Trump claims leaked war plans were ‘not classified’

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell

Episode Title: Trump claims leaked war plans were ‘not classified’
Host: Jonathan Capehart (In place of Lawrence O’Donnell)
Release Date: March 26, 2025

---

Overview

In this episode of The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell, hosted by Jonathan Capehart in place of Lawrence O’Donnell, the discussion centers around a significant national security incident involving former President Donald Trump’s administration. The episode delves into the accidental leakage of war plans via a group chat, the ensuing legal ramifications, and the broader implications for national security and accountability within the government.

---

Incident Details

Accidental Leakage of War Plans

The episode kicks off with Capehart addressing a pressing issue: top Trump officials, including the Vice President and Secretary of Defense, inadvertently shared war plans through a commercial messaging app. Notably, journalist Jeffrey Goldberg was included in this group chat, raising concerns about the security of sensitive information.

"It was 34 hours since we learned that top Trump officials accidentally texted war plans to Jeffrey Goldberg... twenty-five minutes later, Trump declared that there was no national security breach because the information wasn’t classified." [00:59]

---

Trump’s Response

Denial of Classification

Donald Trump swiftly downplayed the incident, asserting that the leaked war plans were “not classified.” This dismissal has sparked outrage and skepticism among lawmakers and national security experts.

"No problem. It wasn't classified. As I understand it. There was no classified information. There was no problem." [00:59]

---

Legal Actions

Lawsuit by American Oversight

Responding to the breach, the government watchdog group American Oversight filed a lawsuit against Pete Hegseth and four other Trump officials. The lawsuit alleges violations of the Federal Records Act due to the use of an unsecured commercial messaging app.

"The lawsuit asks for an emergency injunction for the Trump officials to preserve all materials and to refer the matter to the Attorney General for enforcement..." [01:20]

---

Discussions with Senator Mark Kelly

Security Risks and Accountability

Arizona Senator Mark Kelly, a Navy veteran and member of both the Senate Intelligence and Armed Services Committees, joins the discussion to highlight the gravity of the situation. He emphasizes the potential risks posed by sharing sensitive military information on unsecured platforms.

"When you are about to conduct an operation with US Service members... sharing information on an unsecured platform is putting all of those individuals at significant risk." [06:31]

Concerns Over Transparency

Kelly criticizes the administration’s lack of transparency and underscores the need for accountability among officials responsible for the breach.

"If they say it's not classified, why doesn't the Secretary of Defense step up and show us on the committee first privately or share it publicly?" [09:37]

---

Hakeem Jeffries' Input

Impact on National Security

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries echoes Senator Kelly's concerns, stressing the dangerous implications of the breach irrespective of classification status. He calls for decisive action against officials who failed to secure sensitive information.

"The question is, is this sensitive information that is dangerous to be sharing over open channels prior to an operation? And the answer is yes, 100%." [15:02]

Call for Accountability

Jeffries advocates for the removal of Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, citing his failure to respond adequately to inquiries and his downplaying of the incident.

"Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth should be fired immediately." [16:31]

---

Jeffrey Goldberg's Position

Handling of Sensitive Information

Jeffrey Goldberg addresses the dilemma of possessing potentially classified information. He asserts his responsibility to national security and indicates plans to vet the material before any public release.

"My obligation, I feel, is to the idea that we take national security information seriously... I have a plan to have this material vetted publicly." [24:47]

---

Expert Analysis with Mark Zaid and Tim Miller

Legal Implications

Mark Zaid, a national security attorney, discusses the legal responsibilities tied to handling national defense information, regardless of its classified status. He emphasizes the potential consequences under the Espionage Act.

"The Espionage act actually could apply to unclassified information, that is national defense information." [26:18]

Media’s Role in Accountability

Tim Miller, an MSNBC political analyst, explores how media can hold the Trump administration accountable amidst their attempts to deflect and deny responsibility. He highlights the importance of responsible journalism in such scenarios.

"They put him in a really big bind and they're out there attacking him. The national security adviser is on Fox... He's just advancing total conspiracy theories." [25:59]

---

Conclusion

The episode underscores the critical nature of safeguarding national security information and the profound implications of its mishandling. Through engaging discussions with key political figures and experts, Jonathan Capehart highlights the urgent need for accountability and robust oversight within the government to prevent future breaches and ensure the safety of American lives.

---

Notable Quotes with Timestamps

• "No problem. It wasn't classified..." — Donald Trump [00:59]
• "When you are about to conduct an operation with US Service members... sharing information on an unsecured platform is putting all of those individuals at significant risk." — Senator Mark Kelly [06:31]
• "Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth should be fired immediately." — Hakeem Jeffries [16:31]
• "The Espionage act actually could apply to unclassified information, that is national defense information." — Mark Zaid [26:18]
• "They put him in a really big bind and they're out there attacking him..." — Tim Miller [25:59]

---

This comprehensive summary encapsulates the key discussions, insights, and conclusions from the episode, providing a clear and informative overview for those who haven't listened to the podcast.

