — J.D. Vance's consistent anti-Europe stance
• [12:45] — Mike Waltz takes responsibility on Fox News
• [13:39] — Security culture clash: Why use a commercial app?
• [17:49] — Waltz’s vulnerability: Will he be sacked?
• [19:15] — Trump supports Waltz, blames the tech
• [21:29] — Social media reaction: Trump supporters vs. critics
• [22:45] — The Clinton emails comparison
• [23:55] — Hillary Clinton’s “eyes emoji” response
• [27:24] — Congressional oversight unlikely
• [28:44] — "Pretty big salad": Why this scandal matters
• [31:23] — Pete Sessions: "America must not take on the world all by itself."
• [33:14] — Closing White House statement: “Nothing to see here”

---

Conclusion

Americast unpacks not just the specifics of the Signal chat leak, but what it reveals about the Trump administration’s approach to security, transparency, alliances, and internal dynamics. The episode connects this digital blunder to broader themes—information security, political spin, transatlantic relationships—and questions whether, despite the chaos, Team Trump will once again ride out a political storm.

---

For questions or further discussion, listeners are encouraged to contact the Americast team.

---

Transcript

[Justin Webb]

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the uk.

[Greenlight Advertiser]

The US Electric grid is approaching a breaking point as demand soars from data centers and home energy use. Our aging infrastructure can't keep up. And the Department of Energy warns that without action, blackouts could surge 100 fold by 2030. The good news? One solution is already here. Propane. It's American made, stored on site and always ready. Powering homes and businesses with cleaner, reliable energy. That's that doesn't depend on the grid or the weather. Learn [e-mail] this message comes from Greenlight.

Ready to start talking to your kids about financial literacy? Meet Greenlight, the debit card and money app that teaches kids and teens how to earn, save, spend wisely and invest with your guardrails in place. With Greenlight, you can send money to kids quickly, set up chores, automate allowance and keep an eye on what your kids are spending with real time notifications. Join millions of parents and kids building healthy financial habits together on Greenlight. Get started risk [e-mail] iheart.

[Justin Webb]

Hello AmeriCasters. There are more of you now with us than ever before and we'd like to try to keep it that way. So do subscribe and tell people if you're enjoying what you're hearing now.

[Marianna Spring]

On with the episode BBC Sounds Music Radio podcasts.

[Justin Webb]

Long after the attack on Houthi targets in Yemen is over, there is a new war front for the White House. This is a war they're waging with the Atlantic magazine. The Atlantic magazine who had been included in messages about that attack in Yemen, now publishing all of those messages. They've done so in the last couple of hours. The White House saying, these don't amount to war plans, do they? Do they not? Does it matter? When will heads roll in Washington? Welcome to AmericasT.

[Marianna Spring]

AmericasT, AmericasT from BBC News.

[Caller or Listener]

You're gambling with the lives of millions of people. You're gambling with World War three.

[Justin Webb]

President Trump's message is very simple.

[Anthony Zurcher]

We are done being taken advantage of. Mr. President, in the name of our God, have mercy upon the people who are scared now.

[Sarah Rainsford]

Are you supportive of these onesies?

[Caller or Listener]

I'm supportive of vaccines.

[Sarah Rainsford]

What is happening?

[Marianna Spring]

Like, this is not America. This is a terrible nightmare.

[Sarah Rainsford]

This is victory. Feels like.

[Marianna Spring]

Yeah.

[Sarah Rainsford]

Hello, it's Sarah here in the BBC's Washington bureau.

[Anthony Zurcher]

It's Anthony sitting next to Sarah. Also in Washington, it's Justin in the.

[Justin Webb]

Worldwide headquarters of AmericasT in London, England.

[Marianna Spring]

And it is Marianna, aka misinformation, sitting next to Justin.

[Sarah Rainsford]

It's about half past ten in the morning here in Washington. That MEANS it's about 2:30 in the UK in the afternoon. And I'm giving you that time check because this story is moving pretty quickly. It's been developing through the week. And then about two hours ago there was a bit of a bombshell. Americasters will all know that the Atlantic editor, Jeffrey Goldberg accidentally got added to this WhatsApp group where they were discussing plans for bombing Houthi targets in Yemen yesterday. There was a huge amount of pushback against him. He is being insulted left, right and center, called a loser and a liar. And we heard from several members of the administration saying no war plans were shared on this group chat, that the story was being either exaggerated or completely made up. So the Atlantic made a big decision this morning and they actually published the messages that related directly to the military action. They had kept those back before, saying they were maybe a bit too sensitive to publish. But accused of actually lying, they decided to put them out there and it's absolutely fine. Fascinating to have a look at what they've got to say.

