A Pentagon watchdog concluded that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth risked exposing sensitive information and endangering U.S. troops by sharing details of a planned military strike in Yemen on the commercial messaging app Signal, ABC News reported.

The inspector general found that the information regarding the March operation against Houthi rebels had been properly classified by U.S. Central Command before Hegseth shared it with colleagues and his wife, though the secretary maintains he acted within his authority to declassify information.

Sources familiar with the classified report indicate that Hegseth refused to be interviewed for the investigation or grant access to his personal phone, asserting that the shared details were for media coordination and did not compromise operational security.

Details of the Signal Chat Exposure

Hegseth shared precise plans about the Yemen strike, including timing and weaponry like F-18 jets and Tomahawk missiles, with senior officials, his wife, and personal contacts. One message even declared, "THIS IS WHEN THE FIRST BOMBS WILL DEFINITELY DROP," pinpointing a military time of 1415 for the attack.

This wasn't a secure briefing room; it was a casual chat thread, vulnerable to leaks or hacks. Worse, The Atlantic revealed that Jeffrey Goldberg, the magazine’s executive editor, was accidentally added to a related discussion, amplifying the risk of exposure.

The strike went forward on March 15, hitting Houthi missile and radar sites as outlined in the messages. But the ease with which such plans circulated on an unsecured app has left many in Washington reeling over the potential fallout.

Hegseth’s Defense and Refusal to Cooperate

Hegseth has pushed back hard, claiming in a statement to the inspector general that his authority to classify or declassify gave him leeway to share the details. He doubled down on X, posting, "No classified information. Total exoneration. Case closed. Houthis bombed into submission."

That bravado clashes with the inspector general’s rejection of his claim that the information posed no risk to troops. Refusing to sit for an interview during the investigation, and denying access to his personal phone citing privacy, only fuels doubts about accountability at the top.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt echoed Hegseth’s stance, telling ABC News the report confirms no classified leak occurred and operational security held firm. Yet, when a Defense Secretary sidesteps scrutiny, it erodes trust in a system built on protecting those who serve.

Political Fallout and Sharp Criticism

Rep. Adam Smith, ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, didn’t hold back, calling the report a "damning review" of Hegseth’s competence. He argued, "The way he chose to communicate this information put service members at risk," highlighting a failure in judgment that can’t be glossed over.

Smith’s critique lands with weight, especially when paired with Hegseth’s apparent reluctance to face the inspector general head-on. If national security is the priority, why dodge the very process meant to safeguard it?

Senators Roger Wicker and Jack Reed, from opposite sides of the aisle, both demanded this investigation last spring, with Wicker noting the information seemed sensitive enough to warrant classification. Bipartisan concern over such a breach shows this isn’t just political theater; it’s a genuine alarm bell.

A Deeper Look at Responsibility

Hegseth’s aide, Tim Parlatore, dismissed the inspector general’s findings as an unsupported opinion detached from the broader report. He insisted to ABC News that no evidence or interviews backed the claim of endangerment, framing the investigation as largely exonerating.

Yet, Parlatore himself was in one of those Signal chats, alongside Hegseth’s family members who hold no Pentagon roles. That alone raises eyebrows about the casual handling of military strategy in spaces where it doesn’t belong.

As the unclassified portion of the report looms for release, the public deserves clarity on whether protocols will tighten or if this incident gets swept under the rug. For a nation weary of bureaucratic missteps and progressive overreach in government transparency, holding leaders to a high standard isn’t negotiable, no matter their rank or allies.