"The Atlantic magazine published a final, a separate piece of this text thread, which included actual details of the strike operations—when the planes were going to be taking off, when the jets were going to be striking against Houthi targets. This was something that was not included in the initial release. The editor of The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg, says that this part that he wanted to keep off because he believed it was operational details," Posobiec siad.
Following a Monday report from The Atlantic, in which Editor-in-Chief Jeffrey Goldberg revealed that he had been inadvertantly added to a Signal group chat by National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, President Donald Trump has stood by Waltz. Speaking with NBC News on Tuesday, Trump said, "Michael Waltz has learned a lesson, and he’s a good man." He emphasized that Goldberg's presence in the chat had "no impact at all" on the operation against the Houthis, attributing the mishap to a staffer who had inadvertently included Goldberg's number. "It was one of Michael’s people on the phone. A staffer had his number on there," Trump explained, calling the event "the only glitch in two months, and it turned out not to be a serious one."
Posobiec said that the leak occurred before the strikes were carried out, making it potentially damaging, though Goldberg withheld sensitive information until after. "If you look back at the timing of all of this, it was done prior to the strikes actually coming out, so it would have, at the time, definitely impacted operations if he put it out.
"The administration says not classified, Goldberg says it was operational, does look operational. Obviously, it would have also given the Houthis potentially time, or certainly their leaders time, to escape from these assassination strikes. And these were decapitation strikes aimed at Houthi leadership—something that President Biden had really eschewed and really stepped away from. That’s, in fact, why the Houthis were able to continue what they’ve been doing throughout the Red Sea and throughout the last couple of months, and even over the last year, really."
Posobiec said that the leak was part of a broader, now-coordinated effort to undermine Trump’s administration. "What’s really going on here? It’s clear to me, and it went viral yesterday while I was on War Room. This is an operation. You’re looking at a coordinated operation. The timing of these leaks, specifically when intelligence hearings are taking place, specifically when you've got DNI Gabbard as well as CIA Director Ratcliffe up there, you've got people having to talk about what they did, what they knew, what you didn't know—they’re trying to make it a new Watergate. They’re trying to make it a new Russiagate. Why are they doing this? Because they want to derail the agenda of MAGA, MAHA, of global peace around the world."
"We’re going to secure the shipping lanes; of course, we’re going to do that. And I understand that everybody, by the way, when you look at the text thread, is totally in favor. Even JD Vance says he’s in favor. He’s just talking about specifics regarding the messaging, specifics regarding getting people to understand what’s going on. That’s what Sec. Def. Hegseth also talks about on the text thread. The biggest piece of all of this is, what is The Atlantic doing? They’re working with Democrats and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence… Why? To derail the ultra-MAGA agenda, that, by the way, the American people support."
Trump, when asked by reporters about the Atlantic report on Monday, dismissed its significance. "I don't know anything about it. I'm not a big fan of The Atlantic, to me it's a magazine that's going out of business. I think it's not much of a magazine, but I know nothing about it. You're saying that they had what?" Upon hearing the details of the report, Trump responded, "Well, it couldn't have been very effective because the attack was very effective, I can tell you that. I don't know anything about it. You're telling me about it for the first time."
