Trump Attributes Signal Chat Scandal to National Security Adviser Mike Waltz

In a striking turn, President Donald Trump has seemingly placed the blame for the Signal chat scandal squarely on national security adviser Mike Waltz. During an executive order signing on Wednesday evening, the President addressed questions regarding the origins of the scandal, suggesting that Waltz’s involvement was pivotal.

“It was Mike, I guess. I don’t know, I always thought it was Mike,” Trump remarked to reporters. He characterized media scrutiny surrounding the scandal as nothing more than a “witch hunt.” This sentiment showcases Trump’s ongoing battle with the press, often framing himself and his administration as victims of biased reporting.

Changing Explanations

This revelation indicates a notable shift in Trump’s narrative. Just the day before, he had pointed fingers at another aide during a phone interview with NBC News. In that conversation, Trump claimed, “it was one of Michael’s people on the phone. A staffer had his number in there.” This inconsistency has raised eyebrows and led to questions about accountability within the administration.

Defense of Cabinet Members

As the discussion unfolded, a reporter inquired about whether Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth should be concerned about his position amid this unfolding scandal. Trump quickly defended Hegseth, insisting, “Hegseth, he was doing a great job… How do you bring Hegseth into it? He had nothing to do with this.” This strong defense emphasizes Trump’s loyalty to his Cabinet amid rising tensions.

Furthermore, Trump expressed concerns over the Signal app itself, suggesting it “could be defective” in light of its role in the scandal. Such remarks reflect an attempt to deflect criticism away from his administration while questioning the reliability of the tools deemed essential for secure communication.

Taking Focus Away from the Scandal

Despite mounting pressure from the media, Trump downplayed the significance of the Signal chat scandal. Instead, he shifted attention to the successful military operation that preceded the controversy. He declared the operation an “unbelievably successful” attack, positing that the media should redirect their focus onto outcomes rather than the leak itself.

New Revelations From The Atlantic

The fallout continued as Jeffrey Goldberg, Editor-in-Chief of The Atlantic, released a significant report that has left the Trump administration grappling with its implications. Goldberg inadvertently found himself in a Signal chat with senior administration officials discussing a planned military strike against Houthi positions in Yemen. This breach raises crucial questions regarding security protocols followed by top officials.

Initially expressing skepticism about the chat, Goldberg confirmed its authenticity after verifying that actions discussed were indeed taking place. He described the breach as unprecedented, noting that while it is common for officials to use Signal for logistical discussions, such platforms are not intended for sensitive military planning.

Administration’s Response

The Trump administration has attempted to mitigate the fallout from this bombshell. For several days, officials downplayed the significance of the leaked chat. They even celebrated a subsequent article by The Atlantic that referred to the discussions as “attack plans” rather than “war plans,” a distinction that may seem trivial but is intended to shift the conversation.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt went so far as to label the entire situation a fabrication from a so-called Trump-hater. In her post on X, she remarked, “This entire story was another hoax written by a Trump-hater who is well-known for his sensationalist spin.” Such remarks encapsulate the administration’s strategy of dismissing critical coverage as politically motivated.

Investigation and Accountability

On Wednesday, it was confirmed that technology entrepreneur Elon Musk is assisting in the investigation regarding the Signal chat leak. While the administration appears committed to uncovering the source of the breach, questions remain about the potential consequences for those found culpable. Trump himself has indicated that he does not intend to fire Waltz, further complicating the narrative of accountability.

Looking Ahead

The ongoing developments surrounding the Signal chat scandal highlight underlying tensions within Trump’s administration and its communications methodologies. As reporters continue to probe the implications of this leak, the administration’s narrative will undoubtedly face scrutiny in the days and weeks ahead. Ultimately, how Trump navigates this scandal will influence public perception and possibly determine the future conduct of his administration in sensitive matters.