[Justin Webb]

One of those messages says this is when the first bombs will definitely drop. That, Anthony, sounds to me like a war plan.

[Anthony Zurcher]

Yeah, I mean, we can parse the exact terminology, but knowing when an attack is going to happen ahead of time seems like important information that you want to keep out of the wrong hands.

[Marianna Spring]

It feels like the most modern example of a scandal in so much as like, it's like you're seeing these like message conversations that look like the kind of group chats that, that, I don't know, people have at work or people have in general or even with their friends and family. And then it's like, oh, hang on a second. This is incredibly senior people in the US Government. And for anyone who hasn't used Signal, Signal is this messaging app that it's a bit like WhatsApp in how it works. It's like private group chats. But what it's known for is its level of security, like the level of encryption, how your messages are protected. So it's something that I use. I don't know whether you use it, Anthony and Sarah, but I use it when I'm talking to people, for example, who've worked within the social media companies and they want to speak to me confidentially. But it's a whole nother thing for the editor of the Atlantic to be added to the chat.

[Anthony Zurcher]

Yeah, there are two components to this, right? It's one, the fact that they accidentally added someone who was not a high level government individual to this group chat and the security concerns there. And the other thing is the fact that this group chat existed at all, that senior government officials were conducting business on a commercial messaging app and not through traditional secure channels. You know, you asked me if I'd use Signal before I used it when I was in China traveling with Blinkit a few years ago, because it is more secure. But one thing was hammered home to me by BBC security officials and by the State Department security folks, and that is that if China wanted to get on my phone while I was in China, they would be able to do it. Signal would not protect me. It doesn't protect your phone from getting hacked. Yes, the message from one phone to another is encrypted, but if they have access to your phone, they can see all of that. And in fact, they told us that any phones we turned on while we were in China could not be used or even powered on for the remainder of our trip with Antony Blinken. So there were very real concerns about the security, not only of Signal, but of any kind of personal phone that had been exposed, possibly exposed to an adversary.

[Sarah Rainsford]

That's fascinating, isn't it? Of course, in the many, many and varied defenses that we've had from the Trump administration and from different officials, they've never said this is a really, really secure messaging app. They haven't tried to pretend that that's okay. What they've claimed is that the information that was shared on it wasn't classified, that it doesn't constitute war plans, and therefore, somehow it was all right to be chatting away in a group chat and using emojis to discuss these kind of things. So we should probably walk through the politics of this, Anthony, and just who's been saying what around Washington?

[Anthony Zurcher]

Hang on.

[Justin Webb]

Just before you get to the politics, can I intervene there? Because you said that magic word emojis. And I just want to say, before we get to the more serious stuff, I love it that Mike Waltz, the National Security Advisor, uses the same kind of emojis that I do when I message Marianne me.

[Marianna Spring]

Yeah, but that's everything we need to know.

[Justin Webb]

Well, I mean, who knows? It could be. There may well be a vacancy soon. And if they're looking for someone who can wield emojis really well, then who knows? I may.

[Marianna Spring]

They should have added Justin to the.

[Justin Webb]

I may have to leave the building. The other thing that really. I just got to say we will get to the politics of this in a moment. My favorite bit of it in the stuff that's just literally in the last couple of hours come out from the Atlantic. There's an exchange where Michael Waltz, the National Security Advisor, says VP building collapsed, had multiple positive id. Pete Kurilla, the ic, amazing job. To which JD Vance replies, what question mark? Like, he's kind of got other things on his mind and he thinks, what's this man going on about? It's just there's something about this message group that anyone who's ever been on a message group, including your kind of neighborhood message group at home, you just, you lose concentration. You think, what on earth are they talking about?

[Marianna Spring]

Except it's.

