Top intelligence officials skirted questions from senators on Tuesday about their involvement in a Signal group chat where they gave an unintentionally added journalist a front-row seat to discussions about war plans.
Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, questioned Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and Central Intelligence Agency director John Ratcliffe about the group chat fiasco during a hearing on worldwide threats. Gabbard and Ratcliffe responded by insisting that no classified information was shared in the chat but did not agree to Warner’s pushes for them to share the content of the messages with the panel.
Asked by Sen. Jon Ossoff if the accidental inclusion of the journalist was a “huge mistake,” Ratcliffe said “no.”
“I don’t want to get into the specifics,” Gabbard said at least three times when Warner asked her if she participated in the Signal chat.
Trending
Gabbard then told the committee that “there’s a difference between inadvertent release versus malicious leaks of classified information.”
Gabbard and Ratcliffe both initially said the messages did not contain information about weapons packages, targets or the timing of strikes. But Gabbard later said that “there was discussion around targets in general.”
The Atlantic’s Editor-in-Chief Jeffrey Goldberg, who was inadvertently added to the Signal chat of agency heads and other defense and intelligence officers, reported on Monday that the messages between those leaders contained information that “might be interpreted as related to actual and current intelligence operations.” Goldberg’s reporting also asserted that a message from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in the chat contained “operational details” related to targets and attack sequencing of forthcoming strikes.
Sen. Angus King pressed Gabbard on her insistence that targets, timing and weapons-related information were not classified, and also asked intelligence leaders to release the contents of the group chat.
“I can attest to the fact that there were no classified or intelligence equities that were included in that chat at any time,” Gabbard said.
Gabbard did not answer a question from Sen. Jack Reed about whether she was using a personal or government device to participate in the group, saying that matter is under review by the National Security Council.
Ratcliffe said that he was indeed the John Ratcliffe in the Signal group and defended his participation.
The use of Signal to discuss defense and intelligence matters was “entirely permissible and lawful and did not include classified information,” Ratcliffe told the Senate Intelligence panel. “One of the things that I was briefed on very early … was by the CIA records management folks about the use of Signal as a permissible work use. It is. That is a practice that preceded the current administration to the Biden administration.”
Experts have pointed out that using personal devices and platforms like Signal — where users can change settings so messages disappear after a certain amount of time — could violate federal records laws and raise potential for breaches of national security information.
Ratcliffe said using Signal to discuss official matters is allowed as long as the same matters are also discussed through formal channels. He also said that the CIA officer whose name he referenced in messages was “not operating undercover.”
Democrats on the committee weren’t satisfied.
Sen. Ron Wyden called the Signal situation “obviously reckless” and “obviously dangerous.”
Sen. Michael Bennet pointed out the potential that a foreign adversary could have seen the content of the war plans in the Signal group. Steve Witkoff, Trump’s Middle East and Ukraine negotiator, was in Russia while the Signal messages were reportedly exchanged. Gabbard later said she was overseas while at least some of the messages in the Signal group were exchanged.
“Did you know that the president’s Middle East advisor was in Moscow on this thread while you were, as director of the CIA, participating in this thread?” Bennet said to Ratcliffe. “You need to do better.”
And Sen. Martin Heinrich asked why the discussion was not initially conducted on the high side, or the U.S. government’s classified email system.
“The national security advisor intended this to be, as it should have been, a mechanism for coordinating between senior level officials, but not a substitute for using high side or classified communications for anything that would be classified, and I think that that is exactly what did happen,” Ratcliffe responded.
Warner’s comments throughout the hearing attempted to tie the Signal situation to other Trump administration actions, like cutting foreign assistance and firing workers in offices such as the National Nuclear Security Administration.
“Setting aside for a moment that classified information should never be discussed over an unclassified system, it’s also just mind-boggling to me that all of these senior folks are on this line and nobody bothered to even check security hygiene 101,” Warner said. “The Signal fiasco is not a one-off. It is unfortunately a pattern that we’re seeing too often.”
Republican senators on the committee did not bring up the Signal situation in their questions, focusing instead on threats from Iran, Russia, China and other countries. Sen. Mike Rounds said he would ask the intelligence officials questions about Signal during the closed session, which is set to follow the open hearing. Some other Republican members of Congress told reporters Monday night that they wanted to let the situation slide.
President Donald Trump defended national security adviser Mike Waltz on Tuesday for his role in the chat.
“Michael Waltz has learned a lesson, and he’s a good man,” Trump told NBC News.
—
Shifra Dayak is a NOTUS reporter and an Allbritton Journalism Institute fellow.
Author
