Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reportedly stifled a routine investigation of his disclosure of sensitive military plans in a group chat on the non-secure Signal app with a reporter present, and he instead threatened staffers he believed had leaked damaging information.
Typically a classification review would be conducted to assess damage from an unauthorized disclosure of sensitive defense information, but Hegseth didn't order an assessment, according to two former senior officials who worked within the Pentagon at the time and a current U.S. official with knowledge of the situation who spoke to CNN.
"After the Signal messages came to light, Hegseth, instead turned his attention inward and focused on formally investigating suspected leakers on his own staff, even threatening to polygraph defense officials he believed were disclosing potentially embarrassing details about him, multiple current and former officials said," CNN reported. "Those threats had a 'chilling effect' among DoD officials who became increasingly wary of doing anything that could be perceived by Hegseth as an attempt to undercut him, according to those officials."
These new revelations came days after an internal watchdog report showed Hegseth potentially endangered U.S. troops by sharing highly sensitive attack plans against Houthi rebels in Yemen, and the sources told CNN they would have expected a damage assessment to also be conducted because the inspector general's probe had a limited scope.
“One hundreds percent a breach like that would warrant a top-to bottom damage assessment by both DoD and the IC,” said a former senior defense official.
The Pentagon has no plans at this point to investigate the matter further, even though the inspector general concluded Hegseth violated Department of Defense regulations and risked troops' safety by compromising sensitive military plans, and the defense secretary himself insists those findings represent a “total exoneration” of himself.
“A damage assessment is forward-looking and focused on risk rather than personal culpability," Brianna Rosen, a former White House official specializing in national security and tech policy. "Even without the official’s cooperation, analysts can evaluate what material was shared, who had access to it, and any potential operational or counterintelligence implications. In that sense, a damage assessment would not have been constrained by the same limitations that hampered the IG investigation."