[Anthony Zurcher]

It does provide an interesting insight. It does provide an interesting insight into, into the inner workings of Donald Trump's senior national security advisors. In the same way that, say, the, the hacked Hillary Clinton emails and, and the Democratic National Committee emails provided an insight into the operations of the Democratic Party. It is peeling the curtain back and seeing how these people really talk, which, you know, Serro is fascinating in itself.

[Sarah Rainsford]

Oh, it's amazing for people like us to get insight into what goes on. And I love that some of the pushback from the White House is saying, well, it's great that now we can all see the very considered discussions that took place before deciding to take military action and that we should all be pleased that the senior officials on this group were taking things so seriously and thinking so deeply about what they were doing.

[Anthony Zurcher]

J.D. vance had doubts about the strike that he expressed ahead of time. And then he was like, well, I'll go along with whatever you say, but, I mean, they are not marching in lockstep in private, which I thought was.

[Justin Webb]

That is a serious point. So you want to get to the serious stuff. I do think, say what you like about J.D. vance and there are all sorts of people in Europe saying all sorts of things about him at the moment. But what he says in public and what he says in private is pretty much the same thing, isn't it? Because he has utter contempt, it is fair to say, for Europe and Europe.

[Marianna Spring]

He ated Europe in the chat. He's indirecting Europe.

[Justin Webb]

Yeah, there you go. Yeah, yeah.

[Marianna Spring]

Because he makes this comment where he basically says, oh, what was it exactly he said? He said, we don't need to.

[Justin Webb]

The point he's making, as Anthony says he doesn't want to go along with it, is thinking maybe it's not such a good idea. And the point he's making is exactly the point he makes in public as well, which is these Europeans are useless. They don't protect themselves. Most of the shipping that we're protecting by attacking the Houthis is not ours. Most of the trade is not ours. Maybe the Europeans ought to do the thing. It's not something that's of interest to most Americans. They don't know who the Houthis are, et cetera, et cetera. And what strikes me is that what you can say about him is that he is intellectually consistent. So there is a sort of political point which I think is absolutely. I know is being absolutely felt around Europe, having done my other day job and interviewed people here about it, that there is this real sense of, oh, my goodness, this guy is for real.

[Sarah Rainsford]

And Donald Trump doubled down on that yesterday as well. He was actually asked if he agreed with that sentiment that Europe is being bailed out and that it's pathetic. Pathetic that they rely on the US for defense cover. And he said, yeah, 100% he agreed with that sentiment. So, I mean, that's one other thing we've learned, I guess, is that is the official policy of the Trump administration is that they think Europe is quotes. Pathetic.

[Marianna Spring]

I mean, that's what's so interesting about it. It's not just the policy points, but actually the kind of dynamics between these people and how much they're on the same page or not on the same page. Like, it feels like such a window into. Oh, hang on. Okay, this is what J.D. vance thinks. Is that what Donald Trump thinks?

[Sarah Rainsford]

Well, J.D. vance was saying he wasn't sure about going ahead with these strikes because it was America playing the role of doing the work, the defense work essentially, that he thought Europe should be doing. And he thought it sent a confused message when Donald Trump was telling Europe they needed to stand up for themselves, pay for their own defense, to then do this in defense of the Suez Canal, where more European ships pass through it than American ones. So, I mean, they're on the same page with the broader policy. It was just whether or not these strikes at this time were gonna confuse that message. What was fascinating was Stephen Miller, the deputy chief of staff, then chimes in and says, but Trump's already greenlighted this. And then they all went, oh, that's okay. Yeah, yeah, we'll definitely agree with it.

[Anthony Zurcher]

Then wasn't even decisive about it. I think Donald Trump has already greenlighted, from what I hear, Donald Trump has already greenlighted this. So, I mean, it seemed like there was a certain amount of doubt about what Trump wanted there. It's like, oh, he had signed off on it, so now we're carrying it out. And that line From Pete Hegseth. I wanna repeat it verbatim because it's. It's choice. Telling Vice President Vance after he had criticized Europe. I fully share your loathing of European freeloading. It's pathetic in all caps.

[Justin Webb]

Yeah, that's a problem.

[Sarah Rainsford]

Yeah. The all cap is catching, I think, in the Trump administration.

[Justin Webb]

Yeah. And is anyone taking the blame? We should let people hear what various people have said about it. I mean, I suppose that the bounciest is the guy who's right in the middle of this because here's the person who let this journalist in to the conversation. So Mike Waltz, the national security advisor, I mean, can we say. Well, let's listen to him. Is he sort of taking responsibility on Fox News yesterday?

