Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

There’s No Excuse for Signalgate

Opinion

Social media apps on a phone

A Pentagon watchdog confirms senior officials shared sensitive military plans on Signal, risking U.S. troops. A veteran argues accountability is long overdue.

Jonathan Raa/NurPhoto via Getty Images

The Defense Department Inspector General just announced that information shared by Defense Secretary Hegseth in a Signal chat this spring could have indeed put U.S. troops, their mission, and national security in great peril. To recap, in an unforced error, our Defense Secretary, National Security Advisor, and Vice President conducted detailed discussions about an imminent military operation against Houthi targets in Yemen over Signal, a hackable commercial messaging app (that also does not comply with public record laws). These “professionals” accidentally added a journalist to the group chat, which meant the Editor-in-Chief of the Atlantic received real-time intelligence about a pending U.S. military strike, including exactly when bombs would begin falling on Yemeni targets. Had Houthi militants gotten their hands on this information, it would have been enough to help them better defend their positions if not actively shoot down the American pilots. This was a catastrophic breakdown in the most basic protocols governing sensitive information and technology. Nine months later, are we any safer?

As a veteran, I take their cavalier attitude towards national security personally. I got out of the Navy as a Lieutenant Commander after ten years as an aviator, a role that required survival, evasion, resistance, and escape training before ever deploying, in case I should ever get shot down. To think that the Defense Secretary, National Security Advisor, and Vice President could have so carelessly put these pilots in danger betrays the trust troops place in their Chain of Command while putting their lives on the line in the service of this country.


During my service, I held additional roles as the Command Legal Officer and Security Manager. So, when someone accidentally printed the word SECRET on a document that wasn’t actually classified, the issue fell squarely on my desk. There was no leak of any information whatsoever, but the inadvertent mislabeling was enough to trigger a crisis that involved filing reports, conducting an investigation, and giving command-wide training. By contrast, the Administration reduced Signalgate to “an inadvertent number added to the chain" and also a "demonstration of deep and thoughtful policy coordination between senior officials.”

Back in March, I asked my chain of command: “We’d immediately get fired if we had done this, right?”

They said: “We’d go to prison.”

Instead, Hegseth kept his job and is now being scrutinized for authorizing what could range from war crimes to outright murder in the Caribbean Sea. These Signalgate texters were unforgivably reckless with the safety of American troops; out of concern for national security (and out of respect for our servicemembers), shouldn’t they all have been fired —or imprisoned—back in March?

It is inexcusable that such avoidable actions could have resulted in American lives lost. It is also a problem, however, that it took nine months to officially identify this as the colossal cybersecurity blunder it is. As Americans, we deserve leaders who aren’t cavalierly texting military plans over messaging apps, and we deserve leaders who hold them accountable.

Perhaps this incident and the fallout (or lack thereof) are revealing of how illiterate many of our leaders are when it comes to the risks posed by technology. When the median age of a U.S. Senator is almost 65 years old, and our own president admits he has barely used any form of digital communication—email, text, etc.—since 2010, could it be that many of our leaders in the federal government are simply not tech-savvy enough to have made sense of this breach? Congress has yet to pass any meaningful legislation around regulating AI–are our leaders just Luddites?

If we do give them the benefit of the doubt–that if they only had understood the immense risk to national security that using an app like this posed, they would have demanded immediate accountability—then moving forward, we must elect leaders who do understand. From the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) to the Cyber Resilience Act, Europe has implemented robust legislative frameworks to ensure digital security and accountability. Whatever interest has kept American lawmakers from passing similar protections can’t possibly be more compelling than the safety of American lives.

Next election cycle, vote for candidates who know the risks associated with technology and have the integrity to write policy to mitigate those risks, follow protocols already in place, and prosecute those who do not. In the meantime, we need 21st-century policies that can properly respond to these systemic failures of both security and accountability. We must demand that Congress enact mandated communication protocols for all senior Executive Branch officials with legally codified penalties. When senior officials mishandle sensitive information, the consequences should be uniform and automatic, not discretionary, and certainly not decided by political appointees.

How we use technology affects national security. Leaders playing fast and loose with either g2g.


Julie Roland was a Naval Officer for ten years, deploying to both the South China Sea and the Persian Gulf as a helicopter pilot before separating in June 2025 as a Lieutenant Commander. She has a law degree from the University of San Diego, a Master of Laws from Columbia University, and is a member of the Truman National Security Project.


Read More

​U.S. Rep. Carlos Curbelo

U.S. Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-FL), flanked by U.S. Rep. Glenn Thompson (R-PA) and U.S. Speaker of the House Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), speaks during a press conference on Capitol Hill after their weekly party conference meeting on June 21, 2017 in Washington, DC

U.S. Representative Carlos Curbelo / Getty Images

Curbelo Warns Gerrymandering Is Eroding Democracy From Within

Last week’s Unity Forum conversation featured former U.S. Representative Carlos Curbelo giving a cross-partisan assessment of two issues at the heart of America’s polarized politics: gerrymandering and immigration. His message was a refreshing change from common partisan banter. It was grounded in constitutional principle and the pragmatic belief that democracies survive only when citizens feel represented and when political incentives reward problem‑solving rather than extremism.

Curbelo, a Republican who represented a swing district in South Florida from 2015 to 2019, has long been known as a bipartisan voice on issues ranging from energy to immigration. He co‑founded the House Climate Solutions Caucus, a bipartisan group working to develop practical, economically viable solutions to climate-related issues.

Keep ReadingShow less
An American flag waves in front to the U.S. Capitol Building

An American flag waves in front to the U.S. Capitol Building on a clear, spring day on May 30, 2026 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Kevin Carter/Getty Images)

Kevin Carter / Getty Images

The Elephant in the DNC's 2024 Election Report

And no, I don't mean the Republican elephant. I mean the elephant in the room that is being ignored.

The DNC's 2024 Election Report fails to even note what I consider to be a major failure by the Party—the elephant in the Democratic Party's room—not just of the Harris campaign, but of all Democratic campaigns of the past 20 years: the Party's failure to acknowledge and address the plight of blue-collar middle-class Americans.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Fragile Coalitions Beneath American Politics
white concrete building during daytime

The Fragile Coalitions Beneath American Politics

Part 1 of “Today’s Governing Gap,” a three-part series on coalition fragility, governing coherence, and the institutional continuity democratic systems require.

American politics looks stable from a distance. Two dominant parties, fiercely competitive elections, a constitutional framework that has held since the Civil War.

Keep ReadingShow less