Transcript

[Jonathan Capehart]

NETCredit is here to say yes to.

[Mark Kelly]

A personal loan or line of credit. When other lenders say no, apply in.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Minutes and get a decision as soon as the same day. If approved, applications are typically funded the.

[Mark Kelly]

Next business day or sooner. Loans offered by Netcredit or lending partner banks and serviced by NetCredit applications subject to review and approval.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Learn more at netcredit.com partner NetCredit credit.

[Jeffrey Goldberg]

To the people.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Substance use disorder and addiction is so isolating. And so as a Black woman in recovery, hope must be loud. It grows louder when you ask for help and you're vulnerable. It is the thread that lets you know that no matter what happens, you will be okay.

[Adam Smith]

When we learn the power of hope recovery is possible, find out [e-mail] brought to you by the National Council for.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Mental well Being, Shatterproof and the Ad Council. Now it's time for the Last Word, with the great Jonathan Capehart in for Lawrence. Good evening, Jonathan. Good evening, Rachel. I'm going to let you off early. Go home. Good night. Thanks, Rachel. It has been 34 hours since we learned that top Trump officials accidentally texted war plans to Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor in chief of the Atlantic. And just moments ago, a new declaration from Donald Trump about national security breach. It's no problem. It wasn't classified. As I understand it. There was no classified information. There was no problem. No problem. So reporters, do your thing. Ask every single elected Republican, every military expert, every national security expert, if they think it was no problem that cabinet level officials in the Trump administration, including the Vice President and the Secretary of Defense, used an app that you or I could download from the App Store at this very moment to discuss plans about a military strike in Yemen. Today, the government watchdog group American Oversight filed a lawsuit against Pete Hexseth and four other Trump officials for using a commercial messaging app in violation of the Federal Records Act. Because signal messages are stored only on an individual's device, with no copy or backup of the messages retained on the signal system or servers, this means that signal messages can be preserved by the individual users through screenshots or other means, but once deleted, messages cannot be restored or retrieved after deletion. The lawsuit asks for an emergency injunction for the Trump officials to preserve all materials and to refer the matter to the Attorney General for enforcement of the fra preservation of records, recovery of unlawfully removed records, and the recovery or restoration of any deleted or destroyed materials to the extent possible. Jeffrey Goldberg did not release the full message exchange out of security concerns. Later in the hour, we will Discuss Jeffrey Goldberg's latest comments on what he plans to do with the yet unpublished group chat. And national security lawyer Mark Zaid will join us to discuss the legal and security concerns. Mike Waltz, Trump's national security adviser, who created the group chat, tried to make this seem like a tech issue. It's embarrassing.

[Hakeem Jeffries]

Yes.

[Jonathan Capehart]

We're going to get to the bottom of it. We have. I just talked to Elon on the way here. We've got the best technical minds looking at how this happened today. By pure chance, two of the cabinet level officials in the group chat, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, were previously scheduled to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee about worldwide threats.

[Mark Kelly]

You are not TG on this group chat.

[Jonathan Capehart]

I'm not going to get into the specifics.

[Mark Kelly]

So you refuse to acknowledge whether you.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Are on this group chat, Senator? I'm not going to get into this.

[Mark Kelly]

Why are you, why are you going to get into the specifics? Is this, is it because it's all classified?

[Jonathan Capehart]

Because this is currently under review by the National. Because it's all classified.

[Mark Kelly]

If it's not classified. Share the text now. So you were the John Ratcliffe on that chat?

[Jonathan Capehart]

I was.

[Mark Kelly]

Thank you.

[Jonathan Capehart]

My communications, to be clear, in a.

[Ed Markey]

Signal message group, were entirely permissible and.

[Mark Kelly]

Lawful and did not include classified information.

[Ed Markey]

Well, we will, we will make that.

[Mark Kelly]

Determination because if it's not classified. Share the text with the committee.

[Jonathan Capehart]

But some Republican lawmakers are concerned about the national security breach.

[Hakeem Jeffries]

I suspect the Armed Services Committee may.

[Adam Smith]

Want to have some folks testify and.

[Hakeem Jeffries]

Have some of those questions answered as well. I think everybody has acknowledged, including the White House, that, yeah, mistakes were made. And what we want to do is make sure that something like that doesn't happen again.

[Jonathan Capehart]

It's a fact. Classified information is put on by the Secretary of Defense. So that's pretty, I think it's pretty clear.

[Tulsi Gabbard]

What do you make of the White.

[Adam Smith]

House saying that no war plans were.

[Mark Kelly]

Shared, criticizing the reporter?

[Jonathan Capehart]

That's pony.

[Tulsi Gabbard]

I don't think.

[Jonathan Capehart]

They ought to just.

[Mark Kelly]

Be honest and own up to it.

[Jonathan Capehart]

It's not okay. And any member of Congress, particularly ones that are on important committees, sensitive committees like Armed Services or Intelligence or Foreign.

[Adam Smith]

Relations, knows that it's not okay.

[Jonathan Capehart]

And the people who protect America are demanding answers. Here's Senator Alyssa Slotkin tonight on Chris Hayes.

