A Reckless Breach: The Alarming Security Failures of U.S. Leadership

Once again, we find ourselves trapped in the never-ending saga of mobile phones and national security—this time with the particularly pressing question: Should we ban officials under 60 from using them, or at least require a remedial course on not inviting journalists to top-secret group chats? Do you know what your national security adviser is doing on his phone? Is he coordinating defense strategy, or is he deep in the big-man-osphere debating whether to bomb a Hooters? Worse still, did he mistakenly add the editor-in-chief of a major publication to a Signal chat in the critical lead-up to a classified U.S. military operation in Yemen—an act so staggeringly reckless that, frankly, he might as well get a prison jumpsuit tattooed onto his body permanently?

By now, most are aware of what can only be described as one of the most egregious breaches of national security in recent memory—one allegedly orchestrated by none other than the National Security Adviser himself, Mike Waltz. He appears to have been aided in this stunning display of incompetence by figures at the highest levels of government, including Vice President J.D. Vance and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, both of whom reportedly disseminated sensitive operational details in a chat mistakenly including Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg. One has to wonder: is Hegseth in full possession of his faculties? Has he returned to being—how shall we phrase this?—the type of individual one hesitates to assign significant responsibilities to after lunch?

This debacle also raises another intriguing question: Was there, somewhere within the upper echelons of government, an individual with either the first name Jeffrey or the surname Goldberg whom Waltz intended to add? And if so, did this overlooked Jeffrey or Goldberg wake up the following morning, see the Yemen headlines, and experience a profound sense of exclusion? “Wait, you conducted an airstrike in Yemen without me? I despise you all. Add me to the chat immediately so I can storm out in protest.”

The breach itself exposes a number of disturbing realities, making it difficult to determine where to begin. Among the more minor yet telling details is the linguistic landscape of military-themed emojis. It becomes apparent that certain officials employ the same three symbols to mark the elimination of a Houthi target as they would to celebrate golfer Bryson DeChambeau sinking a tricky putt on the 14th hole at the West Palm Beach Pro-Am: punching fist, American flag, fire emoji. Let’s go, Bryson!

Yet, while the emojis may be the least consequential part of this disaster, the ideological undertones are harder to dismiss. Particularly galling is a message allegedly sent by Vance, or someone in his orbit: “I just hate bailing out Europe again.” To which Hegseth reportedly responded: “I fully share your loathing of European freeloading. It’s PATHETIC.”

This is hardly an isolated sentiment. Merely weeks ago, Vance dismissed European military capabilities with a sweeping generalization: “some random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 or 40 years.” Now, we see that same disdain manifest in private discussions among top officials—yet another insult to the memory of European service members who fought and died in conflicts aligned with U.S. strategic interests, particularly in the post-9/11 era. The lack of historical awareness and diplomatic tact displayed here is remarkable, even by the standards of this administration. One could almost envision a satirical television series chronicling their recklessness—The White Potus, perhaps?

Unsurprisingly, the Trump administration’s first instinct in response to this security breach was to attack the journalist who uncovered it, rather than address the gravity of their own misconduct. In the hands of a less responsible reporter than Goldberg, this information could have posed a severe threat to U.S. military personnel and intelligence operatives. At the time of writing, Hegseth’s only public response to this self-inflicted catastrophe has been to disparage Goldberg, labeling him “a deceitful and highly discredited so-called journalist.”

Is he, though? One suspects that if Joe Rogan had been the recipient of this intelligence, he would have livestreamed it immediately—an outcome that, ironically, would have ensured that at least one member of the administration, Donald Trump, remained informed of it. The former president, however, has maintained his characteristic detachment, offering only a vague, half-conscious remark: “I don’t know anything about it.” The rest of his day, it seems, was consumed with outrage over the placement of a portrait of himself in the Colorado state legislature.

The hypocrisy on display is staggering. Consider the administration’s own rhetoric on information security. Just last week, Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell declared: “If a private loses a sensitive item—be it night vision goggles or a weapon—you can bet that private will be held accountable. The same and equal standards must apply to senior military leaders.” And here’s Trump’s Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, also last week: “Any unauthorized release of classified information is a violation of the law and will be treated as such.” Was Gabbard herself in the Signal chat? Naturally.

If further irony is needed, we have Hegseth’s own words from his tenure as a Fox News host, where he frequently lambasted Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information. “If it was anyone other than Hillary Clinton, they would be in jail right now,” he once proclaimed. Then there’s Marco Rubio, who, in a previous incarnation, vowed: “When I’m president of the United States, neither she nor any of these other people will be above the law.” A bold statement from someone now implicated in this debacle, serving as Secretary of State and actively participating in the Yemen chat.

Whether these officials will hold themselves to their own professed standards remains to be seen. Meanwhile, European diplomats are already interpreting this scandal as “the writing on the wall” regarding U.S.-Europe relations. If only these messages had been written on a literal wall—they would have been more secure. In fact, the administration might have had greater operational secrecy had they chosen to communicate via skywriting.

Outstanding work, gentlemen. Punching fist, American flag, fire emoji.