WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump on Tuesday downplayed the texting of sensitive plans for a military strike against Yemen's Houthis this month to a group chat that included a journalist, claiming it was "the only glitch in two months" of his administration as Democratic lawmakers heaped criticism on the administration for handling highly sensitive information carelessly.
Trump told NBC News that the lapse "turned out not to be a serious one," and expressed his continued support for national security adviser Mike Waltz.
Waltz, according to an article posted online Monday by The Atlantic, appeared to have mistakenly added the magazine's editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, to a chat that included 18 senior administration officials discussing planning for the strike.
President Donald Trump gestures Monday as he departs a reception celebrating Greek Independence Day in the East Room of the White House in Washington.
"Michael Waltz has learned a lesson, and he's a good man," Trump said.
People are also reading…
The use of messaging app Signal to discuss a sensitive operation opened the administration to criticism from Democratic lawmakers who expressed outrage at the White House's and senior administration officials' insistence that no classified information was shared.
Senior administration officials struggled to explain why the publicly available app was used to discuss such a delicate matter.
Waltz comments
Waltz said Tuesday he was not sure how Goldberg ended up on the chat.
"This one in particular, I've never met, don't know, never communicated with," Waltz said.
"We won't be using it very much" in the future, Trump said of Signal. "That's one of the prices you pay when you're not sitting in the Situation Room with no phones on, which is always the best, frankly."
Trump added, "If it was up to me everybody would be sitting in a room together. The room would have solid lead walls and a lead ceiling and lead floor."
One official reported to be on the Signal chain, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, acknowledged during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing Tuesday she was traveling overseas during the exchange. She wouldn't say whether she was using her personal or government-issued phone because the matter is under review by the White House National Security Council.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, joined at right by CIA Director John Ratcliffe, answer questions Tuesday as the Senate Intelligence Committee holds its worldwide threats hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington.
'An embarrassment'
Both Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, who was a participant in the Signal exchange and also testified at Tuesday's intelligence hearing, faced criticism from lawmakers.
"Director Ratcliffe, this was a huge mistake, correct?" Sen. Jon Ossoff, a Georgia Democrat, asked.
After a brief pause, Ratcliffe shook his head. "No," he said.
Ratcliffe attempted to interject as Ossoff asked a follow-up question, leading the two men to speak over each other.
"This is an embarrassment," Ossoff said, silencing Ratcliffe. "This is utterly unprofessional. There's been no apology. There has been no recognition of the gravity of this error."
CIA Director John Ratcliffe, right, joined at center by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, testifies Tuesday as the Senate Intelligence Committee holds its worldwide threats hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington.
In the run-up to his 2016 election victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton, Trump urged criminal prosecution of the former secretary of state for communicating about classified information with her aides on a private email server she set up. The matter was investigated, but the FBI ultimately recommended against charges. None were brought.
Clinton was among Democrats this week to criticize Trump administration officials' use of Signal.
"You have got to be kidding me," Clinton said in a social media post that spotlighted The Atlantic article.
Trump also faced charges for mishandling classified information at his Mar-a-Lago resort following his first White House term. Those charges were later dismissed.
Classified disagreement
But on Tuesday, top administration officials were insistent the Democratic outrage was misplaced.
Ratcliffe and Gabbard told lawmakers that no classified information was included in the texts about U.S. attack plans in the message chain.
But The Atlantic reported that the messages included precise information about weapons packages, targets and timing, but did not publish those details.
Pressed on whether such information should be classified, Gabbard hedged. "I defer to the secretary of defense, the National Security Council, on that question," she said.
Facing heated questions from Democratic Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, Gabbard said there's a difference between "inadvertent" releases of information and intentional leaks. "There was no classified material that was shared," Gabbard said.
Warner, though, said the lapse in security could have cost lives.
"If this information had gotten out, American lives could have been lost. If the Houthis had this information they could reposition their defensive systems," Warner said.
FBI Director Kash Patel, left, joined at right by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, answers questions Tuesday as the Senate Intelligence Committee holds its worldwide threats hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington.
Calls for an investigation
In response to questions from Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, Gabbard and Ratcliffe said they would participate in an audit looking into administration officials' use of Signal. Wyden said it must be investigated.
"I'm of the view that there ought to be resignations," Wyden said.
FBI Director Kash Patel, appearing with Ratcliffe and Gabbard at the hearing, said he was only recently briefed on the Signal chat matter and doesn't have an update on whether the FBI has opened an investigation into it. Warner asked for an update by the end of the day.
"Horrified" by the leak of what is historically strictly guarded information, the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee, Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, said he will demand answers in a separate hearing Wednesday with his panel.
Threats hearing
Meanwhile, as Democrats focused the hearing on the text exchange, the Trump administration's intelligence officials stressed to Congress the threat they said is posed by international criminal gangs, drug cartels and human smuggling.
The annual hearing on worldwide threats before the Senate Intelligence Committee offered a glimpse of the new administration's reorienting of priorities. It comes as Trump opened a new line of communication with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, and focused national security attention closer to home to counter violent crime that officials link to cross-border drug trafficking.
"Criminal groups drive much of the unrest and lawlessness in the Western Hemisphere," said Gabbard. Atop a long list of national security challenges, she cited the need to combat cartels that she said were "engaging in a wide array of illicit activity, from narcotics trafficking to money laundering to smuggling of illegal immigrants and human trafficking."
In the committee room, Republican senators hewed to the scheduled topic by drilling down on China and the fentanyl scourge, while Democrat after Democrat offered sharp criticism over a security breach they called reckless and dangerous.
