Pentagon Watchdog Launches Probe into Trump Administration’s Use of Signal for Yemen Strike Discussions

Washington, D.C. – The Pentagon’s independent watchdog has initiated an investigation into the Trump administration’s use of the Signal messaging app to coordinate a military strike against Houthi targets in Yemen, raising concerns over potential breaches of security protocols and the handling of classified information. The probe, announced on April 3, 2025, follows revelations that senior administration officials inadvertently included a journalist in a group chat discussing sensitive operational details, sparking widespread criticism and calls for accountability.

The investigation centers on a series of U.S. airstrikes launched on March 15, 2025, targeting Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen, an operation ordered by President Donald Trump to secure Red Sea shipping lanes disrupted by Houthi attacks. According to a report by The Atlantic, editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg was accidentally added to a Signal group chat named “Houthi PC Small Group” on March 13, where top officials—including National Security Adviser Michael Waltz, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Vice President JD Vance, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio—discussed the impending strikes. Goldberg detailed how Hegseth shared “operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing” (The Atlantic, March 27, 2025).

The inclusion of Goldberg, a prominent journalist, in the chat has fueled outrage, with experts and lawmakers questioning the administration’s decision to use a commercial messaging app for such sensitive discussions. Pentagon regulations explicitly state that messaging apps like Signal “are NOT authorized to access, transmit, process non-public DoD information,” according to a CNN report (CNN, March 26, 2025). Cybersecurity expert John Wheeler of Wheelhouse Advisors told the BBC, “Something of this sensitive nature should really require very strict protocols in terms of communications,” highlighting the risks of using unmonitored external platforms (BBC, March 27, 2025).

The National Security Council (NSC) has acknowledged the authenticity of the chat, with spokesperson Brian Hughes stating, “This appears to be an authentic message chain, and we are reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain” (The Independent, March 24, 2025). Hughes defended the operation, asserting that “the ongoing success of the Houthi operation demonstrates that there were no threats to troops or national security.” However, critics argue that the incident represents a significant security lapse. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer called it “one of the most stunning breaches of military intelligence I have read about in a very, very long time,” urging a full investigation (ABC News, March 24, 2025).

The Pentagon’s Office of Inspector General, tasked with ensuring accountability within the Department of Defense, will examine whether classified information was improperly disclosed and if the use of Signal violated federal laws, such as the Espionage Act or the Presidential Records Act. The latter requires that electronic messages on non-official accounts be preserved, a concern amplified by reports that some messages in the chat were set to auto-delete (BBC, March 27, 2025). Legal experts suggest that mishandling classified information could carry severe consequences, though it remains unclear if specific provisions were breached in this case.

The strikes themselves, which killed at least 53 people according to the Houthi-run Yemeni health ministry (The Guardian, March 16, 2025), marked the largest U.S. military operation in the Middle East since Trump took office. The administration framed the action as a response to Houthi attacks on shipping, with Trump warning Iran, the group’s primary backer, to cease support or face consequences (NPR, March 15, 2025). Yet, the Signal incident has shifted focus to the administration’s internal processes, with former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta telling CNN, “Somebody needs to get fired” (CNN, March 26, 2025).

As the investigation unfolds, it is expected to scrutinize not only the security implications but also the decision-making culture within Trump’s national security team. While some Republicans, like House Speaker Mike Johnson, have downplayed the breach as a mistake showcasing officials “doing their job,” Democrats and security analysts argue it reflects a broader recklessness (PBS News, March 24, 2025). The outcome of the probe could have significant ramifications for how the administration handles classified communications moving forward, as well as for public trust in its national security apparatus.

For now, the Pentagon watchdog’s inquiry stands as a critical test of accountability, with the potential to reshape protocols in an era where digital communication increasingly intersects with military strategy. As Goldberg himself noted, the episode underscores “the shocking recklessness” of relying on unsecured platforms for matters of war (The Atlantic, March 27, 2025). 17GEN4.com