[Mike Waltz]

I could tell you for 100% I don't know this guy. I know him by his horrible reputation and he really is the bottom scum of journalists. And I know him that in the sense that he hates the president. But I don't text him. He wasn't on my phone. And we're going to figure out how this happens.

[Justin Webb]

So you don't know what staffer is responsible for this right now?

[Mike Waltz]

Well, look, a staffer wasn't responsible. And look, I take full responsibility. I built the. I built the group to admit my job is to make sure everything's coordinated.

[Justin Webb]

I mean, I don't mean to be pedantic here, but how did the number.

[Mike Waltz]

Have you ever had a. Have you ever had somebody's contact that shows their name and then you have an. And then you have somebody else's number there?

[Anthony Zurcher]

I know you make those mistakes. Right.

[Mike Waltz]

You got somebody else's number on someone else's contact. So of course I didn't see this loser in the group.

[Justin Webb]

What do we make of that?

[Anthony Zurcher]

Well, I mean, I think the fact that he accidentally apparently added a journalist to a national security chat that included secretaries, a vice president, the head of the CIA. I mean, it's astounding. Yes, we all make that mistake. Oh, yeah. You know, I accidentally texted my mom when I meant to text my wife or something embarrassing like that. Yeah, but we don't need to.

[Justin Webb]

More embarrassing scenarios are available, Anthony. But that's a good one.

[Anthony Zurcher]

Yeah. The stakes are so high here. And so, yeah, that's why generally it's discouraged for government officials to use private messaging apps. Because when you're on a classified computer or in a skiff, which is the secure classified information areas, that you can go into that to prevent eavesdropping, where you're supposed to be having These kind of discussions about military operations, it's impossible to accidentally add a reporter to it. The fact that they were kind of freewheeling and doing this on the sly in a private chat group, possibly also to avoid any kind of government records requirements, I think that is what is truly dramatically remarkable about this.

[Sarah Rainsford]

And it still doesn't explain how Jeffrey Goldberg's number was in Mike Waltz's phone number. Okay, so it was stored under a different name. But if he's never met him, had no contact with him at all, how did that number magically end up in his phone?

[Marianna Spring]

Like, is it an accidental, like, typo? And it just so happens that that typo of the number is the editor.

[Justin Webb]

Well, I mean, is that possible, Mariana? What? Well, it is.

[Marianna Spring]

It is in theory. I mean, basically what he. What the way I interpret his explanation is that he's trying to say, for whatever reason, this, he thought it was someone else. And in that contact detail, it was actually the Atlantic editor's number, but he didn't realize it was because it wasn't saved as his name, it was saved as some other name. And there are different ways that could happen. You know, I don't know, you've moved phones maybe, and like, merged contacts and. And maybe you've somehow got to a place where, like, stuff's in a bit of a muddle. But, like, given your job, you might want to make sure, like, you're not in a muddle.

[Sarah Rainsford]

What.

[Marianna Spring]

Or you've. Or you've like, mistyped a number, say, and then, like, what on earth are the chances that that would then accidentally be an incredibly important journalist's number? Like, it just. I can't believe that happening. And then also, how would you like, then the other argument is, oh, it's just like, you've miss Saved a contact. Or if you're going full conspiracy theory, and I should say that social media, certain areas of it are going full, like, extreme conspiracy theory, eg, like, you know, has someone got into his phone and deliberately changed the contact to thwart him? And, you know, again, we have no evidence for or against that at the mom, so who knows? And then there's another layer of conspiracy, which is people saying, did they deliberately add him to the chat on purpose? Because they wanted these plans to be like, is there some. Is there a next level to it.

[Anthony Zurcher]

Four dimensional chess here?

[Marianna Spring]

Yeah. Or is it the CIA to thwart them? Or all this kind of stuff. No evidence to support it.

