BURSTHouse Republicans stopped short of endorsing disciplinary action for national security adviser Mike Waltz and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth after news broke that the pair, along with other top administration officials, discussed plans for the U.S. to attack the Houthis in Yemen on a group text chain that a journalist was mistakenly included on.
The support came as Democrats — and a handful of Republicans — sounded off on the report by The Atlantic Editor-in-Chief Jeffrey Goldberg. Sen. Mark Warner (Va.), the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said the duo should resign.
But even after raising concerns about the administration’s conduct, Republicans would not publicly recommend consequences for Waltz or Hegseth — especially after President Trump told NBC News that Waltz "has learned a lesson, and he’s a good man.”
Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) — who said Tuesday classified information should not be sent on unsecured channels or to individuals without security clearances — responded “no” when asked if Waltz or Hegseth should be punished for their actions.
“I think they obviously need to make sure safeguards are put in place to make sure that doesn’t happen again,” Lawler added. “I think, obviously, the mission itself was very successful and the work they did on the whole [was] very good, but that type of situation, you just need to make sure it does not happen again.”
Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) — who was adamant in his criticism Monday, calling the group chat “embarrassing” and “wrong — would not back consequences for the pair, but said Hegseth needs to explain what happened.
“The fact that classified information is put on an unclassified system, I think the secretary of Defense has to answer to that,” Bacon said.
Pressed on if they should face disciplinary action, the Nebraska Republican deferred to the White House.
“But I think we should be critical,” he added. “It wasn’t right.”
Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-N.Y.) similarly deferred to Trump on the proper course of action amid the fallout.
“I have full faith that the president is going to review all their protocols, and, you know, certainly it’s a teachable moment and they’re going to be more careful going forward. … I certainly yield to the president on any sort of changes he is going to make to how the communications protocols are or how he’s going to handle that,” he said.
Goldberg, the top editor of The Atlantic, shook Washington on Monday when he reported that he was added to a Signal group chat full of top-level national security officials who were discussing plans to attack the Houthis in Yemen.
Goldberg said he received a connection request from a user named “Michael Waltz” on March 11, was added to a group chat called “Houthi PC small group” — which Waltz appeared to have created — on March 13 and witnessed discussions about the attack plans over the next two days. Vice President Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe are believed to have been included in the group as well, based on the names of user accounts.
At 11:44 a.m. EDT on March 15, Hegseth sent the group operational details about the Yemen strikes, which Goldberg said he would not quote from because “the information contained in them, if they had been read by an adversary of the United States, could conceivably have been used to harm American military and intelligence personnel, particularly in the broader Middle East, Central Command’s area of responsibility.”
The U.S. attacked the Houthis hours later. A spokesperson for the National Security Council has since said the group “appears to be an authentic message chain,” though White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt has argued that no “war plans” or “classified material” were sent in the thread.
Criticism and concerns regarding the incident broke out immediately Monday afternoon, with scores of Democrats and a handful of Republicans speaking out about the administration’s conduct.
While some Republicans were tepid in their response — criticizing the administration’s conduct while stopping short of endorsing punishment for the officials — other GOP lawmakers were more clear-cut in their defense, arguing the pair should remain in their posts despite the ongoing fallout from the text chain.
“Let him work and see what else happens. The president chose him. The Senate confirmed him. Let him work,” Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar (R-Fla.) said of Hegseth. “If you have never made a mistake, then you can throw the first stone.”
Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), similarly, said Waltz should not face consequences, calling him a “top flight of a guy as I know” and saying he has “no concerns at all.” The South Carolina Republican also expressed support for the Defense secretary, saying “I believe Hegseth. He said it didn’t happen, and if it did it was a mistake.”
Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), meanwhile, called Waltz “a straight-up guy, and he’s very honest, honorable, he’s a patriot,” but when asked if he should suffer any consequences, he responded “I don’t know. I don’t know who did it. It was a mistake, and I’m sure he wishes it didn’t happen.”
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) repeated the White House’s assertions that there was no classified information or war plans discussed in the chat, saying the mistake was that a journalist was part of the chat group.
“Obviously, that was a mistake and a serious one,” Johnson said of a journalist inadvertently being added to the chat.
The Speaker also praised Waltz, who created the group.
“Mike Waltz is a colleague, a former colleague, and he was born for the job. He is highly qualified,” Johnson said. “The president said he has total confidence in him, and we do as well.”