[Adam Smith]

I've been hearing from a lot of spouses today, a lot of family members.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Of folks who are on those missions.

[Adam Smith]

Who, who are just like, are you kidding me? We are told we can't even talk to our kids about where our loved ones are for operational security. And you're putting this out as the Secretary of Defense. So as far as I'm concerned, the spouses have better operational security on their Facebook groups than the Secretary of Defense has in providing that to our adversaries or anyone who has the ability to hack him.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Leading off our discussion tonight is Arizona Senator Mark Kelly, a Navy veteran who serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee. Senator Kelly, thank you very much for coming to the last word. As I said, we are 34 hours into this, 34 hours later. What questions do you have? What do you want to know?

[Mark Kelly]

Well, let me start by saying the President said this is. He said, no problem.

[Jonathan Capehart]

No problem.

[Mark Kelly]

This is a big problem. It is significant. Some of our most classified and sensitive information is when we are about to conduct an operation with US Service members, in this case likely off of an aircraft carrier, but we had ships at sea with the Houthis are going to be attacked in Yemen. By sharing information on an unsecured platform, you're putting all of those individuals at significant risk. This is the kind of information that our adversaries want and when they can get it. Let's just say, as an example, if the Russians were able to get some of this information off of this signal chain, I could see a scenario where they would share it with the Iranians, who would share it with the Houthis in Yemen. And then our pilots coming off that aircraft carrier to deliver bombs on target at a certain time, there's a much higher likelihood that they would be shot down.

[Jonathan Capehart]

You know, Senator Kelly, do you believe Republican senators, like your colleagues in the Armed Services Committee, will just roll over on this? And are they hearing from people on the ground and in the field, as Senator Slotkin has, for whom this is a real safety concern?

[Mark Kelly]

Well, I don't know what they're hearing. You heard Senator Cramer of North Dakota tonight talk specifically about this, how this is a problem, and people screwed up. Obviously they did. And we see folks on TV getting incredibly defensive. I think it's important for people when they make a mistake, especially service members. You got to own up to the mistake. Accidentally putting a journalist on a signal chat chain is a huge problem. But I would say what the bigger problem is is what information was shared, and we don't have all of that information yet. It's clear to me after the hearing that we had today that I don't feel like folks are being totally straightforward with us on this. You could see it, you could hear it when I was asking the Director of National Intelligence specific questions about were targets discussed, were weapons discussed, was timing discussed? Long pauses, a lot of, like, wheels turning before she would answer, especially with the, with the dni. So I've got a lot more questions. I want to know what the Secretary of Defense actually said, what was shared. And they might say, okay, it's not classified, maybe he declassified it. But when you're talking about real operations with real people putting their lives at risk for their, for this country, in my view, there is nothing more sensitive than that information. Hours, possibly hours before they're about to go feet dry with a surface to air missile threat that can shoot them down. That is the stuff that we've got to hold very close.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Two questions. Do you believe the Trump administration has this trap, this chat? Does the President have this chat?

[Mark Kelly]

Yes, absolutely. I totally believe that they, they have it. I mean, the, the journalist just says he hasn't released it yet because he feels this is sensitive information and he didn't want to put it out there. Well, I think the Secretary of Defense, because my feeling is that the sensitive information came from the Secretary of Defense, put it on the signal chain, hasn't been released yet. If they say it's not classified, why doesn't the Secretary of Defense step up and show us on the committee first privately or share it publicly? They say it's not classified. Then let me decide and let the other members of the committee and the other members of the United States Congress take a look at this information.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Given what you read in Jeffrey Goldberg's piece on this and his detailing what he saw on that chat, do you believe that Jeffrey Goldberg, what he saw in that signal thread was classified information? Particularly the fact that he notes that he did that they named a CIA operative and he opted not to publish that person's name.

[Mark Kelly]

He didn't want to publish the name. But Director Ratcliffe in the hearing today mentioned, I think he was referring to this individual. He said he's not undercover. You still do not want to be mentioning people that work at the CIA. The bigger problem here, though, is when you're talking specifics about targets, that means where they're going, what time are they going to get there, or what time are they launching from an aircraft carrier? It's incredibly sensitive what kind of weapons they're using. Our enemy could then, if they knew what kind of weapon it was, they could figure out maybe where the release point would be. They could look in that part of the sky. They could use their surface to air missile system to focus on that area. And I've flown combat missions. I've had a missile blow up next to my airplane in Iraq on my first combat mission. It is not a place you want to be. And the worst thing about it would be to find out later that something our government did put that pilot at further risk.

[Jonathan Capehart]

How did it make you feel as a veteran to read Jeffrey Goldberg's.

[Mark Kelly]

Well, it's not only reading it. I mean, I felt worse today. We've got these folks in front of us, the dni, the director of the CIA. And my feeling is they're not being transparent with us. They're trying to get around answering very direct questions. And I, and I, you know, I saw Mike Waltz, who I know well, and, you know, thought he was a good choice, you know, for this job I'm having. I don't like when people are not taking ownership for things that they were clearly responsible for. It's obvious that he put the journalist on this signal text chain. You got to own up to it.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Do you think that any of these folks will be held accountable or will Congress just roll over? The Republican majority will just roll over and act as if nothing happened?