[Anthony Zurcher]

I mean, if this is just fat thumbs and he typed the wrong number, I mean, that Seems, as you mentioned, astounding that it would just happen to be the editor in chief who is interested in national security and foreign policy issues. I mean, you might as well have accidentally put in a pizza delivery person or the head of the GRU at the Russian embassy. Any of those, I guess, would be equally likely and also just really, really scary to think about. Like, oops, you could accidentally include anyone into this group chat. I think it's much more plausible that he had the contact already on his phone for whatever reason. Maybe he had talked to Jeffrey Goldberg. He was a member of Congress before he became National Security Advisor, so I would suspect he might have reason to have contacts in the media, including Jeffrey Goldberg. So that seems much more realistic. But he doesn't want to. I don't think he wants to admit that he had Jeffrey Goldberg on his phone because I think that the President may not like the fact that he was on speed dial with someone who Donald Trump really doesn't respect at all.

[Justin Webb]

Do we think he's toast, Sarah? I mean, not now, obviously, because he's being stuck by. But an awful lot of Republicans you think of how Washington works are going to have had the same conversation that we've just had about how Jeffrey Goldberg's number happened to be in his phone. And they're going to say, hmm, he's not one of us, or he's plotting behind our backs, or he's saying nasty things about the administration or planting information about the administration that it doesn't want out there, which of course is done in all administrations. But the punishment for it generally, if you're found, is to be heaved out at some stage.

[Sarah Rainsford]

Yeah. And Mike Waltz is without doubt the most vulnerable person who was on this chat. So firstly, he's the one who set up the chat group, and as you say, he's the one who is in the firing line for having had this journalist contact. But there's other reasons why he is seen as dispensable as well. To replace him, he wouldn't need a Senate confirmation hearing, which any Cabinet secretary would need. So that makes life much, much easier. But also he's not seen as 100% MAGA. So you've got Pete Hegseth who's out there also saying things that may stretching the truth, as he says very forcefully to camera. There were no war plans discussed on that chat, but he's a bit of a MAGA hero at the moment. So much, much better if heads have got to roll over this to just quietly sack Mike Waltz and find yourself a new national security advisor than to try and replace the Defense Secretary and the political fallout that could come from that. So there are many, many reasons why if anybody is caught as on a shoggly peg, it is Mike Waltz's. And the President will probably wait till the end of this week, see how this all plays out, see if the story dies down before making a decision as to whether or not he does want to fire somebody over this. It's really interesting to hear the way he is backing his team at the moment over an incident that he really cannot be happy about. This is what Donald Trump had to say yesterday about Mike Waltz. Whilst, as you'll hear, he's sitting in the room with Mike Waltz.

[Caller or Listener]

No, I don't think he should apologize. I think he's doing his best. It's equipment and technology that's not perfect and probably he won't be using it again, at least not in the very near future.

[Justin Webb]

What do you think?

[Mike Waltz]

That's sort of. I agree with you. Let's get everybody in the room. Whenever. Whenever possible.

[Caller or Listener]

A lot of times you find out defects by exactly. Things like that. But I don't think it's something. Something we're looking forward to using again.

[Justin Webb]

When they talk about everyone should be in the room. As if the alternative to using these chat things is for everyone to be in the room.

[Marianna Spring]

It doesn't look to be.

[Justin Webb]

I wanted the right phrase definition, but, I mean, I can remember from, from my time in D.C. talking to someone about how the CIA director used to travel and presumably still does travel, and they travel in a military plane and they put an entire kind of Winnebago thing. Anthony, you must have seen this. There's an actual structure, isn't there, that they wheel into the plane. It's really uncomfortable, actually, for everyone else because you have to kind of strap, hang around it. And the director of the CIA is inside this box in the plane. I kid you not. Marianne's looking at me and said, I'm crazy. But, Anthony, back me up. This is true, isn't it? That's how they run.

[Anthony Zurcher]

Yeah. In these cargo planes, it is a box that has a door and inside it has a desk. And it looks like a little office. And you can see the principals, the secretaries, walk in there, close the door. Meanwhile, the rest of us are sitting in uncomfortable jump seats or in seats that have been set up in the middle of this cargo plane really loud. But inside that box, it's nice and quiet and you can have your secure conversations.

[Sarah Rainsford]

And there are these things called skiffs all over the city, aren't they? It's a secure compartmented. I'm looking at it. Information facility, I think.

[Anthony Zurcher]

Yeah, that sounds right.

