U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth meets with Naval Special Warfare (NSW) Sailors at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickman, Hawaii, U.S. March 25, 2025. U.S. Navy/Petty Officer 1st Class Joseph Rolfe/Handout via REUTERS. THIS IMAGE HAS BEEN SUPPLIED BY A THIRD PARTY
Fox News' chief national security correspondent broke with many on her right-wing network Wednesday, telling social media followers that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's error in sharing attack orders over Signal in a group chat that included a journalist is even "more egregious" than many believe.
Hegseth and National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, both high-ranking officials in the Trump administration, stirred controversy due to their involvement in the group chat, which leaked sensitive military information. Hegseth shared live updates about a U.S. airstrike on Yemen's Houthi militants, disclosing sensitive details such as launch timings. Waltz initiated the group chat and inadvertently included Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, in the conversation.
While the Trump administration has downplayed the seriousness of the transgression and disparaged the journalist involved, Fox News' Jennifer Griffin attempted to cut through the noise Wednesday night on X.
ALSO READ: ‘I miss lynch mobs’: The secretary of retribution's followers are getting impatient
Griffin dug into the vigorous debate about whether the operational details that Hegseth shared were "classified" or not, and said she surveyed a range of current and former U.S. defense officials who "agreed 'war plans' is not the right term but what was shared may have been FAR MORE sensitive given the operational details and time stamps ahead of the operation, which could have placed US military pilots in harms way."
"What Hegseth shared two hours ahead of the strikes were time sensitive 'attack orders' or 'operational plans' with actual timing of the strikes and mention of F18s, MQ9 Reapers and Tomahawks. This information is typically sent through classified channels to the commanders in the field as 'secret, no forn' message," she noted, meaning the information is should not be shared via insecure channels.
Griffin added: “'Attack orders' or 'attack sequence' puts the joint force directly and immediately at risk," citing a former senior defense official.
Sharing such orders could allow an enemy to move the target and increase lethal actions against U.S. forces, the official said.
"This kind of real time operational information is more sensitive than 'war plans,' which makes this lapse more egregious," she said, citing two former senior U.S. defense officials.
One former senior U.S.defense official told Griffin that Hegseth's downplay that he didn’t release "war plans" is "pure semantics," she added.
"These were 'attack plans,'" she said. "'If you are revealing who is going to be attacked (Houthis – the name of the text chain), it still gives the enemy warning. When you release the time of the attack – all of that is always ‘classified.’”