When Jeffrey Goldberg published a story about a bomb, stating that some of the highest American officials had misleading sensitive information with him, he received the biggest glass of in the year. The Atlantic editor also became the main target for any senior Trump administration official in Washington.
For the last few days he has been called “loser” and “Sleazebag” by President Trump, as well as US national security adviser, as well as “Scum”, which seems to have been wrongly added by Goldberg to the group chat earlier this month.
Before becoming political lightning, Goldberg watched the cabinet officials on his phone – including US Secretary of State Marc Rubio, Secretary Secretary of Pete Hegseth, CIA director John Ratcliffe and Director of National Intelligence Tuli Gabbard – talked about sensitive details, time and goals. They didn’t seem to notice his presence.
In an interview with the BBC on Wednesday, he told me that it all started when he received a message on his phone, through publicly available signal exchange applications, which allows users to send encrypted messages to each other. It is popular with journalists and government officials. The bill under Waltz’s name sent him messages, which he assumed was a fraud.
“I wish there was a quality of Le Carré here,” he said, referring to the late British spy novel. “But he asked me to talk. I said yes. And the next thing I know, in this very strange chat group I am with the leadership of the National Security of the United States.”
As the outburst of the episode has engulfed Washington, Waltz has taken responsibility for the wrong adding of Goldberg to a group chat, suggesting that he wanted to invite someone else.
He insisted that he never met the editor, saying, “I wouldn’t know if I ran into him when I saw him in a police lineup.”
According to Goldberg’s account, the two of them actually met several times, although he refused to get into details about their relationship.
“Obviously, he can say whatever he wants, but I don’t comment on my relationship or a non-disconnection,” Goldberg told me. “As a journalist, I’m just not comfortable to talk about relationships I can or can’t have with people who are news bringers.”
Still, one thing is clear: you must already have someone’s contact information to get them on the signal, so Waltz had Goldberg’s phone number. The top safety consultant said he asked Elona Musk, the Technology Billionaire and the Emperor of the White House’s government, to investigate how a mistake happened – a move that Goldberg made ridicule.
“Indeed, you will put Elon Musk asking how to end someone’s phone number in someone’s phone? I mean, you know, most of the 8-year-old could understand that,” he said.
A bigger question? “Should national security officers, do so on a signal on your phone?” Said Goldberg.
On Monday, Atlantic Story – the first to report his approach to Chat – Goldberg retained accurate details that were divided around the bombing mission that attacked Houthi Rebel goals in Yemen on March 14th. But Trump’s administration officials diminished the report, calling it a liar and challenging their claims that classified information had been distributed.
And so two days later, the magazine wrote the entire text messages, including several from Hegsetth, which included operating specifics. I asked him if it was a difficult decision.
“Once Donald Trump said that there was nothing to see here here, and when Tulsi Gabbard and John Ratcliffe said that there were no sensitive data or classified information and ET Cetra – we felt like, um, we disagree,” he said. “They say that, and we are the ones who have texts, so maybe people should see them.”
There are text messages in the group chat – sent before the first wave of strikes – in which they describe in detail when F -18 fighter jets were removed when the first bombs were lowered to the Houth goals and when the Tomahawk rockets dropped out. Hegsetth pushed himself away, saying that they were obviously not “war plans” and that none of this was classified.
On Wednesday, President Trump expressed his support for Hegseth, saying that “he was doing a great job” and describes Goldberg as “Sleazebag”. The White House also tried to claim that divided information was not technical planning of war.
Goldberg did not appear in vain for his insults and claims.
“If my Pete Hegsetth, the Minister of Defense, says, telling me that the attack will be launched in Yemen – telling me what aircraft will be used, what weapons will be used, and when the bombs will fall two hours after the text received – this seems sensitive to information, war data.
This is not the first time that the Veterans’ editor was at the entrance end of Trump’s IRA: 2020. He published a work in an Atlantic in which senior military officials quoted Trump as if they had fallen into US soldiers “tits” and “losers”, which the president and his administration vigorously refused.
I asked him how he felt about the vitrele personal attacks on him, coming from the highest levels of government.
“This is their move. Never defend yourself, just attack,” Goldberg said. “So, I’m sitting there, thinking about my own business. They invite me to this signal chat and now they attack me as a passage bag, I don’t even understand it.”
Trump has, so far, defended his national security team and does not seem to be inclined to release no one who calls the “Witch Hunting” print. But Goldberg says that there is a wide feeling in the White House that Waltz has made a serious mistake, as well as deeper concerns about treating an incident.
“If you are an aviation captain, you are currently working with CIA and State Department, and you have made a mistake in sensitive information in the way they have obviously mis -controlled sensitive information? You would be discharged, you would be prosecuted,” Goldberg said.
He said there is now some “buzzing” among the ranks of seemingly different standards of responsibility for the leaders in Trump’s administration.
Goldberg did not dwell in chat to relegate. He decided to leave the group responsibly. Some journalists expressed infidelity that they would voluntarily come out.
But what happens next will play in the White House and Congress, where democratic MPs and some Republicans demanded an investigation.
“There is a part of me who would like to see what is happening there. But there are many different questions about the law and ethics and all kinds of other questions that I really can’t go into,” Goldberg said. “Believe me when I say that I made that decision with good advice of various sides.”