[Sarah Rainsford]

Secure compartmented information facility. And they're set up in the middle of buildings. I had the most DC conversation ever at the weekend was an extremely pregnant woman in my Pilates class who was saying she's a bit worried about when she goes into labor because she can't phone her husband, she can only email him. And we were all like, well, how can that be said? Oh, because he works in a skiff. She said, just casually, as, you know, everybody's husband just works in a skiff.

[Marianna Spring]

Moving on to this question of where this goes now, I was having a little bit of a look at the undercover voters, our fictional characters, with all the social media profiles across the main sites, and particularly looking at the pro Trump ones, because obviously the ones that don't like Donald Trump very much are seeing a lot of criticism about this and how did it happen and why did it happen. Even a political. Gabriella R. One who's not really into politics like this has broken through, I think, particularly because it's messages. And, like, people love to be able to read the messages, look at the messages. It's the sort of thing that's kind of catnip for online sleuths and everything else in terms of populist. Right. Britney or Faith and Flag Larry, who are supporters of Donald Trump. Their feeds are just absolutely overwhelmed with either kind of like attacks on the Atlantic editor or trying to undermine the story in some way, suggesting, again, it's kind of part of the plot by the global elite to take Trump out. And actually, this is, you know, it's like, this isn't a big deal, but everyone's trying to make it a big deal. And, you know, this is just like their, you know, this is just how politics works now and all that kind of thing. Like this sort of like it's not, you know, we won't allow it to stick. And then it's also the flooding, the zone thing we've spoken about, which is just like trying to move it on by talking about all kinds of different things.

[Anthony Zurcher]

Sending JD Vance to Greenland next week.

[Marianna Spring]

Yeah, exactly.

[Anthony Zurcher]

Yeah. I mean, they're definitely circling the wagons. And, you know, one of the things I've heard from Trump administration officials is that we've survived worse, which I think is arguably true. There are scandals that look a lot worse than this that they have managed to skate through. So I think they think that if they say this is all, once again, another attempt to get Donald Trump, that this is the mainstream media blowing things out of proportion, that what they're doing is perfectly normal and perfectly routine. And, yes, a mistake was made, but they're going to move on. Although I do think it's very rich that Donald Trump's talking about using devices and technology after 2016, when he just railed against Hillary Clinton for her use of a private email server and communications that were later deemed to be classified or even top secret, but at the time did not have that classification. So here we are. Now, Trump and a lot of people, including Pete Hegseth and others who are very critical of Hillary Clinton, have come out and are offering similar defenses to what the former Secretary of State offered. And actually, I think Sarah, Hillary Clinton had a comment about all of this when this first broke on Monday. Did you see that?

[Sarah Rainsford]

Yeah, yeah. She attached a comment on X to the original article with the eyes emoji saying, you've got to be kidding me, which was a fairly lighthearted response for something, you know, you can imagine. Must be. Must be. She must be absolutely furious about. And in the vein of this all being done by messages and on social media after the Atlantic just a couple of hours ago, has published all of these messages showing that there were, well, certainly military plans being discussed of when the bombers were gonna take off and when they would be around their targets. There's a big pushback from the administration. So we've had J.D. vance this morning on Truth Social saying that Jeffrey Goldberg, the journalist, has oversold what he had by claiming that it's war plans that were shared in the signal group. And, well, I mean, that comes down to an interesting debate about whether or not these are war plans or attack plans. But then also, Mike Waltz himself has been on X. He says no locations, no sources and methods, and then in all caps, no war plans. So, I mean, they think obviously that they can front this out by simply saying, you know, we didn't put war plans on a chat group, even though they've been published. And I think a lot of people who would look at them would think, I don't officially know what all war plans look like, but that kind of looks like one to me.

[Anthony Zurcher]

Yeah, it says the type of aircraft use. It says when they're taking off, you know what, in general terms, they're targeting. After the fact, they said how effective these attacks were. This is all stuff that was posted by Pete Hegseth. And you have to remember to get this kind of information from a secure location onto a personal phone, which it appears these conversations were taking place on their personal phones. You can't just copy and paste. I mean, there's more to it than that. So it does represent a kind of a dramatic use of information that if you knew about when the attack was going to happen two hours before, might be very damaging if it fell into the wrong hands.