[Mark Kelly]

Well, I think there should be further investigation. And I also don't get the sense that this is over. You know, this is. We're 30 something, 36 hours in. And nobody is denying that. There is a lot more information out there. And the information that is remains to be seen by the public and also by me. I sit on the Intelligence Committee and the Armed Services Committee and is, what did the Secretary of Defense say about these strikes? What weapon systems were used? When did they launch? When did he say it? Did he say it before the mission or did he say it after? If he said it after the mission. Right. That this just happened, that is way less important and concerning. If he said it before, let's say he said it hours before pilots are getting ready to launch off an aircraft carrier or you're launching some other weapon system. That is a big, big effing deal.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Could you. We're overtime. But I have to ask you this. Could you get the text thread, the signal thread from Jeffrey Goldberg?

[Mark Kelly]

I don't know. Possibly. I would imagine he would have it. I imagine Pete Hegseth has it. As you know, signal has disappearing messages.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Right.

[Mark Kelly]

When did they find out then? Who took screenshots?

[Jonathan Capehart]

Well, we know from Jeffrey Goldberg's story that he took screenshots. He shared them.

[Mark Kelly]

There's one.

[Jonathan Capehart]

He shared them.

[Mark Kelly]

I would expect that when that story was written. Depending on the timeframe of the message, if they were still available, I would expect that some other folks on that text chain would have screenshotted them so they knew what they were dealing with.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, member of the Senate Intelligence and Armed Services Committees, thank you very much for coming to the last.

[Mark Kelly]

Thank you. Thank you, Jonathan.

[Jonathan Capehart]

And joining us now, Washington Congressman Adam Smith, top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee. Congressman Smith, so the Yemen operation discussed is over, but does the information but does that mean the information disclosed is not relevant or possibly actionable by a bad actor who could obtain it?

[Hakeem Jeffries]

Well, look, this is very problematic. What it means is they have an insight into a weakness certainly going on the signal app, but also just the incredible breach of security here. And I completely agree with Senator Kelly and all of his analysis about why this is problematic and just say, well, it's not classified. Well, the president and the secretary of defense have an enormous amount of power of deciding what is classified. The question of whether or not it's classified isn't really the important one. The question is, is this sensitive information that is dangerous to be sharing over open channels prior to an operation? And the answer to that question, as Mark just explained quite well, is yes, 100%. And also we should ask question if the secretary of Defense and the president, United States think that advanced targeting information that, as Mark explained, tells you where our pilots are going to be and when they're going to be there ahead of the operation, if they think that information isn't classified, then they are way crazy incompetent to do the job that they're supposed to be doing. And that, to my mind, is the real issue. And I'm not going to rehash everything Mark said because I think he summed it up pretty well. The issue is, is Secretary Hagseth, is this whole team competent to be in charge of our national security operation? If they do something like this on a signal app, sharing this information and then act like it's not really a big deal, everybody will tell you, Republican, Democrat, anyone involved in this, it is a big damn deal that they ought to care about.

[Jonathan Capehart]

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries wrote a letter to President Trump calling for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to be fired over using the group chat to discuss war plans. And I'm quoting here, his behavior shocks the conscience, risked American lives, and likely violated the law. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth should be fired immediately. So Congressman Smith, should Hecseth and other officials in the group chat be fired?

[Hakeem Jeffries]

Well, I'm getting to that point because they are not responding to the inquiries, they are not explaining themselves, and they're not reassuring us about what they're going to do going forward. And look, there have been instances, you know, I discussed this earlier. Secretary Austin got in trouble because he didn't report his illness and that he was out of pocket for a while while he was being treated for cancer. But he came clean on that, explained it, and he came before the House Armed Services Committee and testified. He gave us the oversight that we need. If Secretary Hagseth is saying, screw you, I'm not gonna answer any of your questions, but I can pay any attention to this. If he's blocking Congress's ability to do our job on oversight, and if he's making clear that he doesn't think this is a big deal, then. Then, yeah, I think we get into concerning territory. And one other thing that occurred to me on this that hasn't been mentioned before, absent from this phone call. So Stephen Miller is on the call.

[Tulsi Gabbard]

And what's.

[Hakeem Jeffries]

Why is Stephen Miller concerned about strikes in Yemen? There wasn't a single uniformed officer on this call, which points up even greater incompetence here. So they fired the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. CQ Brown, an imminently qualified human being, by the way, fired him. Haven't replaced him yet. On situations like this, the uniformed military personnel are the ones that have the most experience about how to carry out these operations, how to carry them safely. What the hell is Stephen Miller doing on this call? Okay, you don't have a chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff because you stupidly fired the one that you did have. But maybe the vice chair, maybe, you know, the CENTCOM commander, somebody who has some operational intelligence here, should have been part of this discussion a hell of a lot sooner. Forget Stephen Miller. Certainly a hell of a lot sooner than Jeffrey Goldberg should have been part of this conversation.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Congressman Adam Smith, thank you for coming to the Last Word.

