What to know today
- President Donald Trump announced 25% tariffs on all automobiles imported into the United States starting next week. He also said China might get "a little reduction in tariffs" if it agrees to a TikTok deal the Trump administration brokered.
- A federal appeals court this afternoon denied the Trump administration's request to resume deportations under the Alien Enemies Act.
- National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe faced a grilling from House Intelligence Committee members about a group chat among Cabinet members that revealed sensitive information about military strikes in Yemen to the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, who was mistakenly included in the discussion.
- The Atlantic released a transcript of the group chat about the U.S. strikes this morning. In the messages, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth specified types of U.S. military aircraft and the timing of recent airstrikes against Houthi militias in Yemen, but the texts did not include specific target information.
UAW, which endorsed Harris, praises Trump auto tariffs
The United Auto Workers praised the 25% tariff Trump announced for automobile imports today, saying in a statement that it could lead to more blue-collar jobs, spur investment in domestic manufacturing and correct trade agreements it characterized as "allowing automakers to offshore U.S. jobs and drive a race to the bottom."
“We applaud the Trump administration for stepping up to end the free trade disaster that has devastated working class communities for decades. Ending the race to the bottom in the auto industry starts with fixing our broken trade deals, and the Trump administration has made history with today’s actions,” UAW President Shawn Fain said in a statement also calling for stronger rights for all autoworkers.
“These tariffs are a major step in the right direction for autoworkers and blue-collar communities across the country, and it is now on the automakers, from the Big Three to Volkswagen and beyond, to bring back good union jobs to the U.S,” Fain added.
The praise for Trump marks a shift in tone for a union that emerged as one of his loudest critics last year, when it ultimately decided to endorse Democratic nominee Kamala Harris.
In remarks at the Democratic National Convention, Fain praised Harris as a "fighter for the working class" and called Trump a "scab," in part for his visit to a nonunion manufacturing plant in Michigan during a campaign stop.
"The UAW has been clear: we will work with any politician, regardless of party, who is willing to reverse decades of working-class people going backwards in the most profitable times in our nation’s history," Fain said in his statement today.
The union called for the Trump administration to next renegotiate the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which it said "perpetuated NAFTA’s harmful effects by increasing the trade deficit with Mexico and allowing automakers to offshore U.S. jobs."
Trump negotiated the USMCA during his first term.
Secret Service reunites child with parents after he slips through White House fence
There was another White House security breach today, just not the kind that’s likely to spark talk of congressional inquiries.
Secret Service personnel carried a small child off the White House grounds after he slipped onto the property through security fencing.
Video captured by NBC News' Peter Alexander shows several agents carrying the child, who's seen waving, on the North Lawn of the White House, where he was quickly reunited with his parents.
"Just after 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday, U.S. Secret Service Uniformed Division officers observed a child slip through the White House north fence," the agency said in a statement. "Officers quickly reunited the child with their parents without incident."
Trump floats tariff reduction if China agrees to TikTok deal
Trump said this evening that he might give China “a little reduction in tariffs” if its government approves a TikTok deal his administration brokered.
“China is going to have to play a role in that,” he said at a news conference at the White House, “possibly in the form of an approval, maybe, and I think they’ll do that.”
Trump signed a memorandum last month calling for “fair and reciprocal” trade tariffs on all major U.S. trading partners, including longtime allies. He previously announced that April 2, when sweeping trade levies are announced, would be “Liberation Day in America.”
TikTok’s fate in the United States has been up in the air since last year, following the passage of a bipartisan law signed by President Joe Biden. The legislation forces the platform’s Chinese owner, ByteDance, to sell the app to a non-Chinese buyer or face a nationwide ban.
'Trump is at it again': E.U. and Canadian leaders slam new Trump auto tariffs
Canadian and European leaders are slamming Trump's announcement today of 25% tariffs on all automobiles made outside the United States.
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said at a news conference that the move was a "direct attack" on Canadian workers. He said he is awaiting further details to assess the full impact the tariffs will have on the Canadian economy, but he called them "entirely unjustified."
"This will hurt us, but through this period, by being together, we will emerge stronger," Carney said, adding that he is considering additional retaliatory tariffs and that a conversation with Trump would be "appropriate."
Doug Ford, the premier of Ontario, said the tariffs will "do nothing more than increase costs for hard-working American families."
"President Trump is at it again," Ford said on X. "His 25 per cent tariffs on cars and light trucks will do nothing more than increase costs for hard-working American families. U.S. markets are already on the decline as the president causes more chaos and uncertainty. He’s putting American jobs at risk."
Ford said he would "fully support the federal government preparing retaliatory tariffs to show that we’ll never back down."
Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, said the tariffs will be "bad for businesses, worse for consumers, in the US and the EU."
"The EU will continue to seek negotiated solutions, while safeguarding its economic interests," she said on X.
Trump calls questions about Signal chat group a 'witch hunt'
Taking questions in the Oval Office, Trump denounced continued coverage of the Signal chat leak as “a witch hunt” and defended Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
Trump said of his national security adviser, Michael Waltz, “I guess he said he claimed responsibility.”
“I always thought it was Mike,” he said, adding that Hegseth "had nothing to do with it."
Asked whether classified information was shared in the Signal group chat, which inadvertently included a journalist, Trump responded: “That’s what I’ve heard. I don’t know. I’m not sure. You have to ask the various people involved. I really don’t know.”
He said he would ask Hegseth to review whether any of the information in the messages should have been classified.
Waltz last night said on Fox News that he takes "full responsibility" for putting together the text group, which accidentally included The Atlantic magazine's editor-in-chief.