Gabbard and other officials did note the U.S. government's longstanding national security concerns, including international terrorism and the threat she said was posed by countries including Russia, China, Iran and North Korea.
The Social Security data breach compromised 'billions' of accounts. Here's how to protect yourself.
The Social Security data breach compromised 'billions' of accounts. Here's one easy, free way to protect yourself.
In early 2024, background checking service National Public Data was hit by a massive cyberattack that potentially compromised the sensitive, personal information of millions, or possibly even billions, of people around the world, including U.S. residents.
A year later, new security threats have gained traction. While artificial intelligence has transformed the ability to prevent, detect, and rapidly respond to cyberattacks, the malicious use of AI has also exploited new vulnerabilities. As AI systems evolve, so does the sophistication and scope of cyberattacks. In the hands of bad actors, AI capabilities have increased the scale and efficiency of attacks, including identity theft, fraud, and data privacy violations, according to a report on AI and cybersecurity.  Â
In the financial sector, for instance, deploying a form of algorithmic manipulation known as data poisoning to increasingly sophisticated machine learning models could significantly impact AI. That, in turn, can lead to biased or harmful results, undermining fraud detection or credit scoring models.
analyzed resources from the and the three credit bureaus to compile tips on how to secure your identity in the aftermath of last year's unprecedented data breach and prepare for potential threats in the future.
The group taking credit for the breach targeting NPD calls itself USDoD, a moniker that mirrors the name of the federal government agency responsible for the country's security. The group reportedly sold the vast trove of user data on the dark web for $3.5 million.
In a , which does business as National Public Data, the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability said the attack "likely represents one of the largest cyberattacks ever in terms of impacted individuals." The letter was sent to request a hearing and alert the owner to the committee's investigation of the security event, alleging that the company failed to notify consumers of the breach in a timely and detailed manner.
The breach is concerning not only because of its possible scope but also because of the information compromised, which includes Social Security numbers.
A Social Security number can be used to steal someone else's identity. This allows criminals to fraudulently open new lines of credit, apply for loans, and even receive government benefits, which happened during the COVID-19 pandemic when states were providing additional unemployment pay.
If you don't already pay for an identity theft monitoring service, you can still take advantage of free tools offered by the main credit bureaus to prevent criminals from defrauding you.
The process is called freezing your credit. While it is the most secure option to prevent fraud, industry surveys estimate that only a small percentage of Americans use the service. Depending on the scope and circumstances, consumers could benefit from freezing their credit after a major data breach. Read on to learn more about how to protect your information and set up a credit freeze.
Have I been impacted by the NPD data breach or any others?
The simple fact that a person hasn't experienced the repercussions of identity theft, like credit card fraud, isn't always a sign that their personal data wasn't compromised. Personal info can sit in public spaces for some time before it's purchased or found and used by someone with criminal intent.
Every U.S. state and multiple territories have laws that require that businesses notify stakeholders when their data has been accessed by an unauthorized actor. However, not every company is forthright about breaches. NPD is now facing a class action lawsuit in which at least one victim claims they didn't know about the breach until their own identity theft service notified them.
Many identity theft services will notify you when your personal info is found in public or on marketplaces used by criminals. For the NPD breach, specifically, cybersecurity firm Pentester has released a free web tool that by only providing your name, state, and birth year.
After you've confirmed any exposure, a credit freeze can help protect you from future fraud attempts.
What is a credit freeze?
A credit freeze is a free service that restricts access to your credit report through the major credit bureaus. You can temporarily pause the freeze when needed, such as when applying for a loan or credit card. A credit lock can similarly block access to your credit information, but it usually comes with a monthly fee and offers additional features, such as immediate deactivation and reactivation of the lock.
When you turn on a credit freeze, all credit report requests will be denied, even if it's a legitimate lender processing your application for a loan or credit card. This simultaneously secures your information but also adds an extra step for you to remember when applying for new credit. (More on that later.)
The three credit bureaus—Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion—all provide the service for free. Create an account on each bureau's website and turn on fraud alerts. Be wary of offers for paid tiers of services from each of these companies—you may want to purchase their additional services or a credit lock, but you should not need to pay to freeze a credit file.
Comb through accounts tied to your personal information within each bureau's credit report, and be on the lookout for credit cards and other items you didn't personally apply for. The presence of an unrecognizable account could be evidence of identity theft.
Then, request that each bureau place a freeze on the credit file. This can also be done by phone at:
- Experian: 1-888-397-3742
- TransUnion: 1-888-909-8872
- Equifax: 1-800-685-1111
NPD and the FTC also encourage consumers to report identity theft when they're alerted to it at or call 1-877-438-4338.
What if I want to access my credit?
The freeze stays in place until the owner of the credit file requests to lift it temporarily or permanently.
A freeze might be lifted for a few days if the person anticipates applying for a mortgage or credit card within a specific set time. The process provides peace of mind that the window for fraud is limited should they forget to request a freeze again.
Though freezing your credit is an easy and effective step to prevent fraud, it only protects against the creation of new, fraudulent accounts. Any existing credit account can still be compromised, so keep an eye out for your monthly statements and any suspicious charges.
Experts also recommend securing all other types of online accounts in today's age of near-constant cyber threats. Aside from bank accounts, platforms like social media and even streaming service accounts can provide criminals with access to your credit card information and ways to impersonate you. Most websites offer a security service called multifactor authentication that works similarly to a credit freeze, pinging the user via a secure channel like a personal phone number to confirm the login activity is coming from them and not an impersonator.
Story editing by Carren Jao. Additional editing by Kelly Glass. Copy editing by Tim Bruns. Photo selection by Ania Antecka.Â
originally appeared on and was produced and distributed in partnership with Stacker Studio.
