CIA Director John Ratcliffe recently addressed the controversy surrounding the leaked Signal chat texts that were published by The Atlantic. These texts allegedly detail attack plans targeting Yemen’s Houthi rebels and have sparked debates about the transmission of classified information. During a House Intelligence Committee hearing focused on global threats, Ratcliffe clarified that the information revealed in the article proves he did not disclose any classified material.
In his statement, Ratcliffe emphasized that he spent four hours answering questions from senators regarding the article. He noted, “With regard to that article, I also would appreciate the opportunity to relay the fact that yesterday I spent four hours answering questions from senators as a result of that article that were intimating that I transmitted classified information because there were hidden messages.” He asserted that the messages published by The Atlantic later confirmed he did not share any classified information.
Ratcliffe took issue with claims made by the reporter, stating, “That reporter also indicated that I had released the name of an undercover CIA operative in that Signal chat. In fact, I had released the name of my chief of staff who was not operating undercover. That was deliberately false and misleading.” He stressed that he used appropriate channels to communicate sensitive information and maintained that it was permissible to do so.
According to Ratcliffe, the primary focus should be on the success of the mission rather than the alleged leaks. “I didn't transfer any classified information. And at the end of the day, what is most important is that the mission was a remarkable success,” he stated. This sentiment underscores the importance of the operational achievements rather than the controversies surrounding the Signal chat leak.
On the same day, The Atlantic published messages from the Signal chat that included operational updates about the attack on the Houthi targets. One message quoted a military official, Hegseth, as saying, “Weather is FAVORABLE. Just CONFIRMED w/CENTCOM we are a GO for mission launch.” The timeline included specific confirmations about the launch of F-18s and MQ-9 Reaper drones, outlining the operational strategy and timing.
“We are currently clean on OPSEC operational security and Godspeed to our Warriors,” the quoted message concluded. The publication of these messages raised further questions about the communication of sensitive military operations and the implications of such leaks.
During the Senate Intelligence Committee hearing, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard affirmed that there was no classified material in the leaked messages. When questioned about her previous statements, she clarified, “What was shared today reflects the fact that I was not directly involved with that part of the Signal chat.” However, the discussion revealed inconsistencies regarding the details she recalled from the chat.
Ranking Member Jim Himes pressed her on her testimony, highlighting discrepancies in her recollection. Gabbard acknowledged that there were conversations about weapons in the chat but maintained that she did not remember specific details.
The leak of the Signal chat has not only raised concerns about operational security but has also led to calls for accountability from Congressional Democrats. Representatives like Raja Krishnamoorthi and Jason Crow have joined in urging for the resignation of Secretary of State Pete Hegseth due to the implications of the leak. “There can be no fixes. There can be no corrections until there is accountability,” Crow stated, pushing for the administration to take necessary actions.
The ongoing discussions surrounding the Signal chat leak highlight the complex intersection of national security, operational transparency, and the responsibilities of government officials in handling classified information.