GOP senator criticizes use of Signal to discuss military plans
More Republican lawmakers are weighing in on the use of a Signal chat by several top Trump administration leaders to discuss imminent military plans, with some sharpening their criticisms of the U.S. officials use of the platform.
Leaving a Senate Intelligence Committee closed-door meeting this afternoon, Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., told reporters that there’s “no rationale” for a detailed conversation about military strikes to have taken place on a commercial messaging app.
“I can’t see any rationale for the kind of conversation that took place over Signal, for not taking place in a more secure manner than that. I think that’s hard to explain,” he said.
Asked whether he thinks the information that was discussed was classified, Moran said: “Certainly, the topic is of a nature in which you would not want our adversaries to know. You certainly wouldn’t want the details known, and this form of communication allowed that to happen.”
Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., dodged when he was asked how the information in the chat was not classified, telling reporters that the American people “can decide for themselves.” Rounds said that he believes mistakes were made but that he doesn’t “expect to see it happen again.”
"I think it was a real learning experience for this group of leaders," he said.
Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., defended Hegseth and other national security officials involved in the group chat, saying there’s no issue with discussing sensitive information via Signal. But he did call it a “mistake” to include a reporter in the chat.
“I just fail to see what the big deal is here, other than that a reporter was inadvertently added,” Hawley said.
In fiery ruling, judge denies Trump request to recuse herself in law firm case
The judge presiding over a law firm's case challenging Trump's executive order punishing it for its work for Democrats denied the administration's bid to disqualify herself from the case, saying today that it was based on "speculation" and "innuendo."
"When the U.S. Department of Justice engages in this rhetorical strategy of ad hominem attack, the stakes become much larger than only the reputation of the targeted federal judge. This strategy is designed to impugn the integrity of the federal judicial system and blame any loss on the decision-maker rather than fallacies in the substantive legal arguments presented," U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell said in a sharply worded ruling.
The Justice Department had asked Howell to recuse herself from the Perkins Coie case after she issued a temporary restraining order barring some of Trump's directives against the firm, saying she had "repeatedly demonstrated partiality against and animus towards the President.” One of the previous cases the Justice Department pointed to involved comments she made when she formally dismissed charges against Jan. 6 defendants who'd been pardoned by Trump, arguing she had exhibited "hostility" toward Trump and "disdain for his supporters."
Howell wrote that the Jan. 6 defendants "were not identified, investigated, and prosecuted for their political beliefs or support for President Trump but because they engaged in offense conduct during the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol that allegedly violated federal criminal laws."
"Their conduct—not their beliefs and not their political views—was the reason for their criminal charges," she wrote.
Howell also took issue with the Justice Department's claim that every lawsuit it has faced challenging Trump's agenda across the country is "meritless."
“This blanket denigration of the merits of all the lawsuits filed across the country certainly reflects palpable frustration with court rulings issued to pause, temper, or reverse Trump Administration actions, but this is a testament to the fact that this country has an independent judiciary that adheres to an impartial adjudication process, without being swayed merely because the federal government appears on one side of a case and the President wishes a particular result,” Howell said.
She said that in the Perkins Coie case, both sides "will have the opportunity to present relevant evidence and legal arguments which will receive full, fair, and impartial consideration, as does every case before this Court. To the extent the parties disagree with the final judgment entered, the normal judicial process of appeal applies."
Trump to impose 25% tariff on all automobiles brought into the U.S.
Trump said today that he was imposing a 25% tariff on all autos coming into the United States.
Trump said he expects auto firms to relocate to the United States and build new sites or expand existing ones. He hit out at companies that have in recent decades opened facilities in Canada and Mexico at what he said were the expense of U.S. workers.
“What we’re going to be doing is a 25% tariff on all cars that are not made in the United States,” Trump said. “So we’ll effectively be charging a 25% tariff, but if you build your car in the United States, there is no tariff.”
Trump said he anticipates automakers will build new sites in the United States or quickly expand existing plants. Shares of the top U.S. automakers fell sharply in after-hours trading on the announcement. Ford Motor shares dropped 2%, General Motors tumbled 2.3%, and Jeep owner Stellantis declined 3%.
Senate Armed Services leaders pushing for expedited report on Signal group chat
Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Jack Reed, D-R.I., said today he expects a "hopefully quick" investigation into the Signal chat several administration officials used to discuss imminent military plans.
Reed, alongside committee chair Roger Wicker, R-Miss., requested that the Pentagon inspector general perform an expedited investigation into Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s use of a Signal chat to discuss sensitive plans and determine whether any of the information shared in it should have been kept on more secure channels.
“An expedited one shouldn’t take that long, really, because it’s a series of five or six chats and then some subsidiary material, hopefully quick,” Reed told NBC News, adding the bipartisan focus on the report by the committee's leadership "signals how important it is to the Senate to get this done."
Wicker said he will ask the administration for a classified briefing on the Signal chat for Armed Services Committee members. He said he would request that a "senior person" perform the briefing, which would take place in a SCIF, or Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility.
“We will want someone that that actually has the facts and can speak on behalf of the administration," Wicker said.
Reed deflected when he was asked whether Hegseth, who detailed plans for an imminent U.S. strike in the Signal chat, should resign.
“What we’re doing and together with Sen. Wicker, is calling for a very expedited IG investigation to establish the facts and then be able to make a much more judicious decision,” Reed said.
Trump says he is the 'fertilization president' while speaking to a crowd of women at the White House
Trump said in remarks at a Women’s History Month event at the White House that he would be known as the “fertilization president.”
