Hegseth Under Fire as He Shared Yemen Strike in 2nd Signal Chat/ Newslooks/ WASHINGTON/ J. Mansour/ Morning Edition/ Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is facing renewed scrutiny after reports revealed a second Signal chat involving sensitive details of a U.S. airstrike in Yemen. The group included his wife, brother, and other non-official participants. Despite administration denials, lawmakers are demanding accountability and further investigation.
Hegseth Yemen Signal Chat Controversy – Quick Looks
- New Revelation: A second unauthorized Signal chat was used by Hegseth.
- Participants: Included Hegseth’s wife, brother, and 11 others.
- Security Breach Allegations: Details of a Yemen airstrike were discussed.
- App Use Questioned: Signal is not approved for classified information.
- Pentagon Denial: Officials claim no classified data was shared.
- Investigation Underway: DOD inspector general probing the incident.
- Political Fallout: Senate Democrats demand Hegseth’s firing.
- Staff Departures: Four key officials removed or resigned from Pentagon.
- White House Defense: Claims story is fueled by disgruntled ex-employees.
- Calls for Accountability: Pressure grows as more details emerge.
Deep Look: Hegseth Faces Growing Fallout After Second Signal Chat on Yemen Airstrike
WASHINGTON (AP) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is under increasing pressure following a report by The New York Times that revealed he created a second private Signal chat in which he shared details of a recent U.S. military airstrike in Yemen. The chat group, titled “Defense ‘ Team Huddle,” included not only senior staff but also personal associates, including his wife and brother.
The controversy centers around the unauthorized use of Signal—a private messaging app not cleared for the transmission of classified or sensitive defense information. The group reportedly consisted of 13 members, including Jennifer Hegseth, a former Fox News producer, and Phil Hegseth, a Department of Homeland Security liaison working at the Pentagon.
Sources familiar with the group, speaking to the Associated Press on condition of anonymity, confirmed the chat and its contents, which mirrored details shared in a separate Signal group involving Trump administration officials. Both chats allegedly contained sensitive information about the timing and logistics of a military strike on Iran-backed Houthi militants in Yemen.
White House and Pentagon Push Back
Responding to the growing criticism, White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly dismissed the story as another recycled attack by “recently-fired leakers” trying to undermine President Trump’s administration. She emphasized that “no classified information was shared.”
Echoing those statements, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell posted on X (formerly Twitter), labeling the reports “a narrative pushed by disgruntled individuals” who were let go last week. He reiterated that the communications in question contained no classified content.
Lawmakers Demand Answers
Despite the denials, pressure from Capitol Hill is mounting. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer posted, “Pete Hegseth must be fired,” citing ongoing concerns that his conduct endangered military personnel and violated security protocols.
Senator Jack Reed, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, called for an expanded investigation. “If Secretary Hegseth texted operational military plans, it could put American lives at risk,” Reed warned. He added that Hegseth’s ability to maintain trust within the military and with the Commander-in-Chief is now in question.
Content and Timing of Messages Raise Alarms
The original Signal chat, reportedly created by National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, became public after journalist Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic was mistakenly added to the group. Goldberg published the messages, which included specific references to weapons systems and the scheduled timing of military operations.
According to The New York Times, the second Signal chat replicated this sensitive content, including exact launch times. Security experts and former defense officials noted that such operational information, if shared before a strike, would likely be classified. The premature exposure of this data could compromise mission security and endanger U.S. pilots.
Ongoing Pentagon Investigation
The Department of Defense’s acting inspector general launched an investigation at the request of Senators Reed and Republican Roger Wicker, chair of the Armed Services Committee. The investigation is focused on Hegseth’s use of unauthorized communication channels to discuss national security matters.
On Sunday night, following the new revelations, Reed asked the inspector general to include the second Signal group in the inquiry.
Internal Turmoil and Departures
The scandal comes amid broader instability at the Pentagon. Last week, four senior figures in Hegseth’s inner circle either resigned or were removed. Among them were Dan Caldwell, Colin Carroll, and Darin Selnick—all known allies of Hegseth. The three were escorted from the building amid leak investigations.
A joint statement from the group, shared by Caldwell on X, stated that they had not been told the specific reason for the investigation or even whether it was still active. They questioned the legitimacy of the inquiry and the transparency of the process.
Former Pentagon spokesman John Ullyot also resigned last week. While his departure was said to be unrelated to the leak investigation, Pentagon sources indicated he had been asked to step down.
A Divisive Figure in a Turbulent Time
Hegseth, a former Fox News host turned defense chief, has long been a controversial figure within the defense establishment. His appointment raised concerns over his limited formal military leadership experience and close political ties to the Trump administration. The Yemen strike leak controversy has further deepened tensions between military leadership and civilian oversight.
With increasing bipartisan scrutiny, a formal investigation underway, and top aides departing, Hegseth’s future in the role is now uncertain. What remains clear is that the unfolding situation reflects deeper concerns over operational security, the politicization of defense, and the handling of sensitive military actions at the highest levels.
You must Register or Login to post a comment.