Waltz’s future in doubt after data leak

The report said nothing is finalized yet, and President Donald Trump would ultimately make the decision over the next day or two

Active discussions about the future of National Security Advisor Mike Waltz are underway in the White House after a leak of classified data on US strikes in Yemen, Politico reported citing sources, who said his resignation is not off the table.

A senior administration official told Politico on Monday afternoon that they are involved in multiple text threads with other administration staffers on what to do with Waltz, following the bombshell report that the top aide inadvertently included Atlantic editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg in a private chat discussing a military strike on Houthis.

“Half of them saying he’s never going to survive or shouldn’t survive,” said the official. Two high-level White House aides have suggested that Waltz should resign to prevent the president from being put in a “bad position.”

Politico said nothing is finalized yet, and President Donald Trump would ultimately make the decision over the next day or two.

“It was reckless not to check who was on the thread. It was reckless to be having that conversation on Signal. You can’t have recklessness as the national security adviser,” the official said.

A person close to the White House was even more direct: “Everyone in the White House can agree on one thing: Mike Waltz is a <…> idiot.”

A third person familiar with the situation said Trump has spoken with Waltz about the matter — and the White House is, for now, standing by him.

“As President Trump said, the attacks on the Houthis have been highly successful and effective. President Trump continues to have the utmost confidence in his national security team, including National Security Advisor Mike Waltz,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a Monday statement.

A source told Politico that what happens to Waltz largely depends on how Trump personally feels about the matter, and noted the involvement of other administration officials in the Signal chat as well.

Speaker Mike Johnson told Politico that Waltz should “absolutely not” resign.”He’s exceptionally qualified for the job. He is trusted — trustworthy,” Johnson said. “He was made for that job, and I have full confidence in him.”

Earlier, CNN journalist Alayna Treene, citing sources, wrote on the social network X that Trump has no plans to fire Waltz. Pentagon Chief Pete Hegseth denied the leak, stressing that no one had sent any sensitive military information in chats.

The story by the Atlantic chief editor Goldberg said in a story he published in the Atlantic that he had got a request to join Signal, an encrypted messaging app, from a “Mike Waltz” on March 11. He was then included in a group chat dubbed “Houthi PC small group” with what appeared to be other top administration officials, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Vice President JD Vance, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and others.

For several days, “a fascinating policy discussion” was conducted in the chat, the story says. According to the editor, on March 15, user “Pete Hegseth” posted a message that contained details of planned strikes against the Houthis, including targets, weapons, and the estimated time of the start of the strikes, which, according to Goldberg, coincided with the time of publication of the first messages about the bombing on social networks.

Goldberg said that Brian Hughes, the spokesman for the National Security Council, confirmed the veracity of the Signal group.

“This appears to be an authentic message chain, and we are reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain,” Hughes wrote.

“The thread is a demonstration of the deep and thoughtful policy coordination between senior officials. The ongoing success of the Houthi operation demonstrates that there were no threats to troops or national security.

“On March 15, the United States launched heavy strikes against the positions of Houthis, who control about a third of Yemen’s territory.

According to the Central Command of the US Armed Forces, the operation is aimed at protecting US interests and ensuring freedom of navigation.

In response, the Ansar Allah movement launched a series of attacks on the US aircraft carrier USS Harry Truman in the northern part of the Red Sea, using missiles and drones.

There was no information about any damage sustained by the ship as a result of the strikes.