[Hakeem Jeffries]

Thanks for giving me a chance.

[Jonathan Capehart]

And coming up, as we were just discussing, will the full group chat be disclosed either by the administration or by Jeffrey Goldberg? That's next. Your old or broken phone can let you down, but at Verizon, trade in any old phone from our top brands. And get iPhone 16 Pro with Apple Intelligence with a new line on my plan and iPad and Apple Watch Series 10. After all, you don't want your old.

[Tulsi Gabbard]

Phone to die on you when you're lost.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Perfect.

[Tulsi Gabbard]

Or for your broken phone to glitch.

[Jonathan Capehart]

At the worst possible time. Hey, can I get your number. Oh, trade in your old phone for a brand new iPhone 16 Pro, iPad and Apple Watch. Visit verizon.com today. Additional terms apply Service and required for Apple Watch and iPad Want to pull.

[Adam Smith]

Off the season's freshest trends? You just need the right shoes. That's where designer Shoe Warehouse comes in. Loving wide leg jeans. Pair them with sleek low profile sneakers. Obsessed with the sheer trend? Try it with mesh flats, Feeling Boho comfy sandals. Nail the whole free spirited thing. Find on trend shoes from the brands you love like Birkenstock, Nike, Adidas and more at DSW.

[Jonathan Capehart]

It's President Trump's first 100 days and MSNBC's Alex Wagner will be covering it all from the front lines.

[Adam Smith]

What issue matters to you the most?

[Jonathan Capehart]

Join her as she travels the country to talk to the people at the center of the President's policies and promises.

[Adam Smith]

Do you think now that he's pardoned everybody he can count on this group of people again?

[Jonathan Capehart]

Search for Trumpland with Alex Wagner wherever you're listening and follow subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen ad free okay, here is what we need to understand about crises in the Trump administration. We cannot wait for them to take responsibility. America's first criminal president is not going to admit wrongdoing or feel shamed. That train has left that station if it ever stopped there at all. That is not this world. The Trump playbook is Attack the media for reporting it, deny it, deflect with irrelevant information, lie about it, all of the above. All of that has happened since the Atlantic's editor in chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, published his stunning report about top officials accidentally texting war plans to a group chat on a commercial messaging app that inadvertently and inexplicably included him. Group chat participant Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national Intelligence, claims no classified information was shared.

[Adam Smith]

I can attest to the fact that there were no classified or intelligence equities.

[Jonathan Capehart]

That were included in that chat group at any time. Group chat participant Pete Hegseth, the secretary of Defense, claims no war plans were texted.

[Ed Markey]

Nobody was texting war plans.

[Jonathan Capehart]

The White House press secretary, in A statement, claims:1 no war plans were discussed. 2. No classified material was sent to the thread. Donald Trump says the material wasn't classified, but he won't say how he knows that.

[Adam Smith]

Who told you that information was not classified?

[Jonathan Capehart]

Another question. Okay, right now, 34 hours since the Atlantic broke this story, we still do not know the answers to some very basic questions. Question one has Trump seen the full group chat thread himself. NBC's Garrett Hake reports. Trump read the Atlantic article, but Jeffrey Goldberg deliberately did not publish the sensitive, potentially classified material. Question two, does anyone in the Trump administration have the full group chat thread? Senator Kelly, Mark Kelly just told me he believes they do. Today, as the Trump team follows its predictable playbook attacking Jeffrey Goldberg. Some, like Lawfare's Ben Whittis, have called on Goldberg to release the full chat thread. Since the DNI and the CIA director have both testified that there was no classified information in the Atlantic's Houthi PC Small PC Small group thread, there is no reason for the magazine not to release the entire thing. I call upon it to do so. It's possible that the Trump plan for surviving this national security breach is a bet that Jeffrey Goldberg won't call their bluff. Or maybe he will. Here's Jeffrey Goldberg in an interview with the Bulwarks. Tim Miller, today My obligation, I feel, is to the idea that we take national security information seriously. And maybe there's, and maybe in the coming days I'll be able to let you know that, okay, I have a plan to have this material vetted publicly. Joining us now are Mark Zaid, a national security attorney who deals with cases involving security clearances. He's also the co founder of Whistleblower Aid, a non profit legal organization that helps public and private sector workers report and expose wrongdoing. And Tim Miller, writer at large for the Bulwark and an MSNBC political analyst. Tim, you spoke to Jeffrey Goldberg today. What was your sense of what the Atlantic does next with the material in his possession?