“We’re gonna have tremendous goodies in the bag for women, too,” Trump said. “The women, between the fertilization and all the other things we’re talking about, it’s gonna be great. Fertilization. I’m still very proud of it. I don’t care. I’ll be known as the fertilization president, and that’s OK.”
Trump signed an executive order last month that seeks to lower the out-of-pocket cost of in vitro fertilization, a medical procedure designed to help women facing infertility become pregnant. IVF treatments are typically reserved as a last resort after less expensive fertility treatments have proved unsuccessful.
Trump expressed his support for the treatment throughout the 2024 campaign cycle after it became a flashpoint following an Alabama Supreme Court decision that held frozen embryos could be considered children.
The order, titled Expanding Access to In Vitro Fertilization, instructs the White House domestic policy team to provide "a list of policy recommendations on protecting IVF access and aggressively reducing out-of-pocket and health plan costs for IVF treatment."
Appeals court denies Trump challenge in Alien Enemies Act case
A federal appeals court today denied the administration's bid to lift U.S. District Judge James Boasberg's order banning it from using Trump's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act to deport people alleged to be Venezuelan gang members.
In a 2-1 ruling, the appeals court panel said despite the administration's position, Boasberg did have the authority to hear the case, allowing the deportations to remain halted while Boasberg hears the case.
"At the outset, the government’s suggestion that judicial review of the Alien Enemies Act is categorically foreclosed is incorrect," U.S. Circuit Judge Karen Henderson wrote. “At this early stage, the government has yet to show a likelihood of success on the merits.”
Judge Patricia Millett, in a concurring opinion, said, “There is neither jurisdiction nor reason for this court to interfere at this very preliminary stage or to allow the government to singlehandedly moot the Plaintiffs’ claims by immediately removing them beyond the reach of their lawyers or the court.”
The dissenting judge, Trump appointee Justin Walker, sided with the administration, saying it “likely faces irreparable harm to ongoing, highly sensitive international diplomacy and national-security operations. The Plaintiffs, meanwhile, need only file for habeas in the proper court to seek appropriate relief.”
Senate Republicans warm to hiking the debt limit in their sweeping party-line bill
Senate Republicans are warming up to the idea of including a debt ceiling increase in their big party-line bill to advance Trump’s agenda.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has told Republican senators that he’s now open to raising the debt limit in a broader spending package, according to a source familiar with his conversations. That’s a shift for Thune in the direction of a budget blueprint adopted by House Republicans, which included a $4 trillion debt limit hike.
The Senate’s separate budget plan, by contrast, avoided the issue, one of several major conflicts between the two measures to provide funding for Trump’s policy priorities. But now, as the Trump administration pushes the chambers to resolve their differences, some Republican senators are changing their tune after having initially preferred to address the debt limit question separately.
Top Republicans say they’re out of the loop as DOGE downsizes Social Security Administration
Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency is moving to downsize the Social Security Administration with office closures, cutbacks on phone services and new rules requiring in-person visits for some prospective beneficiaries to register.
And DOGE is making those changes without consulting or notifying some of the most senior lawmakers on Capitol Hill who oversee Social Security, including GOP allies of Trump.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth spoke to reporters about The Atlantic's release of messages from a Signal chat about military strikes in Yemen that inadvertently included a journalist. Hegseth said the messages had "no classified information" and disputed how the communications were being characterized.
Rubio says 'someone made a big mistake' by adding The Atlantic's editor-in-chief to the Signal chat
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said this afternoon that someone made a mistake in adding The Atlantic's editor-in-chief to the Signal chat about the military attack on the Houthis in Yemen.
"Obviously, someone made a mistake. Someone made a big mistake and added a journalist. Nothing against journalists, but you ain’t supposed to be on that thing. So they got on there and this happened," Rubio said during a trip to Kingston, Jamaica.
Rubio said he contributed to the chat twice — once when he identified his chief of staff as his point of contact and second when he congratulated members of the team in the chat after the attack on the Houthis.
"Obviously, that was a mistake and that shouldn’t have happened," he said, adding "that none of the information on there at any point threatened the operation or the lives of our servicemen. And in fact, it was a very successful operation."
Asked if the information shared in the Signal chat was classified, Rubio said: "Well, the Pentagon says it was not. And not only did they said it was not, they made very clear that it didn’t put in danger anyone’s life or the mission. There was no intelligence information. And understand, when this story first broke, they were sort of alluding to, were there war maps? ... There were no war plans on there."
Rubio said that the White House is reviewing what occurred.
'Presidents do not control elections': NAACP slams Trump's executive order on election administration
The NAACP warned against the sweeping executive order Trump signed yesterday that aims to overhaul U.S. election administration and implement requirements controversial among voting rights groups, including requiring voters to provide documented proof of their U.S. citizenship before voting in federal elections.
“Trump’s so-called executive order is blatantly unconstitutional and designed to disenfranchise millions of lawful, eligible voters. In America, Presidents do not control elections,” NAACP President Derrick Johnson said. “Trump is clearly pushing the boundaries of executive power, and seeing how much he can get away with. It’s time for the public and all elected officials to speak up as loudly as they can before our country is stolen from its people. If we hand the president control over how elections are run in America, we no longer live in a democracy.”
The order, called Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections, moves key election administration decisions typically left to the states under control of the executive branch. It threatens to withhold federal funding, which states rely on to safely and securely administer elections, from states that do not comply with the order’s provisions.
Trump’s order explicitly targets mail-in voting, which the president has baselessly claimed to be rife with fraud, despite encouraging his own voter base to vote absentee throughout the 2024 campaign cycle after realizing its popularity among registered Republicans.
Currently, decisions about whether to accept mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day but received at county recorder’s offices after it has passed are left to states to decide. Trump’s order seeks to change that by mandating that states must reject mail-in ballots unless they are “cast and received” by Election Day.
