Pentagon review faults Pete Hegseth over ‘Signalgate,’ sources say

A Pentagon investigation has faulted U.S. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth for using Signal on his personal device to transmit sensitive information about planned strikes in Yemen, saying it could have endangered U.S. troops if intercepted, two people familiar with the document told Reuters on Wednesday.

However, the report by the Pentagon’s independent inspector general did not weigh in on whether the information Hegseth posted was classified at the time, since it acknowledged that he, as the head of the Pentagon, can decide what information is classified and what isn’t, they said.

The review was delivered to lawmakers, who were able to review the report in a classified facility at the Capitol. A partially redacted version of the report was expected to be released publicly later this week.

In a statement, the Pentagon said the review had cleared Hegseth, comments the defence secretary himself echoed later on social media.

“No classified information. Total exoneration. Case closed,” Hegseth said on X.

U.S. President Donald Trump “stands by” Hegseth, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement, adding that the probe affirms that “no classified information was leaked, and operational security was not compromised.”

Journalist added to a chat

In at least two separate Signal chats, Hegseth provided the exact timings of warplane launches and when bombs would drop — before the men and women carrying out those attacks on behalf of the United States were airborne.

Hegseth’s use of the app came to light when a journalist, Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic, was inadvertently added to a Signal text chain by then-national security adviser Mike Waltz. It included U.S. Vice-President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and others, brought together to discuss March 15 military operations against the Iran-backed Houthis.

Goldberg later revealed the details of the chat in an article. When Trump administration officials accused him of exaggerating their importance, he published screenshots of the back-and-forth between Hegseth and other top Trump officials.

Hegseth could be seen in the screenshots texting about specific plans to kill a Houthi militant leader in Yemen two hours before the secret military operation.

Hegseth had also created another Signal chat with 13 people that included his wife and brother where he shared similar details of the same strike, The Associated Press reported.

Signal is encrypted but is not authorized for carrying classified information and is not part of the Pentagon’s secure communications network.

Legal concerns raised

The renewed focus on Hegseth comes at a delicate time for the former Fox News host, as scrutiny intensifies of his leadership overseeing deadly U.S. strikes against suspected drug vessels in the Caribbean.

Lawmakers just opened investigations into a news report that a follow-up strike on an alleged drug-smuggling boat in the Caribbean Sea in September killed survivors after Hegseth issued a verbal order to “kill everybody.”

Hegseth defended the strike as emerging in the “fog of war,” saying he didn’t see any survivors. But he added that he “didn’t stick around” for the rest of the mission and that the admiral in charge “made the right call” in ordering the second strike.

Declined to be interviewed

The inspector general’s report on the Signal chat said the information from the U.S. military had been classified at the time it was transmitted to Hegseth and that it could have put U.S. service members and the mission itself at risk had the chat been intercepted, the sources said.

Hegseth, who repeatedly denied texting war plans and said no classified information was shared, declined to be interviewed by the inspector general’s office for the investigation, the sources said, citing the report.

In a written statement to the inspector general, Hegseth said he was allowed to declassify information however he determined was appropriate and only texted information he did not think posed an operational risk, one of the sources said. He also accused the investigation of being driven by political opponents, even though it was called for by Republican and Democratic lawmakers, the source said.

Hegseth’s past defence of his use of Signal has bewildered Democrats and former U.S. officials, who regard timing and targeting details as some of the most closely held material ahead of a U.S. military campaign.

If Houthi leaders knew a strike was coming, they might have been able to flee, possibly to crowded areas where targeting is more difficult and the number of potential civilian casualties might be deemed too high to proceed.

However, the chat did not appear to include any names or precise locations of Houthi militants being targeted or to disclose information that could have been used to target U.S. troops carrying out the operation.

The inspector general noted that Hegseth only provided a small number of his Signal messages for review, leaving the investigation to rely on screenshots published by the Atlantic, the source said, citing the report.