[Tulsi Gabbard]

Look, for starters, you can just tell he's really wrestling with this. He wants to act responsibly. He does not want to, to release any information that might expose classified information or sources and methods or anything like that. He's abundantly clear about that. And I think had the Trump administration not done the playbook that you laid out there at the top, Jonathan, and had they done something different from them, which was to say, you know what, we screwed this up. We appreciate Jeffrey Goldberg being responsible with this info, we apologize or something to that effect, I don't think that he would have released it. But now they've put him in a really big bind and they're out there attacking him. The national security adviser is on Fox just about an hour or two ago saying Jeffrey Goldberg might have deliberately gotten into the chain, implying he might have hacked his way into the chain or something to that effect. He's just advancing total conspiracy theories. They're smearing him. Secretary of Defense smeared him. And, you know, I think that Senate Democrats on, into, on the Intel Committee now think, you know, are going to want to see this. So I don't know, I don't have any insight into, on what Jeffrey plans to do, but I do think they've put him in a tough situation. I think he's much more likely to release it than had they handled this responsibly.

[Jonathan Capehart]

And Mark, let's talk about the legal considerations here. Setting aside the question of whether classified material was or wasn't discussed, does our random civilian reporter wrongly included in a group chat have any legal obligations when it comes to classified material?

[Jeffrey Goldberg]

They do. Frankly, anyone who is in possession of and it's national defense information is what the Espionage act actually speaks to. But in modern times, that is class classified. And the statute can apply to those of us without clearances. I guess I don't have a clearance anymore, according to President Trump, but we'll see. But like if you have a copy of no Easy Day, which was the book on the killing of bin Laden, I was actually an expert witness for the author. The government takes a position that's classified information in it. Now, Jeffrey did the responsible thing in keeping the key information out of his article, and I applaud him for that. And what he should do, not what my colleague Ben Wittes is suggesting. I wouldn't go that far. He should give the contents to both the Republicans and the Democrats on the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, let them see the text messages and then they can decide what they're going to do with that. And maybe they'll call Hegseth bluff if in fact there are war plans. Or maybe they'll say Hegseth is right, but he shouldn't just publish it out there because just because the administration is saying now it's not classified. Let me tell you, I have litigated against the government for 30 plus years to declassify information if what Jeffrey described is accurate, that that is classified by every executive order that has existed in the last half century.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Mark, let me stick with you here for a minute because there's something that Senator Kelly was saying when he was here at the top of the show. I noticed he kept talking about sensitive information. Is there a distinction between sensitive information and classified information? Is one more having possession? Is having possession of one more illegal than the other?

[Jeffrey Goldberg]

Yes. So again, the Espionage act actually could apply to unclassified information, that is national defense information. You have classified information, confidential, secret, top secret, tssci, things like that. You have protected information like attorney client privilege, work product, things like that. You have sensitive information. There could be for official use only, which is not supposed to be used any longer, but still is by some agencies or controlled unclassified information. And there are all different standards that apply mostly to those in the government who have access to it than the public. For us, for reporters, for the public who don't have clearances, it's really, is it classified? Is it not classified? For the most part. But you know, we don't know what this information is yet. So you know what, let the proper oversight authorities handle it and let Jeffrey step back, make sure he's not in trouble so he doesn't get prosecuted and we'll find out.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Tim, with its impulses of no shame, no admission of wrongdoing, how can the media hold this administration accountable?

[Tulsi Gabbard]

Well, that's a complicated question we've been dealing with for a decade now, Jonathan. But look, Mike Waltz did not look like a guy that was very stable in his position. Tonight on Laura Ingraham doing the dog ate my homework. You know, maybe somebody broke into my signal thread. Excuses. We have seen this in Trump 1.0 where people in the administration were held accountable, just didn't happen to be the President himself. And you know, look, I think that it's important in these types of situations for the media and for advocates for the Democratic Party, for anyone that wants to publicize information to do so in a way that reaches kind of outside of political bubbles. Because I do think that these guys are going to be susceptible to political gravity just like anybody else if they, you know, if it comes away and they just look completely incompetent in a manner that people decide is going to put their lives or their security at risk.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Tim Miller, Mark Zaid, thank you both very much for coming to the Last Word. And coming up, Trump's new pick to head the Social Security administration is a self described dodgy person. That's next. Auto insurance can all seem the same until it comes time to use it. So don't get stuck paying more for less coverage. Switch to USA auto insurance and you could start saving money in no time. Get a quote today, restrictions apply.

[Adam Smith]

Want to pull off the season's freshest trends? You just need the right shoes. That's where designer shoe warehouse comes in. Loving wide leg jeans. Pair them with sleek low profile sneakers. Obsessed with the sheer trend. Try it with mesh flats, peeling boho comfy sandals. Nail the whole free spirited thing. Find on trend shoes from the brands you love like Birkenstock Nike, Adidas and more at dsw.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Stay connected with the MSNBC app. Watch your favorite shows live, read live blogs and in depth essays and listen to coverage as it unfolds. Visit msnbc.comapp to download what are you.

[Tulsi Gabbard]

Doing to ensure the protection of our Social Security benefits?

[Jonathan Capehart]

Good question. President Trump has made it clear and any changes to Social Security are not on the table and I will not cut your Social Security.

[Adam Smith]

The question was about Social Security and what she's accusing me of is standing by while it is being dismantled by Doge.