The order is largely expected to face legal challenges over its constitutionality, since the Constitution grants states broad authority to decide how to administer elections.
“This isn’t just another executive order—it is a test to see if we allow the president to crown himself,” Johnson said in the statement.
Witkoff denies having a personal device in Russia as Democrats push for answers on group chat
Witkoff denied having a personal device with him during his trip to Russia, saying in a post to X that he had only a government-issued secure phone during his travels and suggesting that was why he did not comment in the group chat for a period of time.
Witkoff's post was responding to an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal, which referenced media reports about Witkoff "receiving these messages on the commercial app while in Moscow."
He did not confirm in the post whether he had been using Signal on a government device or personal device. But when recounting why he was silent for portions of the group chat discussion, Witkoff said it was "because I had no access to my personal devices until I returned from my trip."
Witkoff's post comes after Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., sent a letter to Gabbard and Witkoff requesting information about their use of Signal on personal devices by March 31.
"The national security breach caused by sharing sensitive military information over an unclassified messaging application is compounded by the fact that both of you, who are prime targets for foreign intelligence services, were traveling in high-threat environments that pose significant counterintelligence risks to U.S. personnel and devices," Schiff said in the letter.
NBC News has previously reported that cybersecurity experts say government phones are generally considered more secure than personal devices.
White House says Americans should trust Pete Hegseth on whether something is classified
In an extended back-and-forth about the military plans group chat, Karoline Leavitt directed reporters to comments by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth asserting that the contents were not classified — even as messages seemingly shared by Hegseth detailed the timing of an attack against the Houthis, and some of the weapons used, shortly before it occurred.
“It’s not just me saying that,” Leavitt said. “It’s the secretary of defense himself who is saying this as well. And he put out a very strong statement earlier today listing all of the things that were not included in that message that he sent to the group. And again, this message, there was no classified information transmitted. There were no more plans discussed.”
Pressed by a reporter on why the strike launch times wouldn't be classified, Leavitt said, "I would defer to you to the secretary of defense’s statement he put out this morning. There were various reasons he listed, things that were not included in that messaging thread that were not classified."
"Going back to the American public: Do you trust the secretary of defense ... or do you trust Jeffrey Goldberg?" she added.
In one of several of the messages released by The Atlantic, Hegseth at one point shared in all caps with the group that “this is when the first bombs will definitely drop.”
Leavitt maintained that nothing classified had been discussed by the group of top officials in the chat.
“We have said all along that no classified material was sent on this messaging thread,” she said. “There were no locations, no sources or methods revealed, and there were certainly no war plans discussed.”
Press briefing ends after 20 minutes
The White House press briefing ended after about 20 minutes, which is shorter than usual.
Leavitt was asked numerous questions about the Signal group chat.
Supreme Court upholds Biden regulations on ‘ghost gun’ kits
The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a Biden administration effort to regulate “ghost gun” kits that allow people to easily obtain parts needed to assemble firearms from online sellers.
The decision by a court that often backs gun rights resolves the legal dispute over whether the kits can be regulated the same way as other firearms.
Karoline Leavitt says Trump will announce auto tariffs today
Trump will announce tariffs on the auto industry today at 4 p.m., according to White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt.
Leavitt said during today's news conference that Trump would hold a news conference in the Oval Office to make the announcement.
Sen. Adam Schiff requests information from Gabbard and Witkoff about their travel during the Signal chat
Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., is requesting information from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff about whether they used Signal on personal devices as part of their jobs and is questioning whether the two were abroad during the chat involving The Atlantic's editor-in-chief.
In a letter to the two Trump administration officials, Schiff wrote that he has grave concerns about their "participation in highly sensitive Principals Committee deliberations about a planned military operation using the commercial messaging service Signal while you were both on foreign travel."
“The national security breach caused by sharing sensitive military information over an unclassified messaging application is compounded by the fact that both of you, who are prime targets for foreign intelligence services, were traveling in high-threat environments that pose significant counterintelligence risks to U.S. personnel and devices," Schiff wrote.
Schiff noted that public records show that Gabbard was on a multination tour to Asia that included stops in Japan, Thailand and India during the time of the Signal chat involving The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg.
The Democratic senator also said in his letter that reporting has revealed that Witkoff was in Russia at the time, meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
"This means that Mr. Witkoff appeared to be receiving sensitive national intelligence information while in Moscow and, based on this timeline, may have been in direct meetings with the Kremlin when some of the messages were exchanged," Schiff said.
Schiff asked that they respond to a number of questions in the letter by March 31, including whether they have used Signal for work-related purposes on their personal devices since Trump's inauguration.
Trump administration asks Supreme Court to weigh in on Education Department funds
The Trump administration is asking the Supreme Court to allow it to terminate about $600 million in Education Department grants.
The administration previously tried to terminate the grants, but a district judge blocked the move and ordered that the administration immediately reinstate the funds. The Trump administration is now asking the Supreme Court to reverse the lower court's decision.
"This case exemplifies a flood of recent suits that raise the question: 'Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever)' millions in taxpayer dollars," the government wrote.
The group that originally sued to block the grant termination, authorized by Congress, argued that the funds are necessary to "address nationwide teacher shortages and improve teacher quality by educating, placing, and supporting new teachers in hard-to-staff schools, especially in rural and other underserved communities, and in hard-to-staff subjects, such as math and special education."
Senate Armed Services Committee seeks 'expedited' IG report on top Trump officials' chat revelations
Senate Armed Services Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss., told reporters today that he and ranking member Jack Reed, D-R.I., are asking the administration for an “expedited” inspector general report into a Trump Cabinet-level chat that revealed military strike information to a journalist who was inadvertently included in the discussion.
