Trump Administration TORCHES ‘War Plans’ Hoax & The Atlantic Alters Story!

The drama surrounding Hoax Peddler Jeffrey Goldberg and the case of the Signal App chat fiasco isn’t over yet.

Most of the mainstream media is entirely fixated today on the additional so-called ‘details’ being released — more screenshots of the high-level conversation — that Goldberg was somehow allowed to access.

Those supposed additional details are actually nothing substantive, and add nothing new to the narrative.

But they do allow The Atlantic, and Trump-hater Jeffrey Goldberg, to continue fishing for emotional outrage to direct at President Trump and his team… even though the most substantive alterations to their story are actually in the headline; which I and others are appropriately calling a BACKTRACK from their original assertions. (Likely for legal purposes that might slap them in the face at a later date.)

Meanwhile, not only is the Trump Administration being very clear that NO WAR PLANS, nor anything of a classified nature, was ‘leaked’ through the apparent inadvertent inclusion of Goldberg.  (I still wonder if it was truly ‘inadvertent’…)

But everyone on Team Trump has been weighing in with pure fire; calling Jeffrey Goldberg and The Atlantic out on their ‘sensationalist reporting’, particularly since The Atlantic attempted to quietly change it’s entire phrasing of the incident.

Which is exactly what the Secretary of Defense called it this morning.

This first video was uploaded and shared by the White House’s ‘Rapid Response’ X account, and reposted by Sean Parnell — the Assistant to the Secretary of Defense in charge of the Pentagon’s public affairs.

Here’s the clip of SecDef Hegseth giving a statement to reporters on the tarmac this morning, and setting the record straight.

He also references the fact that The Atlantic didn’t just add more screenshots to its story, but it actually CHANGED the story — backtracking on its original ‘leaked war plans’ accusations!

.@SecDef wrecks the Atlantic for their sensationalist reporting: “I noticed this morning, out came something that doesn’t look like war plans. As a matter of fact, they even changed the title to ‘attack plans’… There’s no units, no locations, no routes, no flight paths, no… pic.twitter.com/hqa7cvHNhR

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) March 26, 2025

The changes to The Atlantic’s story published by Jeffrey Goldberg mentioned by Hegseth does actually include changes to the body of the story.

What the mainstream media is fixated on is the additional screenshots of the conversations — but still nothing classified, still nothing constituting ‘war plans’.

The changes to the headline and the inclusion of additional screenshots from the conversation happened at the same time, which I suspect was an attempt to minimize the focus on the headline change with maximum focus on the additional screenshots.

And the mainstream media is playing along with that distracting chorus line just as you would expect.

The changes also happened after repeated pushback from the Trump Administration on the accuracy of Goldberg’s hit piece, describing the conversation as having included ‘war plans’.

Specifically, the changes to The Atlantic’s story happened after WH Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt UNLEASHED RAW TRUTH during multiple briefings over the last few days.

She continued to do so, highlighting the false narrative of Goldberg’s piece in The Atlantic after the recent changes to the article, referencing just as Hegseth did that the changes to the article seem to be an attempt to BACKTRACK from Goldberg’s original assertions.

Here’s that clip:

🚨🇺🇸 PRESS SEC LEAVITT: NO WAR PLANS WERE DISCUSSED, NO CLASSIFIED MATERIAL WAS SENT

“We have said all along no war plans were discussed, no classified material was sent.

You have the Secretary of Defense saying that.

You have the director of the CIA, the director of… https://t.co/i6jY5x5bp7 pic.twitter.com/CZl3atGKlk

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) March 26, 2025

Journalist Eric Daugherty was one of the few media voices who pointed out the ‘BACKPEDALING’ nature of the changes to The Atlantic’s article.

Here’s a screenshot of the *updated* headline from The Atlantic as shared by Daugherty on his X account, who also pointed out that nothing truly ‘NEW’ was added to the story:

🚨 THEY'RE BACKPEDALING! The Atlantic just sent out an update report CLARIFYING that there WERE NO WAR PLANS exchanged in that Signal chat… they were (as we all saw) some discussion on the Houthi strikes that Americans knew were coming.

This hoax totally fell on its face!… pic.twitter.com/btbpSFKvXB

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) March 26, 2025

For easier viewing, here is the full text from Daugherty’s post, highlighting what Goldberg and The Atlantic seemingly DOES NOT want highlighted about the changes to their story:

THEY’RE BACKPEDALING! The Atlantic just sent out an update report CLARIFYING that there WERE NO WAR PLANS exchanged in that Signal chat… they were (as we all saw) some discussion on the Houthi strikes that Americans knew were coming.

This hoax totally fell on its face!

They added additional messages in today’s release, but there is nothing new.

There are endless holes in what was supposed to be a HUGE outrage.
– No classified info
– Signal was approved for use by the Biden admin
– No “war plans” were discussed

To be clear, the exact circumstances that led to Goldberg’s inclusion in the high-level chat on the Signal App is still not fully known.

And the use of the Signal App has long been considered a ‘best practice’ for government officials who are likely to be targeted by foreign adversarial eavesdropping.

In fact, that was a BIDEN-ERA DIRECTIVE, as reported by Fox News:

The federal office in charge of ensuring cybersecurity at all levels of the government cited the use of encrypted messaging app Signal as a “best practice” for “highly targeted” government officials, the Biden-era document shows.

