Will Pete Hegseth and Mike Waltz survive Signal fiasco?

Trump will be reluctant to give The Atlantic a scalp but the group chat revelations are deeply damaging to the White House.

US National Security Adviser Michael Waltz (L), US Vice President J.D. Vance (rear), and Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth (R, listen to a question from a reporter during a meeting in the Oval Office. Picture: AFP.

Standing beside President Trump just three days ago, the US defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, said that America had “looked like fools” under the presidency of Joe Biden. “Not any more.”

But that is how Trump’s national security team is looking after discussing war plans to attack the Houthis in a group chat that included the editor of a liberal magazine hated by the president.

It is hard to know which aspect of the episode is the most damaging.

The gaffes include:

• Exchanges exposing deep disdain for Europe felt by the vice-president, JD Vance, and Hegseth

• Vance’s disagreement with Trump on the wisdom of the strikes

• The invitation to join the 18-strong group chat issued unwittingly to the Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg

• The fact that Susie Wiles — Trump’s respected chief-of-staff, sometimes cited as the “adult in the room” — was in the group but did not pick up on an interloper

• The casual approach to national security material being shared on an app outside of government systems that could have imperilled military lives if phones were hacked or stolen

The list goes on.

It is reminiscent of the shambles early in the Trump administration’s first term when the author Michael Wolff researched his insider account by simply wandering into the supposedly secure private part of the West Wing and sitting in a chair to watch everyone.

The revelation is another cause for concern for allies such as Britain, who expect to be able to share the highest level of intelligence with the US without it being compromised. This was already becoming an issue over the apparent realignment of America’s relationship with Russia and sympathy towards Moscow among several leading members of Trump’s inner circle.

Does the lackadaisical attitude come from the top? Trump allegedly has form when it comes to careless handling of sensitive material: he was charged with retaining secret papers from his first term. He pleaded not guilty to any crimes and the case was dismissed by a judge during the election campaign.

Hillary Clinton had cause to post “you have got to be kidding me” about Goldberg’s account, after Trump spent years threatening to lock her up for careless use of classified information on a private server.

Trump appeared not to know about the incident when questioned about it on Monday, about five hours after Goldberg said he called, emailed and texted for reaction from Wiles, Waltz and Hegseth.

Later Trump tried to make light of it, reposting a message on X written by Elon Musk, which said: “Best place to hide a dead body is page 2 of The Atlantic magazine because no one ever goes there.”

But the president is likely to be furious that he was not tipped off by anyone before being questioned on TV in the early afternoon. Past form suggests that he will see how the story plays out for a couple of days before deciding if any heads should roll.

However, he will be very reluctant to give The Atlantic a scalp and there were signs from the White House on Tuesday morning that none of his senior officials would pay with their job.

After insisting that no classified material had been shared, Karoline Leavitt, the press secretary, wrote: “Thanks to the strong and decisive leadership of President Trump, and everyone in the group, the Houthi strikes were successful and effective.”

Waltz would be the easiest to sack since his role does not require Senate confirmation. He was identified by Goldberg as the figure who had added him to the group on Signal.

But on Tuesday morning Waltz was said to be back at work negotiating with his Russian counterpart on Ukraine. Fox News reported that Trump had no plans to fire him.

Hegseth could also be vulnerable but Trump admires him, and his response to the episode was straight out of his boss’s playbook.

He attacked Goldberg as “a deceitful and highly discredited so-called journalist who has made a profession of peddling hoaxes”. Loyalists hate The Atlantic for revelations such as Trump allegedly referring to First World War fallen soldiers as “suckers and losers”.

Hegseth insisted “nobody was texting war plans” even though Goldberg reported that he had received detailed operational information while US warplanes were in the air.

On Monday night Goldberg accused Hegseth of lying. Again, this is a very Trumplike defence: deny everything.

Hegseth, a former National Guard major and Fox News host, only squeaked through his Senate nomination amid concerns about his lack of temperament and senior leadership.

In a sign of the defence secretary’s inexperience in government, he has now put his colleagues on the spot. Whenever those on the group chat appear before Congress or reporters, they are likely to be asked if they received war plans on a commercial app from Hegseth. Should they dissemble to protect him?

The bigger point is that Trump has appointed a cadre of loyalist outsiders to key positions — such as Hegseth at defence, Elon Musk at the department of government efficiency, his property friend Steve Witkoff as Middle East negotiator, Robert F Kennedy Jr at health, Kash Patel at the FBI and Tulsi Gabbard as director of national intelligence.

Trump saw their institutional inexperience as an asset to remake government. The question is whether they will break it first.

The Times