“We are signing a letter today asking the administration to expedite an IG report back to the committee," Wicker said. "We’re sending a similar letter to the administration in an attempt to get ground truth. We certainly want to know if the transcript that has been published is accurate.”
Wicker said he is confident the Pentagon will follow through with a report despite Trump's firing of the Defense Department's inspector general, along with several other of the independent watchdogs at major departments, shortly after he took office.
Asked if he thinks the information discussed in the Signal app chat was, or should have been, classified, Wicker said, “The information as published recently appears to me to be of such a sensitive nature that, based on my knowledge, I would have wanted it classified.”
Wicker said he will also request a classified briefing for committee members from a “senior person” in the administration. Asked if that person should be Hegseth, Wicker said, “We will want someone that that actually has the facts and can speak on behalf of the administration.”
House Intelligence Committee hearing adjourned ahead of private session
The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has adjourned the public portion of its annual hearing on worldwide threats.
The committee will now move into a closed session where top U.S. intelligence officials will continue their testimony.
Poll: Majority unhappy with Trump’s appointees, as some face heat over group chat with military plans
A majority of American voters are generally disappointed with the people President Donald Trump has appointed to posts in his administration, according to an NBC News poll earlier this month — a record share in a question NBC News has measured at the start of four previous administrations.
The survey was conducted March 7-11, before The Atlantic published a story Monday revealing that a number of senior Trump administration officials — including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, national security adviser Mike Waltz and others — participated in a Signal chat thread about plans to launch airstrikes against Houthi militants, in which Hegseth shared plans including the timing and types of aircraft used.
The Signal thread included The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, as well as Hegseth, Waltz, Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and others.
Rep. Chrissy Houlahan urges Gabbard to investigate Signal chat, says it is 'likely to be more than just this chat'
Gabbard defended the group chat by reiterating an argument that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth can declassify information.
"Secretary Hegseth has the classification and declassification authority over DOD information," Gabbard said, referring to the Defense Department.
Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, D-Penn., urged Gabbard to investigate the situation, speculating that it is "likely to be more than just this chat."
Gabbard says she stands by her recollection of the group chat
Rep. Jimmy Gomez, D-Calif., pressed Gabbard about whether she stood by her testimony before the Senate yesterday that she did not recall discussions of specific weapons, timing or targets.
"My response in the Senate yesterday, yes, I stand by that response," Gabbard said. "Obviously the release of the screenshots that came from that chat group today were a refresher on what happened. As I said earlier, I was not involved with that portion of the chat, so it did not come to my recollection yesterday."
Gomez noted shortly after that the administration has said they want to "drain the swamp." "But you have become that swamp in a matter of days," Gomez said. "Not weeks or months. Days."
Senate intelligence chairman defends Hegseth after release of Signal chat transcript
Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton, R-Ark., defended the Trump administration officials who participated in the Signal chat that revealed sensitive military information to The Atlantic, even after the contents of the discussion were released this morning by the magazine.
Cotton said he doesn't think Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth broke the law in discussing pending attacks in Yemen.
“There was no locations listed there," Cotton said. "There were no sources of methods. There’s no specific targets. Certainly, there was nothing called war plans, which was an embellishment and exaggeration by a known left-wing partisan opponent of the president.”
Cotton also said he doesn’t see his committee investigating the security breach because “to the extent there was any allegation of classified information here, that was not information that was coming from either Tulsi Gabbard or John Ratcliffe. So, as far as I know, it’s outside of our jurisdiction.”
When pressed on whether intelligence officers or the Department of Defense should share this kind of information on Signal in the future, Cotton noted that Ratcliffe said yesterday that the Signal messaging app had been installed on his computer at CIA.
“I’m sure the administration, like all administrations, will continue to review how it communicates inside and deliberates consistent with the requirements of operational security and presidential record-keeping rules," he said. "But I think here the real story is the incredibly successful strikes in Yemen that has protected our sailors and protected our friends in Israel and international shipping, and that’s where we should focus.”
Rep. Jimmy Gomez and Ratcliffe engage in a shouting match over Hegseth's drinking habits
Rep. Jimmy Gomez, D-Calif., questioned Ratcliffe and Gabbard about Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s drinking habits during his line of questioning about the Signal group chat information leak at this morning’s House Intelligence Committee hearing.
“The main person who was involved in this thread, that a lot of people want to talk to, is Secretary of Defense Hegseth, and a lot of questions were brought up regarding his drinking habits in his confirmation hearing,” Gomez said. “To your knowledge, do you know whether Pete Hegseth had been drinking before he leaked classified information?”
Ratcliffe denied that Hegseth had been drinking before texting detailed plans of the strike in Yemen over Signal and called Gomez’s line of questioning “offensive.”
“You don’t want to focus on the good work the CIA is doing, the intelligence community…” Ratcliffe said in a raised voice, prompting Gomez to shout over him to “reclaim his time” for questions.
“I have huge respect for the CIA, huge respect for men and women in uniform,” Gomez said. “But this was a question that’s on the top of minds of every American right. He stood in front of the podium in Europe holding a drink. So of course, we want to know if his performance is compromised.”
Hearing on fired probationary workers ends without a ruling
The judge presiding over a case alleging federal probationary workers were fired unlawfully said he needs more time to consider whether to issue an injunction in the case, and how broad such an issue should be.
U.S. District Judge James Brehar asked the plaintiffs — a coalition of states with Democratic attorneys general — to explain “why nothing less than a national injunction forbidding what happened here would be sufficient.”