[Justin Webb]

I suppose the big thing, though, is that it wasn't damaging. And I wonder if that's why they kind of escaped from this in the end, that it was a pretty successful mission. It seems it did what they set out to do. And you think back to plenty of much better protected missions when it comes to information. But the mission itself has gone completely wrong. I mean, including the withdrawal from Afghanistan under Biden, where American soldiers killed at the airport, all sorts of chaos. I mean, you think back, think of the entire Iraq war, frankly, think of all sorts of things that go wrong, even in circumstances where actually the surrounding stuff is all done with impressive zeal and vigor and proper decorum, and the thing goes completely mad. And they may. Well, I suppose, as the days turn into weeks, weeks, just say, look, it was a successful operation. We messed up a bit on signal and that was it.

[Anthony Zurcher]

That there wasn't a body count here, obviously, I think, as you rightly point out, Justin, is a big factor. Benghazi, another one. An operation that resulted in the death of Americans that Republicans turned in in 2012 into a major issue for a decade after it helped sink Hillary Clinton's presidential aspirations. They can point to this and say it was a success. I think another way that this may. They may be able to get past this is that Republicans control both chambers of Congress and the institution that would best be positioned to investigate, to provide oversight, to dig in and issue subpoenas and find out what was on the phones and where people were and what they were saying would be a congressional committee. And Democrats, despite the fact that they're calling for some kind of investigation, despite the fact that there are some Republicans who seem open to the idea it's gonna be Republicans controlling the levers here, and it's gonna be much more difficult for anyone to get into what some of these unanswered questions are about.

[Sarah Rainsford]

This chat group, Mike Waltz, said that he's asked Elon Musk personally to get the best technical brains to have a look at how this could possibly have happened. Presumably he's turned over his phone to them. But that is something slightly different from a congressional investigation.

[Anthony Zurcher]

Elon Musk, reference, you must.

[Marianna Spring]

I actually was Going to say before I was looking through who was in the chat, thinking, is Elon Musk going to be in the chat? But no evidence of that.

[Anthony Zurcher]

We need a bell to ring or something.

[Marianna Spring]

Yeah, we.

[Anthony Zurcher]

The first mention of one of our.

[Marianna Spring]

Maros is said to say Elon. Every time we say.

[Justin Webb]

I'm sure it's not beyond the producers to come up with something that is played here, Elon.

[Marianna Spring]

Just on our scale of the Americas, scale of Nothing Burger, for example, it's not a big deal to everything salad. It's a super big deal. Where do we think this ranks on the scale?

[Anthony Zurcher]

I think this is a pretty big salad. I don't think that it necessarily is going to have legs because of the reasons we just discussed. But I mean, it is just stunning that they could have this kind of lackadaisical attitude towards information security when they were launching a military operation in which American lives were at risk. And I think it just kind of illustrates the haphazard, kind of fly by the seat of their pants way this administration operates. And if they're operating this way now, I think it's an indication that there are going to be other instances going forward where they make mistakes like this, where things aren't followed in the proper procedures. And maybe this time they get away with it, maybe this time there aren't drastic political consequences. But if they keep this up, at some point there is going to be something that will really come back and bite them.

[Sarah Rainsford]

Yeah. And among the premium ingredients that are being added to this pretty big salad, I think, is the very aggressive way the administration's pushing back against this story and saying things that just frankly don't ring true and may well be proved not to be true. And that keeps the story going for a few days. We haven't quite got the, I guess, breadcrumbs on the top. Is that what really turns a salad into an everything salad? At some point, if Donald Trump is fed up that this is still in the headlines and going on and on and distracting from what he sees as the great successes of the administration he would rather be talking about, I think he will step in and do something about it. But, you know, even losing a national security advisor in Donald Trump's White House, that's probably not that big of a deal.

[Anthony Zurcher]

Michael Flynn, Donald Trump's first pick for national security advisor, his First Pym lasted 22 days. So already Mike Waltz is playing with house. Michael Flynn has actually just been named by Donald Trump to be on the Board of Supervisors or whatever for West Point Military Academy. He's doing pretty well now.

[Justin Webb]

Can I add something as well that may turn it from a super salad into at least a small burger? And that is that. And it's something we mentioned earlier on, but we've kind of gone off now. But it really does resonate in Europe and in the chancelleries of Europe is this business of the contempt for the Europeans that both Hegseth and Vance express. And as we were saying earlier on, we sort of know that because Vance at least says it very obviously in public. But I talked to Pete Sessions, the Republican congressman, this morning doing my day job here in Britain, and he was saying he represents a strand of opinion in the Republican Party. He's quite a fan of Donald Trump, certainly voted for him. He's keen to, keen to see him succeed. He was quite upset, actually.

