Hegseth denies sharing Yemen strike info in Signal chat with wife and lawyer

US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth rejects allegations he leaked military strike details on Yemen via private Signal messages.

U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth looks on during the annual Easter Egg Roll on the South Lawn of the White House, on April 21, 2025, in Washington, DC. Photo by Brendan Smialowski/AFP

By Anna Fadiah and Hayu Andini

US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Monday dismissed new allegations that he disclosed sensitive information regarding military strikes in Yemen using the encrypted Signal messaging app. The reported leak allegedly involved a private chat group that included his wife, brother, and personal lawyer—none of whom were officially cleared to access classified operational details. The incident has sparked a wave of criticism and triggered an internal Pentagon investigation, as the administration faces mounting pressure to respond.

Controversy over private messaging escalates

The uproar began when The Atlantic reported last month that its editor-in-chief had accidentally been added to a Signal chat group discussing the March 15 strikes on Yemen. The group reportedly included senior national security figures such as Hegseth and National Security Advisor Mike Waltz. The revelation raised concerns over the potential mishandling of military intelligence and prompted a Pentagon inspector general review.

The situation intensified over the weekend after The New York Times published a follow-up report stating that Hegseth had also shared information about the same Yemen strikes in a second Signal chat group. According to the report, this group included Hegseth’s wife Jennifer—formerly a Fox News producer and now a journalist—his brother Phil, and attorney Tim Parlatore. Both Phil and Parlatore are said to be affiliated with Pentagon-related roles, although their precise clearances remain unclear. All these details were attributed to anonymous sources within the Department of Defense.

Hegseth pushes back against anonymous accusations

Hegseth forcefully denied the allegations during a press appearance at the White House. “This is what the media does. They take anonymous sources from disgruntled former employees and then they try to slash and burn people and ruin their reputations,” he stated.

He also dismissed the report as “old news” and framed the allegations as politically motivated smears. “Not going to work with me,” Hegseth said, defending himself as the target of biased reporting and internal resentment.

His defense aligns with a broader strategy of rejecting mainstream media narratives, a tactic often employed by members of President Donald Trump's administration. Hegseth has consistently characterized himself as an outsider within the Pentagon who is unafraid to challenge institutional norms—an image that plays well with Trump's political base but has stirred controversy within defense circles.

White House stands by embattled defense chief

Despite the controversy, the White House offered its full support for Hegseth. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that “the president absolutely has confidence in Secretary Hegseth,” adding that President Trump had spoken with him earlier that day and “stands behind him.”

The statement of support comes amid calls from some former staff members for Hegseth’s removal. Over the weekend, three former employees released a joint statement denouncing their dismissals and suggesting that internal culture under Hegseth had become toxic. Notably, his former Pentagon press secretary hinted in a media interview that Hegseth should be replaced for the sake of operational integrity.

The Signal app at the center of military communications debate

Signal, a widely used encrypted messaging application, has become a flashpoint in the debate over secure communications in government. While it is lauded for its privacy protections, its use for discussing potentially sensitive or classified material has raised red flags in multiple government agencies. The app’s end-to-end encryption makes it nearly impossible to monitor without user cooperation, adding layers of complexity to investigations.

Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell attempted to downplay the issue, accusing the media—specifically The New York Times—of pushing an anti-Trump agenda. “There was no classified information in any Signal chat, no matter how many ways they try to write the story,” Parnell said, declining to provide additional evidence or clarify the nature of the information that was shared.

Critics call for accountability and transparency

Security experts have urged the Pentagon to conduct a thorough and transparent investigation. While not all information related to military operations is classified, sharing even unclassified operational plans or timelines can endanger missions and troops, they argue. The inspector general’s review of Hegseth’s use of Signal is ongoing, but public calls for accountability have continued to mount.

Retired military officials and defense analysts have also questioned whether personal communications—especially with individuals not clearly cleared for such discussions—reflect a breakdown in internal security protocols. “Even if no classified information was technically shared, the appearance of impropriety damages credibility,” one former intelligence officer commented anonymously.

Political implications in a volatile election year

The Hegseth Yemen Signal chat leak comes at a politically sensitive time. With the 2026 midterm elections on the horizon, President Trump and his administration are working to maintain control of national security messaging. Any perception of disarray, especially regarding military operations abroad, could be leveraged by political opponents.

Trump’s decision to continue backing Hegseth signals a determination to stand by loyal appointees, even amid controversy. But it also risks further alienating institutional figures within the Pentagon who may view this as another example of undermining traditional norms in the defense establishment.

Larger context of U.S. involvement in Yemen

The controversy also places renewed focus on the United States’ military engagement in Yemen, where American forces have conducted airstrikes targeting Houthi rebel groups allegedly backed by Iran. The March 15 strikes, in particular, were part of a broader campaign to disrupt Houthi missile capabilities, according to earlier Pentagon briefings.

Civilian casualties and humanitarian concerns have long plagued U.S. operations in Yemen. Human rights organizations have often criticized both the scope and the opacity of the mission. The idea that operational details were potentially leaked to unauthorized individuals outside official channels may fuel additional scrutiny of the campaign's legal and ethical basis.

Ongoing investigation may shape Hegseth’s future

As the Pentagon inspector general continues its investigation, the future of Secretary Hegseth remains uncertain. While he enjoys support from the White House, further revelations—especially if substantiated—could force the administration’s hand. Investigators will likely examine message logs, user access permissions, and whether any national security protocols were violated.

In the meantime, the Defense Secretary’s credibility may hinge on his ability to control the narrative and demonstrate transparency. However, with more former staffers speaking out and pressure mounting from watchdog groups, maintaining that narrative may become increasingly difficult.