The judge earlier this month signed a temporary order directing the government to rehire thousands of federal workers, after finding they were mass firings and that agencies hadn't followed procedure in notifying the states beforehand. That order expires Friday night, although Bredar suggested he might temporarily extend it while he works on his decision on a longer-lasting injunction.
“This court has great reluctance to issue a national injunction,” he said at a hearing in Baltimore today. “That doesn’t mean the court won’t enter one if the circumstances and law require it. I’m going to resist doing it. You’re going to have to show me that it is essential to remedying any harms that your clients are specifically experiencing.”
The judge asked the government how he could write a more limited preliminary injunction that does not “sweep across the country.”
House Democrat cites Trump classified information language in pushing back on unclassified chat claim
At this morning's House Intelligence Committee hearing, Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., cited the Trump administration's own language in pressing the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency on the administration’s claim that a high-level Signal chat that revealed sensitive information on military strikes was unclassified.
Krishnamoorthi read a Trump administration executive order on classified information, which holds that “information should be classified if its unauthorized disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause damage to national security, including military plans, weapons systems or operations."
“We clearly have weapons systems that have been identified, that is classified information,” Krishnamoorthi said, pointing to a blown-up picture of the plans texted by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in the Signal group chat. “The reason why it’s important that this information not be disclosed is that we don’t want the adversaries to know what’s about to happen.”
.
The DIA director, Lt. Gen. Jeffrey Kruse, argued that the military terms used in Hegseth's texts lacked specific context and could have been used in any number of operations.
But Krishnamoorthi countered that “Secretary Hegsth has disclosed military plans as well as classified information," adding, "He needs to resign immediately and a full investigation needs to be undertaken with regard to whether other similar Signal chats are occurring.”
Rep. Dan Crenshaw makes a joke about emojis in leaked Signal chat
Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, quipped about the emojis used in the Signal chat reacting to the Yemen strikes.
"I will note I always use fire emojis when I see terrorists getting killed," he said.
After the strikes in Yemen, Waltz responded in the group chat with the fist, American flag and fire emojis.
Judge in Alien Enemies Act case to oversee case about Signal chat
The judge who the government has argued can't be trusted with sensitive information in the Alien Enemies Act case has been assigned to a case about top government officials appearing to share sensitive information on the commercial messaging application Signal.
U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg in the District of Columbia has been assigned to oversee the case of American Oversight against top officials involved in a Signal group chat about an attack in Yemen. The lawsuit seeks to make sure the officials are not using the app to get around federal record-keeping requirements.
“Messages in the Signal chat about official government actions, including, but not limited to, national security deliberations, are federal records and must be preserved in accordance with federal statutes, and agency directives, rules, and regulations,” the plaintiffs argue.
Gabbard is one of the defendants in the case, and used the suit as argument for why she couldn't answer some questions about the group chat in today's House hearing.
"As a result of that pending litigation, I'm limited in my ability to comment further" on the case, she testified.
Boasberg is overseeing a separate civil case in which alleged Venezuelan gang members have sued to stop from being deported under Trump's invocation of the rarely used Alien Enemies Act. The administration has refused to answer some of the judge's questions about the initial March 15 deportations in the case and suggested in a filing it did not believe the court could be trusted with such sensitive information.
Trump, meanwhile, has repeatedly bashed the judge for issuing a temporary restraining order in the case.
Negligently disclosing national defense information is illegal — and it doesn't have to be classified
The Espionage Act, the law that often has been used in criminal cases involving leaks or mishandling of classified information, contains a provision making it crime to disclose national defense secrets “through gross negligence.”
The law does not require that the information be classified, because it was written before the classification system existed. The law refers simply to “national defense information.”
The specific provision reads: “(e) whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blue print, plan, map, model, note, or information, relating to the national defense, through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be list, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000, or by imprisonment for not more than two years, or both.”
Brad Moss, an attorney whose practice is devoted to issues of security clearances and classified information, said that is “the most reasonably applicable provision from the Espionage Act both for Secretary Hegseth and for national security adviser Waltz,” referring to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and top Trump aide Mike Waltz, who took part in a high-level group chat onYemen strike plans that inadvertently included The Atlantic's editor-in-chief.
This provision was cited by critics of the decision by the FBI not to recommend criminal charges against Hillary Clinton in connection with the classified information she and her aides discussed on an unsecure private email system.
“In order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require,” legal scholar Andrew McCarthy wrote for National Review, including bold type for emphasis. “The added intent element, moreover, makes no sense: The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing."
Moss said another law that seems to apply here is 18 USC 1924, which makes it a crime to remove classified information to retain it “at an unauthorized location.” While the law does require the material in question to be classified, Moss said there could be no doubt that the material disclosed in the Trump administration officials' group chat was classified.
“There’s no way any reasonable person would think that military operational details or real time intelligence about military strikes is not classified, and if they do, they’re not qualified to hold senior positions in the U.S. government,” he said.
Under normal circumstances, Moss said, the DNI would be conducting a damage assessment to figure out exactly information was shared in these chats on a non-government platform and to determine what information reached the reporter, and likely a criminal referral to the Justice Department would follow.
Moss said he does not think that will happen under this administration.
Trump officials have repeatedly said the messages in the Signal app chat included no classified information, and in testimony before the House Intelligence Committee this morning, Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, continued to insist on that point. Gabbard also said the National Security Council was conducting a review of the incident.