[Jonathan Capehart]

That is absolutely 100% untrue. Absolutely 100% untrue.

[Adam Smith]

Doge is not dismantling Social Security.

[Jonathan Capehart]

All month long, Republicans have faced angry voters with very real, very legitimate and very loud fears that Elon Musk's It's Doge but it's dodgy is dismantling Social Security ahead of today's confirmation hearing of self possessed, professed dodgy person Frank Bisignano to lead the Social Security Administration. The Washington Post reports, quote, the Social Security administration website crashed four times in 10 days this month because the servers were overloaded, blocking millions of retirees and disabled Americans from logging into their online accounts. In the field, office managers have resorted to answering phones in place of receptionists because so many employees have been pushed out. The agency no longer has a system to monitor customer experience experience because that office was eliminated as part of the cost cutting efforts led by Elon Musk. For now, the agency is run by a caretaker leader in his sixth week on the job who has raced to push out more than 12% of the staff of 57,000. He has conceded that the agency's phone service, quote, sucks and acknowledged that Musk's US Doge service is really in charge, pushing a single minded mission to find benefits fraud, benefits fraud despite vast evidence that the problem is overstated, the turmoil is leaving many with less access or shut out of the system altogether. According to those familiar with the problems, the millions of seniors and disabled Americans who rely on Social Security checks as their primary source of income have a right to complain about potential disruptions to Social Security. But according to billionaire Howard Lutnick, Donald Trump's Commerce Secretary, only a fraudster would complain if they don't receive their Social Security check. Let's say Social Security didn't send out their checks this month. My mother in law who's 94, she.

[Tulsi Gabbard]

Wouldn'T call and complain.

[Jonathan Capehart]

She just wouldn't. She thinks something got messed up and she'll get it next month. A fraudster Always makes the loudest noise, screaming, yelling and complaining. Joining us now, Democratic Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts, a member of the Health, Education, labor and Pensions Committee. Senator, every time I see that clip, I want to scream. Of course, of course his mother in law isn't going to call to complain. Her son in law is a billionaire. She can go a month, two months, forever without a Social Security check. Your reaction to that?

[Ed Markey]

Well, of course, that's outrageous. 22 million Americans would be in poverty without their Social Security check. So they can't wait an extra month. They need to check every month to make sure they can pay for every one of their bills because it's their only check. And they would be devastated. They'd fall into poverty. In fact, 2/3 of all seniors are 100% dependent upon this check and only, only without that, they're in big trouble. I'll give you another number. Over the age of 85, 2/3 of the recipients are women. 2/3 are women. And what they're saying is, well, we're going to cut off the phone system, we're going to make you go to the office so that you have to in fact qualify in person. So to the extent to which these seniors, these 90 year olds, didn't take the computer course 30 years ago, they're going to be in big trouble. And Howard Lutnick, God bless his mother in law, she's got a son in law who's a billionaire. 99.999% of all American seniors do not have a billionaire son in law. So it is absolutely absurd. And it's all part of this attempt by Trump and by Musk to call it a Ponzi scheme, to say that people who are 200, 300 years old are trying to collect to cast a cloud over a system constructed 90 years ago that provides security for seniors that had never before existed in our nation.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Senator, let me have you listen to what Frank Bisignano, President Trump's pick to serve as the Social Security Commissioner, said in his confirmation hearing before the Senate Finance Committee. Watch this.

[Ed Markey]

When you have a system that is not working now, do you think it's a great idea to lay off half of the employees?

[Jonathan Capehart]

I don't know if do I think it's a great idea to lay off.

[Mark Kelly]

Half of the employees when a system doesn't work? I think the answer is probably no.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Senator, what do you make of his answer?

[Ed Markey]

Obviously, they're trying to implement a plan of designed neglect. They're doing it at the epa, they're doing it at the Department of Energy. They're doing it at the Department of Education. They're attempting to undermine their actual efficiency of these agencies. And they now have Social Security in their crosshairs. They're actually going to try to undermine the confidence which the American people have in the Social Security system, which is a lifeline for 72 million Americans on a monthly basis. So all of this is all part of the Doge plan. And by the way, Mr. Bisignano, he says he's a doger. So why would they be doing anything differently at the Social Security Administration than they're doing at every other federal agency?

[Jonathan Capehart]

Senator, what are you hearing from your constituents in the Commonwealth?

[Ed Markey]

Well, there's outrage. Social Security has always been described as the third rail of American politics. The Republicans are now touching the third rail and they're getting burned. Americans do not want Social Security to be undermined. They want it there as a reliable source of funding, as they do Medicaid, as they do Medicare, as they do the Affordable Care Act. They're attacking all of these programs which are the underpinning of the protection for all American families. And Social Security is at the top of the list. That's what began in 1935 to transform our nation to give security to our seniors and people in Massachusetts. But across the country are up in arms at their attempt to undermine this most sacred of all American programs.

[Jonathan Capehart]

And with that, we're going to have to leave it there. Senator Ed Markey, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, thank you very much. Thank you very much for coming to the Last Word.