[Caller or Listener]

The relationship that, that I think is best described that the United States must have and needs to have is one of respect, one of that where we cooperate with each other. And the discussions that I continue to have with the BBC and that the BBC wants to know is can we count on America when everything needs to be done? And I would say to them, I'm still watching. I believe the president is bringing about a conversation that I'm going to learn about, but that it must not be done where America takes on the world all by itself.

[Justin Webb]

He felt it was the wrong signal to send out to Europeans. And I think there is going to be a strand of Republican thinking. It's not yet going to be enough of a, of a group of people and a powerful group to mount some sort of a coup against Trump, as it were, legislatively speaking. But I do think that there is some concern. I mean, it's okay to tease the Canadians and maybe bully the Greenlanders, but do you really want to rip up relationships so extremely with all of your allies in the world? Is that really what the Trump administration about? And in a way, if this mess up is about anything, it seems to me it's about that.

[Sarah Rainsford]

This is interesting. This maybe rounds us off and brings us back to the beginning. The White House have just emailed out an official statement. And what it is, is a copy of the X post that Mike Waltz sent that we were talking about earlier, where he said that there were no locations, no sources and methods, no war plans included in the group chat. And it's in case you missed the X post from Mike Waltz sent to me by the White House, making absolutely sure that we've all seen that and I guess underscoring that this is their defense.

[Justin Webb]

There we are. There's nothing here to see. Move on.

[Marianna Spring]

Leave the chat, leave the chat.

[Justin Webb]

Say goodbye.

[Sarah Rainsford]

And it's also goodbye from us. Bye bye, bye, bye bye.

[Marianna Spring]

Ameracast ameracast from BBC News.

[Justin Webb]

Well, look, thanks for listening all the way to the end of today's AmericasT. You are now officially an AmericasT. It is of course a ride, a wild ride, navigating the US News, particularly in the era of Trump. You have made it. If you have a comment, a question about the things we've talked about or anything at all actually, get in touch with us. The email is americastbc.co.uk the WhatsApp is 033-01-239480 we answer your questions every single week actually on the podcasts, so keep them coming. You can join the online community as well on Discord. The link is in the podcast description on your app. We will be back with another podcast very soon. So until then, see you later. Bye.

[Greenlight Advertiser]

The US Electric grid is approaching a breaking point. As demand soars from data centers and home energy use, our aging infrastructure can't keep up and the Department of Energy warns that without action, blackouts could surge 100 fold by 2030. The good news? One solution is already here. Propane. It's American made, stored on site and always ready, powering homes and businesses with cleaner, reliable energy that doesn't depend on the grid or the weather. Learn [e-mail] Now I'd like to introduce.

[Meaningful Beauty Advertiser]

You to Meaningful Beauty, the famed skin care brand created by iconic supermodel Cindy Crawford. It's her secret to absolutely gorgeous skin. Meaningful Beauty makes powerful and effective skin care simple and it's loved by millions of women. It's formulated for all ages and all skin tones and types and it's designed to work as a complete skin care system, leaving your skin feeling soft, smooth and nourished. I recommend starting with Cindy's full regimen which contains all five of her best selling products including the Amazing Youth Activating Melon Serum. This next generation serum has the power of Melonleaf stem cell technology. It's melon leaf stem cells encapsulated for freshness and released onto the skin to support a visible reduction in the appearance of wrinkles. With thousands of of glowing five star reviews, why not give it a try? Subscribe today and you can get the Amazing Meaningful Beauty system for just $49.95. That includes our introductory five piece system, free gifts, free shipping and a 60 day money back guarantee.

[Greenlight Advertiser]

All that [e-mail] this message is sponsored by Greenlight. With school out, summer is the perfect time to teach our kids real world money skills they'll use forever. Greenlight is a debit card and the number one family finance and safety app used by millions of families helping k learn how to save, invest and spend wisely. Parents can send their kids money and track their spending and saving while kids build money, confidence and skills in fun ways. Start your risk free Greenlight trial [e-mail] iheart that's greenlight.com iheartra.