An odd-but-true story of loose lips dominated national news last week and stretches into this one. Senior members of President Donald Trump's administration planned March 15 naval and air strikes on Yemen over an unsecure commercial messaging app, and their text chat group unintentionally included journalist Jeffrey Goldberg, a national security reporter and editor-in-chief of The Atlantic magazine. In a stunning article nine days later, he related parts of what the secretary of defense, secretary of state, vice president and others texted while debating the decision and posting details about mission timing, weapons and dozens of targets.

The journalist had a front-row seat as the Cabinet department heads and White House advisers discussed the president's decision to attack Houthi rebels, an Islamist political and military group backed by Iran that had fired repeatedly at U.S. warships and drones, as well as civilian cargo vessels in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. The militia also has shot ballistic missiles and drones at Israeli cities. This month's first U.S. attack, which reportedly killed 15 people, was aimed at radars, air defenses and missile and drone systems. There were follow-up raids in the largest Mideast military operation of Trump's two-month-old second term.

Goldberg left the messaging chain on an encrypted app called Signal when classified attack plans were revealed. He initially omitted military details, but published that evidence two days later "because senior administration figures are attempting to downplay the significance of the messages that were shared," he wrote. "People should see the texts in order to reach their own conclusions." Officials had been advised in February by the National Security Agency not to use Signal for sensitive information, citing the free, open-source app's vulnerability to Russian hackers even though messages are coded (encrypted) to hide the contents. Its use, instead of the Pentagon's heavily protected, classified internal systems, violated the Federal Records Act requirement to archive official discussions, critics believe. Choosing automatically erased messages "looks like an effort to do an end run around government records retention procedures," writes Substack blogger Joyce Vance, a law professor and former federal prosecutor. "By going to Signal, they avoided leaving a paper trail. No annoying records that could be unearthed. . . . Is this how this new government is operating routinely—off the books, in a hidden fashion designed to avoid scrutiny and accountability?"

Last week's article sparks alarm in Congress, including from a few Republicans, and also among military members, veterans, security specialists, media commentators and others. "Anybody in uniform would be court-martialed for this," a U.S. defense official told CNN privately. "There are so many questions that arise that the Department of Justice should be answering," wrote New York Times columnist David French, a former Army lawyer. "A security breach this significant requires thorough investigation."

President Trump so far defends his team -- including national security adviser Michael Waltz, who said "I take full responsibility" for mistakenly inviting Goldberg into the sesnitive phone text discussions. The president calls it "a glitch" and adds: "The mission was successful so it doesn't matter." By contrast, several congressional Democrats, including Rep. Hakeen Jeffries of New York (the party's House leader), call for the resignations of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the other senior national security officials involved. Most Republicans rally around Trump's team, though Sen. John Thune of South Dakota acknowledges "errors in judgment" and seems open to a Senate inquiry. "I suspect the Armed Services Committee may want to have some folks testify and have some of those questions answered," says the Republican. "What we want to do is make sure that something like that doesn't happen again." Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., asked for an independent review by the Defense Department's acting inspector general. Vance, the law professor, wrote last week on her blog: "There needs to be accountability, real accountability of the kind that comes from a fact-based investigation into how this lapse occurred. It's not, or at least it shouldn't be, a matter of politics."

Senator says: "The information that you have fighter aircraft launching off of an aircraft carrier, flying over enemy territory and impending combat operation is the most sensitive information we have at the federal government. . . . What Pete Hegseth did was reckless and dangerous." – Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., former Naby pilot

White House says: "This entire story was another hoax written by a Trump-hater who is well-known for his sensationalist spin. . . . The real story here is the overwhelming success of President Trump's decisive military action against Houthi terrorists." – Karoline Leavitt, presidential press secretary

Blogger says: "Anyone who would engage in this kind of behavior and then argue that it was not improper rather than apologizing and promising to do better should leave government." – Joyce Vance, law professor and former federal prosecutor