There is precedent for high-level officials getting in trouble for leaks or mishandling secrets. When the name of an undercover CIA officer was leaked during the George W. Bush administration, a special prosecutor was appointed that resulted in criminal charges against the vice president’s chief of staff, Scooter Libby. In recent times, former CIA Director John Deutsch and former national security adviser Sandy Berger were among those disciplined for mishandling incidents. And former CIA Director David Petraeus was prosecuted a decade ago after he gave notebooks containing military secrets to someone writing a book about him.
Rep. Joaquin Castro says it's a 'lie' to say information in the Signal chat would not have been classified
Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-Texas, said it was a "lie" to say that information discussed in the Signal chat would not be considered classified.
Castro asked National Security Agency Director Timothy Haugh whether similar information intercepted from China or Russia would have been considered classified information.
"We would classify based off of our sources and methods," Haugh answered.
Earlier, Castro said that "the idea that this information, if it was presented to our committee, would not be classified, y'all know is a lie."
"That's ridiculous. I've seen things much less sensitive be presented to us with high classification, and to say that it isn't is a lie to the country," he continued.
The government has repeatedly said there was no classified information in the group chat.
Top House intel Democrat presses Gabbard over her reposting Russian state media contributor on X
The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., pressed National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard on her reposting of tweets from a known right-wing Russian state media personality despite representing the United States intelligence community on the world stage in her official capacity.
“I have one last question for you, because I think people really listen to what you have to say,” Himes said. "You, on March 15, as DNI, retweeted a post from Ian Miles Cheong, who is listed on RT, that’s Russia Today’s website, as ‘a political and cultural commentator’ who has contributed content to RT since at least 2022.”
Russia Today is a known source of Russian state propaganda and has long been used as a tool of soft power to promote Russian interests on the world stage. The Department of Justice last year accused the platform of covertly paying pro-Trump influencers.
“Do you think that it’s responsible for you as head of the intelligence community and the principal presidential intelligence advisor, to retweet posts from individuals affiliated with Russian state media?” Himes asked.
Gabbard, who was grilled by Senators during her confirmation hearing over past comments defending Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, argued that because the retweet came from her personal account, it presents no conflict of interest with her official role as intelligence director.
“I maintain my First Amendment rights to be able to express my own personal views on different issues,” Gabbard said.
Cheong posted his reaction to the exchange on X, saying “DNI Tulsi Gabbard shared my post on the shutdown of the US Agency for Global Media, which operated the propaganda outfits Voice of America and RFERL.”
Gabbard says Signal chat conversation was 'a standard update to the national security cabinet'
Gabbard addressed the Signal controversy in her opening remarks before the House Intelligence Committee, referring to Waltz’s previous comments and noting that he has “taken full responsibility.”
She said Trump's and Waltz's comments yesterday had a "clear message: It was a mistake that a reporter was inadvertently added to a Signal chat with high-level national security principles having a policy discussion about imminent strikes against the Houthis and the effects of the strike."
"National Security advisor has taken full responsibility for this, and the National Security Council is conducting an in-depth review, along with technical experts working to determine how this reporter was inadvertently added to this chat," she added.
Gabbard maintained that classified information was not shared, but called the conversation "candid and sensitive."
"There were no sources, methods, locations or war plans that were shared," she claimed. "This was a standard update to the national security cabinet that was provided alongside updates that were given to foreign partners in the region."
Gabbard also said that Signal is pre-installed on government devices. NBC News has not independently verified this.
She referred to a pending lawsuit as a reason why she would be “limited” in commenting further on the issue.
Testimony raises questions about Hegseth’s handling of secrets and sensitive communications
A contentious Senate hearing yesterday raised questions about how Trump administration officials handle sensitive national security information and communications, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s decision to share a planned U.S. military operation in a group chat.
Of the more than dozen senior U.S. officials on a Signal text chain that was inadvertently leaked to a journalist, Hegseth was the only one who shared details of the planned U.S. airstrikes in Yemen.
House Intel Committee chair says he will not focus on Signal group chat in threats hearing
After welcoming a witness panel composed of some of the same U.S. intelligence officials who were involved in a Signal group chat that leaked military plans to a magazine editor, Rep. Rick Crawford, R-Ark., used his opening remarks at the House Select Committee on Intelligence hearing this morning to slam his Senate colleagues for their focus on the incident in their own intelligence hearing yesterday.
“Yesterday, our colleagues on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence held their hearing on the annual threat assessment,” Crawford said. “And unfortunately, instead of exploring the real and existential threats that face our nation, which is the purpose of this hearing, this issue consumed most of their time, while I will address this topic further in my questions, it’s my sincere hope that we use this hearing to discuss the many foreign threats facing our nation.”
Crawford added that the annual worldwide threats hearings in the House and Senate are intended to provide the American people with the opportunity to hear directly from U.S. intelligence leaders, and focusing too much on the Signal scandal will take away from that opportunity.
“I have deep concerns about the state of our national security,” Crawford said, citing the involvement of North Korean troops in the Russia-Ukraine war, geopolitical tensions with China and the span of Iran-sponsored terrorist groups across the Middle East.
Rep. Jim Himes: It is 'by the awesome grace of God that we are not mourning dead pilots right now'
The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Jim Himes, said that "everyone here knows" that Russian or Chinese officials could have obtained messages where details of a military operation were sent out in a Signal chat, saying it was "by the awesome grace of God that we are not mourning dead pilots right now."
Himes, D-Conn., said that people involved in the chat should "apologize," "own it," and figure out what went wrong and how to prevent it in the future.
"That's not what happened," he added.
Himes also said the U.S. now appears to be on "Team Kremlin," criticizing U.S. officials' perspectives toward the war in Ukraine. He criticized DOGE-related firings and argued that U.S. adversaries "cannot believe their luck."