[Ed Markey]

Great to be with you. Thank you.

[Jonathan Capehart]

And coming up, as Elon Musk and Donald Trump continue to take a chainsaw to the federal government, now they're coming for food benefits for the poorest Americans. Today, Democrats held a meeting on Capitol Hill to expose the truth because Republicans refused to do so. That's next with Congresswoman Angie Craig, the top Democrat on the Republican controlled committee that should be investigating this. They are tanking the stock market. They are offending our allies. They are closing down markets to farmers and businesses. Here in Pennsylvania, the price of goods from eggs to cars is on the rise because of the chaos that the Trump administration has injected into our economy. These tariffs are the dumbest economic decision I've ever seen a president make. That was Pennsylvania Democratic Governor Josh Shapiro at the Central Pennsylvania Food bank earlier today slamming President Trump for cutting federal funding that impacts Americans who need food, but also local farmers who provide that food. On Capitol Hill today, House Democrats held a shadow hearing to address the devastating effect of Trump and Republican cut cuts to food assistance programs like snap, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. SNAP benefits fall under the jurisdiction of the Agriculture Committee because more food demand. More food demand from Americans means more food supply needed from American farms and farmers. Here is Minnesota Congresswoman Angie Craig, the top Democrat on the Agriculture Committee, who will join us in a moment on the broad impact.

[Adam Smith]

House Republicans are proposing we shrink the food economy by cutting the snap program by $230 billion, all to pay for a program of tax breaks for billionaires in this country is absolutely shameful. My grandfather was a farm foreman. And in farm country, neighbors help neighbors. Life is tough enough as it is. We shouldn't be forcing American families to go through it on an empty stomach. I want to thank our witnesses for being here today. I think the American people need to hear the true cost of giving tax breaks to billionaires. Because the choice before Congress is not if we should save $230 billion or not. The choice is whether to make America hungrier and poorer so a handful of billionaires can get richer while the middle class continues to get screwed in this country. We will fight every step of the way to stop this bill.

[Jonathan Capehart]

And joining us now is Minnesota Congresswoman Angie Craig, the top Democrat on the House Agriculture Committee, which has jurisdiction over SNAP benefits. Congresswoman Craig, thank you for coming to the last word. House Democrats have called it, quote, the Republican scheme to dismantle snap. How bad would these cuts be and how many people would be impacted?

[Adam Smith]

Well, let's frame what we're talking about here. People who get food assistance from SNAP get $6.20 a day. And $230 billion in cuts would take that back to about five bucks a day. Think about that for just a minute. We're talking about people who have children that they need to feed. We're talking about veterans who have this assistance. We're talking about America's seniors. And all of that would be bad enough if we didn't all know exactly why it's happening. But they want to use it to pay for tax cuts for billionaires. It is truly shameful. As I said in the hearing today.

[Jonathan Capehart]

You come from a Minnesota farming family. Trump has made many broken promises to America's farmers. What are you hearing is their biggest concern?

[Adam Smith]

Well, look, when you think about SNAP, $230 billion in cuts, that's $23 billion direct cuts to farm income. This is cutting farmers business back home. And that's not just all it is. Think about the supply chain. It's the truckers who drive that food to the grocery store. It's the retailers who sell that food. And of course, it's hungry children and veterans and seniors in our country on top of cutting food assistance locally to food banks, direct farm food to food banks just this week. So it's really an egregious time. This administration has an all out assault on the farming community right now.

[Jonathan Capehart]

From my perspective, you called for more bipartisanship as well during today's hearing. Have any of your Republican colleagues shown any willingness to stick their neck out to defend America's vulnerable families?

[Adam Smith]

Well, my colleagues are always concerned about waste, fraud and abuse and they point out that in these programs that we talk about, that's where they're focused. But that's not true at all. Where they're focused is on cutting the actual benefits and they say they're not. But what I see is if you're going to look into my committee and you're going to take $230 billion away from it, the only place you're going to get that is taking food right out of the mouths of children in our nation.

[Jonathan Capehart]

Congresswoman Angie Craig, the great state of Minnesota, the congresswoman for my alma mater, Carleton College. Thank you very much for coming to the LAST Word.

[Adam Smith]

It's great to be here.

[Jonathan Capehart]

And tonight's Last Word is next. And I want to tell you one more time about my new book yet here I Lessons from a Black Man's Search for Home, which comes out on May 20th. And about the conversation I'm going to have with Lawrence that night, May 20th at 7:00pm at the 92nd Street Y in New York City. Tickets are available. Get your tickets. I can't wait to talk with Lawrence since I have you in the audience. So I hope you'll join us. That is tonight's last Word. Let's face it, after a night with drinks, even just a couple, it can be hard to bounce back the next day to wake up feeling fresh. There's ZBiotics Pre Alcohol Probiotic Drink, a probiotic invented by PhD scientists to break down the toxic byproduct of alcohol. Just make Zbiotics your first drink of the night. Drink responsibly and you'll feel your best tomorrow. Get 15% off your first order at zbiotics.com pod15 and use pod15 at checkout.