Hegseth Signal app info came from classified email: Report


This recording was made using enhanced software.

Summary

New accusations

A new report accuses Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth of sharing information in a Signal group chat that originated from a classified email.

Contradiction

The accusations contradict claims by the Trump administration that no classified information was shared in the Signal group chat.

The controversy

Hegseth shared details of planned military strikes in Yemen in a Signal messaging app group chat that mistakenly included a journalist.


Full story

The Pentagon’s independent watchdog has uncovered information that contradicts the Trump administration’s long-standing claims that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth did not share any classified details in a Signal app group chat that mistakenly included a journalist. This chat contained information about U.S. bombings in Yemen.

The watchdog has received evidence showing that Hegseth’s Signal account, which revealed plans for the bombing campaign, originated from a classified email labeled “SECRET/NOFORN,” as first reported by The Washington Post on Wednesday, July 23.

QR code for SAN app download

Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.

Point phone camera here

Conflicting evidence

People familiar with the matter informed The Post that the finding contradicts the Trump administration’s claim. The administration previously stated that officials did not share classified information in the nonclassified chat, which critics argue constitutes a significant security breach.

In at least two group chats on the Signal messaging app, officials shared messages about the military campaign. These messages are central to an investigation by the Defense Department’s inspector general’s office, which the office initiated in April by a bipartisan group of members from the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Labeled ‘SECRET/NOFORN’

Sources tell The Post that officials originally divulged the airstrike details in a classified email that included information from more than a dozen defense officials. They said Gen. Michael “Erik” Kurilla, the top commander managing operations in the Middle East, sent the emails.

Federal officials shared the emails in the unclassified group chats by an account linked to Hegseth on March 15, shortly before the U.S. strikes against Houthi rebels. 

The “SECRET” designation of Kurilla’s email suggested that the details were classified in a way in which unauthorized dissemination could seriously threaten national security. The “NOFORN” classification reportedly indicates that it also was not intended for anyone who is a foreign national, including senior officials of close American allies.

Four people familiar with the matter told The Post that Kurilla sent his email over a classified system known as the Secret Internal Protocol Router Network, or SIPRNET. 

The email detailed when the strikes in Yemen would occur, which aircraft would be deployed and what weapons would be used. The backlash erupted when it became public that officials mistakenly included a journalist from The Atlantic in the group chat.

Calls for Hegseth’s firing

Some Democrats have demanded Hegseth’s firing following the incident, and at least one Republican has called for his ousting. Last month, congressional committees questioned Hegseth about the alleged breach.

Despite criticism, the Trump administration repeatedly asserted that officials did not share classified plans on Signal. However, national security and military analysts have expressed doubt over that claim.

“These are indeed highly detailed operational plans of war,” a former defense official who spoke to The Post on the condition of anonymity in March. “Twenty-five years, I have never known them not to be classified. And usually this operational level of detail is further restricted to those with a need-to-know.”

“I don’t care what DOD says — that’s classified info,” another former official told The Post.

The administration remained steadfast in its commitment to the claims when responding to The Post’s report. Administration officials praised military strikes against the Houthis in Yemen and more recent bombings of Iran’s nuclear facilities.

“The Department stands behind its previous statements: no classified information was shared via Signal,” Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell told The Post in an emailed statement. “As we’ve said repeatedly, nobody was texting war plans and the success of the Department’s recent operations — from Operation Rough Rider to Operation Midnight Hammer — are proof that our operational security and discipline are top notch.”

White House spokesperson Ann Kelly also criticized The Post’s reporting.

“It’s shameful that The Washington Post continues to publish unverified articles based on alleged emails they haven’t personally reviewed in an effort to undermine a successful military operation and resurrect a non-issue that no one has cared about for months,” she said.

Unanswered questions remain

The Defense Department inspector general’s office declined to comment on the report and has precedent for doing so regarding open cases. 

Hegseth, meanwhile, has failed to say whether the information he shared on Signal came to him through a classified network.

Tags: , ,

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don’t just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Why this story matters

Questions about the sharing of classified military information by a high-ranking U.S. official highlight ongoing concerns about information security, government transparency and accountability within the defense establishment.

Information security

Allegations of classified U.S. military plans being shared in an unsecured Signal group chat spotlight the risks of potential breaches in handling sensitive national security data.

Accountability in government

The investigation into whether Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth shared classified information raises issues about oversight and consequences for high-level officials when protocols are potentially broken.

Public trust and transparency

Conflicting claims between the administration and reported evidence about the incident highlight the importance of verifying facts to maintain public trust in government actions regarding military operations.

Get the big picture

Synthesized coverage insights across 46 media outlets

Context corner

Communication of sensitive government information has historically relied on secured, official channels specifically designed to protect national security interests. The use of commercial apps like Signal for such communication reflects both a growing reliance on easily accessible technology and ongoing concerns about the modernization of official government communications systems to keep pace with user demands.

Global impact

The incident’s implications reach beyond U.S. borders, with potential effects on U.S. military operations and international confidence in American operational security. Details about U.S. strikes in Yemen and against Iran highlight the global strategic context, while the controversy may affect how allies and adversaries assess vulnerabilities in U.S. decision-making and information security.

History lesson

This instance echoes past controversies where officials have faced scrutiny or disciplinary action for mishandling classified information. The Pentagon and federal law have well-established procedures for safeguarding sensitive data, and previous lapses have led to policy changes and increased oversight.

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don’t just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Bias comparison

  • Media outlets on the left emphasize the narrative of a clear security breach by Hegseth, employing charged language such as “really did” and phrases like “far worse than Clinton’s emails” to underscore alleged wrongdoing and hypocrisy, painting Pentagon and White House denials as unconvincing obfuscations demanding accountability.
  • Media outlets in the center de-emphasize partisan blame, focusing instead on ongoing investigations, internal Pentagon dissent, and systemic issues, adding nuance absent in left/right frames.
  • Media outlets on the right frame Hegseth as “under attack” amid a “renewed effort to force ouster,” using defensively emotional terms like “LEAK” and “erred” to portray critics as politically motivated, while highlighting Pentagon spokesperson affirmations to cast doubt on allegations.

Media landscape

Click on bars to see headlines

48 total sources

Key points from the Left

  • The Pentagon's inspector general found that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth shared military details via Signal from a classified email marked "Secret/NOFORN," as reported by the Washington Post.
  • The document shared contained information about U.S. airstrikes on Houthi targets in Yemen, contradicting Hegseth's denials of sharing classified information.
  • The Pentagon's inspector general is investigating Hegseth's use of Signal for discussing military operations, which began in April, prompting the inquiry.
  • Despite the evidence, Pentagon officials maintain that no classified information was disclosed, asserting that operational security remains intact.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Center

  • On March 15, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth shared details of planned U.S. airstrikes on Yemen via a Signal group chat from his residence in Tennessee.
  • The information originated from a classified email labeled SECRET//NOFORN sent by Gen. Michael Kurilla to multiple defense officials, triggering a Pentagon inspector general review.
  • Senior Pentagon officials, including spokesman Sean Parnell, denied classified data was shared via Signal, while critics called the chat a significant security breach.
  • Parnell stated, "no classified information was shared via Signal," Rep. Seth Moulton demanded clarity on classification, and Hegseth praised the mission's success.
  • The controversy led to congressional hearings in June, internal Pentagon scrutiny, and calls from Democrats to fire Hegseth amid an ongoing inspector general investigation.

Report an issue with this summary

Powered by Ground News™