Customs and Border Protection denies removals and inspections based on 'political beliefs'
The Trump administration says travelers' political beliefs are not influencing it to deny entry, deport or detain travelers from Western nations after a spate of incidents, including some searches of electronic devices.
"Allegations that political beliefs trigger inspections or removals are baseless and irresponsible,” Customs and Border Protection said in a statement.
The French interior minister alleged that a French researcher had been turned away by U.S. border agents earlier this month after they found messages critical of the Trump administration on his phone. Another case this month involved a Rhode Island doctor, Rasha Alawieh, who was deported to Lebanon despite having a valid U.S. visa.
Both media searches "followed all policies and protocols," CBP Assistant Commissioner Hilton Beckham told NBC News in a statement. Claims that the agency is “searching more electronic media due to the administration change are false,” he added.
"In the cases of the French scientist and Dr. Alawieh, media searches followed all policies and protocols, leading to the discovery of proprietary information from Los Alamo National Laboratory — violating a non-disclosure agreement — and Hezbollah martyr content," Beckham said.
"These searches are conducted to detect digital contraband, terrorism-related content, and information relevant to visitor admissibility," he added.
The Atlantic releases details of chat that revealed military plans
The Atlantic released details this morning of the top Trump officials' chat that revealed military strike plans to the magazine's editor-in-chief.
The release of the messages in the chat follows repeated denials from the Trump administration that any war plans were discussed on the chat or that the information was classified.
The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg had previously declined to release parts of the conversation, saying that if the messages were read by an adversary, the information "could conceivably have been used to harm American military and intelligence personnel."
The messages released today showed that a text from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth about imminent military strikes in Yemen were highly detailed. In them, he laid out the exact timing of the pending strikes. The messages did not include specific targeting locations.
Secretive Chinese network tried to lure fired federal workers, research shows
A network of companies operated by a secretive Chinese tech firm has been trying to recruit recently laid-off U.S. government workers, according to job ads and a researcher who uncovered the campaign.
Max Lesser, a senior analyst on emerging threats with the Washington-based think tank Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said some companies placing recruitment ads were “part of a broader network of fake consulting and headhunting firms targeting former government employees and AI researchers.”
Gabbard and Ratcliffe to face lawmakers' questions again today at House Intelligence Committee hearing
Lawmakers will have another chance to question Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe today about leaked military plans, this time at a House Intelligence Committee hearing.
The hearing comes one day after the officials — both reportedly members of the Signal group chat reported by The Atlantic — faced pointed questions from Democrats over the group chat's contents and security.
The hearing has an open session beginning at 10 a.m. and a closed-door session for lawmakers at 2 p.m.
Committee Chairman Rick Crawford, R-Ark., has not yet weighed in publicly on The Atlantic's reporting. The top Democrat on the committee, Connecticut Rep. Jim Himes, said he was "horrified" by the report.
"These individuals know the calamitous risks of transmitting classified information across unclassified systems, and they also know that if a lower ranking official under their command did what is described here, they would likely lose their clearance and be subject to criminal investigation," Himes said. "The American people deserve answers, and I plan to get some on Wednesday at the Intelligence Committee’s Worldwide Threats hearing."
Mike Waltz takes ‘full responsibility’ for military plans text group
Trump’s national security adviser, Mike Waltz, said in an interview that he takes “full responsibility” for a group text that included a journalist while discussing military plans.
Top Senate Democrats call Signal controversy 'astonishingly poor judgment' in new letter to Trump
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and top Democrats on the national security committees, are issuing a letter to Trump asking for additional details regarding a text chain about military planning that inadvertently included The Atlantic’s top editor.
“Our committees have serious questions about this incident, and members need a full accounting to ensure it never happens again,” the senators wrote.
They expressed their "extreme alarm about the astonishingly poor judgment shown by your Cabinet and national security advisors" following the report about leaked military plans for strikes in Yemen.
"You have long advocated for accountability and transparency in the government, particularly as it relates to the handling of classified information, national security, and the safety of American servicemembers," the senators said. "As such, it is imperative that you address this breach with the seriousness and diligence that it demands."
The senators said that they "expect" that Attorney General Pam Bondi will conduct an investigation "of the conduct of the government officials involved in improperly sharing or discussing such information."
The senators are also seeking the full unredacted transcript of the text chain for the committees to review, asking whether other White House officials are using Signal or other commercial platforms to discuss classified or sensitive information, and urging relevant agencies to preserve documents and correspondences regarding the incident.
In addition to Schumer, the letter was signed by the top Democrats on the Intelligence Committee, the Judiciary Committee, the Armed Services Committee, the Foreign Relations Committee, the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee and the Appropriations subcommittee on defense.
Trump administration stops processing some green cards ‘to do more vetting’
Finalizing applications filed by certain immigrants to become legal permanent residents is being put on hold to comply with an executive order Trump signed in January.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the part of the Department of Homeland Security that handles citizenship, legal status and other immigration benefits, has suspended processing some applications for so-called green cards to do more vetting of the applicants, the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement.
Supreme Court hears FCC case that could weaken power of federal agencies
Reporting from Washington
The latest attempt by conservatives to undermine the federal bureaucracy reaches the Supreme Court today as the justices consider whether the Federal Communications Commission unlawfully wields power through a program that subsidizes telecommunications services in underserved regions.
The court has a 6-3 conservative majority that has in a series of recent decisions undercut the authority of government agencies and advanced a deregulatory agenda largely favored by business interests and Republicans.
The case concerns both whether Congress in a 1996 law exceeded its authority in setting up the Universal Service Fund, which requires telecommunications services to submit payments to subsidize “universal service” in low-income and rural areas.