Rep. Lawler downplays Signal chat leak of military operation plans
He calls for safeguards but says a Congressional investigation is not needed.
It is no surprise that Rep. Lawler has been writing and talking about Signalgate, the unintentional public release of sensitive military information during the March 15 attack on the Houthis in Yemen. He said it was a “mistake” and that “guardrails” should be put in place to prevent a recurrence.
We begin by looking at what Lawler said about another mistake in July 2024, continue with a brief review of Signalgate, discuss convictions and excuses for people who mishandled classified information, and conclude with Lawler’s responses.
Assassination attempt
On July 13, 2024 there was an assassination attempt on Donald J. Trump while he was speaking at an open-air campaign rally near Butler. Pennsylvania. Rep. Lawler demanded a “complete, independent investigation” and “swift and immediate accountability within the agency,” i.e. the Secret Service.
Houti PC small group chat on Signal messaging app
From March 11 to 15, 2025 the “Houthi PC small group” of high level U.S. Government officials had a discussion by text messaging on the Signal mobile messaging app.
The messages were encrypted, but Signal was never authorized for transmission of sensitive government information. Department of Defense personnel had been warned in February that Signal is a target to intercept sensitive information and should not be used for such. In addition to the persons shown above, Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, was inexplicably invited. None of the participants questioned who he was.
On March 24 Mr. Goldberg published an article in The Atlantic titled
“The Trump Administration Accidentally Texted Me Its War Plans.”
Upon exposure, the Trump Administration denied that any classified information was shown in the Signal chat. This prompted Mr. Goldberg to publish screen shots of the text messages he received from the Houthi PC small group.
”Here Are the Attack Plans That Trump’s Advisers Shared on Signal”
Here is a small section showing specific weapons and the times they would be deployed. It is very clear that highly sensitive military information was transmitted by Signal, exposing it to interception. OPSEC = operational security.
There is an extensive Wikipedia article “United States government group chat leak.”
NSA warning about using Signal
In February 2025 the National Security Agency (NSA), an intelligence agency of the Department of Defense, issued an OPSEC special bulletin warning about a vulnerability in the Signal messaging app.
National Security Officials Were Warned in February That Signal Was Vulnerable to Attack
The F9T53 OPSEC Special Bulletin states
(U/FOUO) Third party messaging apps (e.g. Signal) are permitted by policy for unclassified accountability/recall exercises but are NOT approved to process or store nonpublic, nonclassified information (e.g. Protected, FOUO, CUI, etc.
Note that each paragraph in the bulletin below is preceded by either (U) for unclassified or (U/FOUO) for unclassified, for official use only. CUI, Controlled Unclassified Information, refers to sensitive government information that is not classified but still requires safeguarding or dissemination controls, as mandated by laws, regulations, or government-wide policies.
Convictions for mishandling classified information by mid-level employees
In September 2021 Izaak Vincent Kemp, 36, a contractor at the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) and later at the U.S. Air Force National Air and Space Intelligence Center (NASIC) was sentenced to one year and one day in prison for illegally taking classified documents to his residence. Despite having training on various occasions on how to safeguard classified material, Kemp took classified documents and retained them at his home.
Former Air Force contractor sentenced to prison for illegally taking 2,500 pages of classified information
In July 2022 a former Raytheon Systems Engineer Ahmedelhadi Yassin Serageldin, 67, was sentenced to 18 months in prison, one year of supervised release, and a $10,000 fine after pleading guilty to one count of willfully retaining national defense information. He took classified documents from work to his residence.
Massachusetts Man Sentenced for Illegally Retaining Classified National Defense Information Regarding U.S. Military Programs
In March 2025 Gokhan Gun, 51, a civilian electrical engineer for the Department of Defense pleaded guilty to unauthorized removal and retention of classified material. Gun removed at least five classified documents from his Department of Defense workspace with the intent to retain them at his primary residence, which was not an approved facility for the storage of classified information. Gun is scheduled to be sentenced on June 17 and faces up to five years in prison. Actual sentences for federal crimes are typically less than the maximum penalties.
Department of Defense civilian employee pleads guilty to taking classified documents
Since 2015, at least 13 people have been charged with the “willful retention” of government documents under the broad Espionage Act.
More than a dozen people had the same charges Trump is facing
Excuses for mishandling classified information by high-level officials
A look at federal cases on handling classified information
David Petraeus a former CIA director and retired four-star Army general admitted that he loaned his biographer, Paula Broadwell, with whom he was having an affair, eight binders containing highly classified information regarding war strategy, intelligence capabilities, and identities of covert officers. FBI agents seized the binders from an unlocked desk drawer at his home instead of a secure facility that is required for handling classified material. Patraeus pleaded guilty in 2015 to a misdemeanor count of unlawful removal and retention of classified materials. He was spared prison time and was given two years' probation by a judge who faulted him for a "serious lapse in judgment." Defense lawyers for less-influential clients asserted there was a double standard for senior officials who have been treated with such leniency.
John Deutsch the CIA director from May 1995 until December 1996 stored and processed hundreds of files of highly classified material on unprotected home computers that he and family members also used to connect to the Internet, making the information potentially vulnerable to hackers. A report by the Defense Department inspector general found that Deutsch had failed to follow "the most basic security precautions.” Deutsch apologized and was pardoned by President Bill Clinton before the Justice Department could file a misdemeanor plea deal for mishandling government secrets.