Fox News Digital found that the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) outlined in a guide for federal employees late last year that encrypted messaging platforms such as Signal better protected officials against foreign enemy hackers amid a Chinese-linked cyber breach. CISA is an office under the Department of Homeland Security’s umbrella that is charged with ensuring cybersecurity across all levels of government.

Under the Biden administration in 2024, CISA released a “Mobile Communications Best Practice Guidance” for “highly targeted individuals,” who were defined as high-ranking government officials or politicians who are “likely to possess information of interest to these threat actors.” The document specifically addressed high-targeted politicos and officials, though it noted the guide was “applicable to all audiences.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The document, published in December, details that highly-targeted government officials should use “end-to-end encrypted communications” as part of its “best practices” advice. End-to-end encryption is understood as a secure method of communication, where a sender’s message is encrypted and can only be decrypted by the recipient of the message.

Still, the exact path that led to Goldberg’s inclusion in the Signal chat is unclear.

President Trump stated that it was not his National Security Adviser Mike Waltz who added Goldberg to the chat, but an unnamed ‘staffer’, as we reported yesterday:

UPDATE: President Trump Reveals Who Was ACTUALLY Behind Signal ‘Leak’

But even that is now being questioned, as Mike Waltz has stated on Fox News that there are ongoing technical investigation into exactly how The Atlantic's Goldberg ended up on that chat.

In fact, Mike Waltz stated that President Trump's belief that it was a staffer in Waltz' office who added Goldberg is apparently wrong.

Check out Waltz' comments with Laura Ingraham, which raises more questions than answers:

Ingraham: But you’ve never talked to him so how is his number on your phone? pic.twitter.com/uVlf5d3rJ8

— Acyn (@Acyn) March 25, 2025

So it is entirely possible at this point that the inclusion of Goldberg was neither intentional on the part of the Trump Administration -- in line with the 4D chess theory -- nor a MISTAKE.

From Waltz' explanation, it seems possible that some intrigue was fielded to give Goldberg access to the chat surreptitiously.

While that sounds just as far-fetched and Hollywood-esque as the 4D chess theory to some, if Waltz' explanation in that clip is anywhere near truthful... it seems to be the simplest explanation for Goldberg's inclusion, at this moment.

Meanwhile, the Trump White House is not beating around the bush about the hypocritical nature of the Democrats using this situation to lecture the Trump Administration on national security issues.

Karoline Leavitt detailed that issue with her usual fire in today's WH briefing:

🚨 KAROLINE LEAVITT DROPS THE MIC!

"We are NOT going to be lectured about national security and American troops by Democrats and the mainstream media who turned the other cheek when the Biden administration, because of their incompetence, left 13 service members DEAD in… pic.twitter.com/CgIKNTf6T3

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) March 26, 2025

The mainstream media, however, is attempting to double down on the emotional triggering of Goldberg's original headline.

And yet, still allow The Atlantic's CLEAR BACKTRACKING as evidenced in it's updated headline to go unreported.

Here's the original article with the obvious in-your-face emotional impact that 'WAR PLANS' being leaked would surely create:

And, after enduring the withering firestorm unleased by the Trump Administration over Goldberg's obvious sensationalistic reporting...

Here's today's *updated* headline for comparison:

Notice how The Atlantic wants to draw you in to focus on the additional screen shots of the conversation, while completely ignoring the subtle shift in their labeling?

If they can keep the public focused on the emotionally powerful -- yet intentionally vague -- screen shots of those HIGH-LEVEL conversations...

And keep people from realizing that everything the Trump Administration is saying is true; nothing classified shared, no 'war plans' were 'leaked'...

Then they can keep the American public on the hook, they can keep calling President Trump 'dangerous' and 'reckless', and they can keep peddling their 'sensationalistic reporting' -- as Hegseth so succinctly summed up in the first video I shared.

Meanwhile, The Atlantic does a true BACKPEDALING, and makes a possible future scenario in a courtroom just a little harder to litigate against them for their slanderous reporting.

Thankfully, the Trump Administration aren't the only ones smart enough to see past it.

We are, and so are most Americans -- as President Trump's re-election proved implicitly!

And this is just one more circumstance of the CHANGES that are happening in our nation playing out, sometimes with those suffering from TDS also suffering from a lagging learning curve.

The fact is things ARE changing.  Justice and transparency are back.

It's just... after years of getting away with virtually EVERYTHING, it is taking the Left-leaning media just as long as the Congressional Democrats to catch up to the fact that their old tricks aren't PROTECTED by the current administration, as they were under the Biden regime.

And the Deep State SWAMP is effectively, if slowly, being drained.

And even if it takes awhile to get to the bottom of these things... that's exactly what is going to happen more often than not, with President Trump and his team now running the show.

I would consider this to still be a developing situation, and I expect far better answers than we've received to date.

And, who knows -- The Atlantic and their 'sensationalistic reporter' might actually have to face the spotlight for any wrongdoing in this situation, if that turns out to be what happened.

Either way, I expect to find out the truth once this is all said and done, because that's what the Trump Administration is promising.

And so far, they have a pretty good track record in keeping their promises.