Sandy Berger the national security adviser during Bill Clinton's second term illegally removed classified documents from the National Archives by stuffing papers in his suit. He later destroyed some of them in his office and lied about it. In 2005 he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material. He avoided prison time, but he lost access to classified material for three years. A judge fined him $50,000, higher than the amount recommended by prosecutors. Berger called his actions a lapse in judgment that came as he was preparing to testify before the September 11 commission that examined the events leading up to the 2001 attacks. "I let considerations of personal convenience override clear rules of handling classified materials," he said at the time.
Lawler’s responses to Signalgate
Finally we get to Lawler’s responses to Signalgate. After faulting former President Biden, he said the chat on Signal was a “mistake” that should not have happened and that “guardrails” should be put in place to ensure it never happens again.
Discussing a pending and ongoing military operation on Signal was not a “mistake.” It was a willful and repeated disregard of clearly stated rules by arrogant people who feel entitled to do as they please for their own convenience. The only mistake was including Jeffrey Goldberg in the chat. This also shows the incompetence of Trump’s team. This is engineered incompetence as described by Ruth Ben-Ghiat.
Pete Hegseth and the Autocratic Strategy of Engineered Incompetence
Rules for handling classified information have been in place since well before Lawler was born. Even without the specific NSA warning about Signal, employees and contractors of the U.S. Government who work with classified materials are regularly briefed on the requirement to always use approved, safe methods to store and transmit this information.
Highly sensitive military information was transmitted by Signal. Lawler said classified information was not shared, and he does not think a Congressional investigation is necessary.
Most notably, Lawler does not think anyone should be held accountable for this serious lapse in operational security (OPSEC).
Lawler and most importantly Trump are giving the members of the Houthi PC small group a pass. Now these engineered incompetents are even more beholden to him.
GOP Rep. Mike Lawler says Signal chat leak should never have happened - CBS News
Video, summary, and transcript
Transcript
Welcome back to America Decides. More than a handful of Republicans on Capitol Hill today described the leak of the Signal group chat regarding the Houthis and attack plans as a, quote, mistake.
But some went a little bit further, and they tried to downplay whether these sensitive details were really that sensitive in the first place. Let's listen.
There was no locations listed there. There were no sources of methods. There's no specific target. Certainly, there was nothing called war plans, which was an embellishment and exaggeration by a known left wing partisan opponent of the president.
New York Republican Congressman Mike Lawler joins me now. Congressman, good to see you. Thanks for joining us. Look, let's stipulate upfront that this set of attacks was different than the Biden administration, that it was carried out well, and it probably did important damage relevant to an important international commercial matter, which is traveling through the Red Sea without being harassed by the Houthis. I don't wanna lose sight of that. Stipulate that upfront.
Are you comfortable that details of that successful mission were conducted on Signal, one, and two, that any reporter, Jeff Goldberg or any other, was inadvertently included?
So a few things here, Major. Number one, I do agree to the stipulation. This was a successful mission, an important mission. The Houthis had been allowed to act with impunity over the last, you know, year and a half under the watchful eye of the Biden administration.
The fact is that this was necessary, and I do think the mission was executed well. That being said, as I said the day this story broke, you know, this type of information, this type of discussion should occur in secure locations and using secure platforms.
I would note in December of last year, the Biden administration and CISA (Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency) put out guidance with respect to end-to-end encryption and using apps like Signal for communication and and encouraging folks to do so. But obviously, when you're talking about sensitive, you know, information such as this, it is imperative that we take all precaution.
And certainly in this instance you had a situation where a reporter was added to this group chat. I'm sure we will get, you know, down to how and who specifically. But at the end of the day, anytime you are using an application like this, there is great potential not just that somebody be mistakenly added, but we all know, you know, people screen, screen grab conversations. You know, I mean there's so many potentials here.
Mike, let me jump in if I could because this administration wastes no time in mocking Biden era rules. So I wanna talk to you about what the NSA under the Trump administration said last month.
Don't go on signal if you're discussing anything sensitive.
Times of your kids soccer match, fine. But anything sensitive, don't be on signal under any circumstances.
That's a Trump era advisory.
Look. I I I I think I think many people acknowledge this was a mistake. It is something that should not have happened. And I, you know, obviously believe there needs to be guardrails put in place to ensure it never happens again.
You know, I do think, folks need to acknowledge that and make sure this does not happen. Our adversaries are looking for every, you know, means and method to make sure that, you know, they are able to thwart our efforts, and in this instance, obviously, a very successful mission.
But, you know, obviously when we're talking about national security, we all have to take due caution in in how we engage in it.
Mike, do you believe Jeff Goldberg acted in any way irresponsibly in the handling of this matter?
Look. I I think, obviously, folks can, have their opinion on how this was characterized, the information that was revealed in the text exchange. Obviously, we saw more information this morning.
You know, I think, obviously, he did not release it in real time, which I think, frankly, to his credit, you know, I think that's important. It could have jeopardized the mission.
But, ultimately, obviously, this is a situation where a mistake was made and should not have happened. And so, you know point, that is the issue at hand that needs to be corrected.