Leavitt: “Won’t Be Lectured by Democrats Who Left 13 Service Members in Afghanistan”; Signal Story “Falling Apart by the Hour”

Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt delivered her most forceful defense of the administration on the Signal messaging controversy in March 2025, opening with: “We are NOT going to be lectured about national security and American troops by Democrats and the mainstream media who turned the other cheek when the Biden administration left 13 service members in Afghanistan — and not a single person was held accountable.” She called the Atlantic’s story “a sensationalized story that is falling apart by the hour,” cataloged reporter Jeffrey Goldberg’s history of what she called fabrications, and concluded: “If this story proves anything, it proves that Democrats and their propagandists know how to fabricate, orchestrate, and disseminate a misinformation campaign quite well."

"We Are NOT Going to Be Lectured”

Leavitt opened the briefing with the moral authority argument that framed the entire defense.

“We are not going to be lectured about national security and American troops by Democrats and the mainstream media who turned the other cheek when the Biden administration, because of their incompetence, left 13 service members in Afghanistan,” Leavitt said. “And not a single person in the previous administration was held accountable for that botched withdrawal.”

She added the Biden quote that the administration considered most damning: “Joe Biden said in fact it was a great operation. That is despicable.”

The Afghanistan framing was strategically effective because it established a double standard that was difficult to refute. The Biden administration had presided over a withdrawal that killed 13 American service members at Abbey Gate, left billions in military equipment to the Taliban, and abandoned Afghan allies who had worked with U.S. forces. No administration official was fired, resigned, or faced prosecution. Biden himself had described the withdrawal as a success.

Against that baseline, Democrats demanding accountability over a journalist being inadvertently added to a group chat appeared, in Leavitt’s framing, to be operating on a radically asymmetric standard of outrage.

”A Sensitive Policy Discussion”

When a reporter asked whether the messages constituted “military plans” or “military operation plans,” Leavitt provided a precise characterization.

“I would characterize this messaging thread as a policy discussion — a sensitive policy discussion — amongst high-level cabinet officials and senior staff,” Leavitt said.

She then redirected to outcomes: “And I’m so glad, Peter, that you said the American public can decide for themselves, because I think the American public should decide for themselves based on the outcome of this operation.”

Leavitt stated the outcome: “And what happened in this operation? Terrorists that were allowed to run wild by the Biden administration were killed because of the direction and the determination of this president and his team.”

She elevated the thread from a liability to evidence of competence: “And this messaging thread also proved that President Trump has an incredibly dynamic team who is working incredibly hard, flying all over the world to secure world peace and to fix up the foreign policy crises that the previous administration left for this team to inherit.”

The reframe was effective: rather than defending the process by which the chat was conducted, Leavitt pointed to its content as evidence of a hardworking national security team producing successful outcomes. The thread showed officials coordinating a military strike that killed terrorists — not a scandal but a success story accidentally revealed.

”Falling Apart by the Hour”

Leavitt then attacked the Atlantic’s reporting directly.

“Unfortunately, all of this good is happening for our country — this administration is working hard on behalf of the American public every day — but the mainstream media continues to be focused on a sensationalized story from the failing Atlantic magazine that is falling apart by the hour,” she said.

She restated the administration’s position: “Here are the facts. The national security advisor has taken responsibility for this matter, and the National Security Council immediately said alongside the White House Counsel’s office that they are looking into how a reporter’s number was inadvertently added to this messaging thread.”

The key claims: “We have said all along that no classified material was sent on this messaging thread. There were no locations, no sources or methods revealed, and there were certainly no war plans discussed.”

Leavitt noted a concession from the Atlantic itself: “The Atlantic has even admitted this themselves. Their release of these internal messages validates the truth which we have been saying all along.”

The argument was that the Atlantic’s own publication of the messages had undermined its own story. If the messages had contained classified information, publishing them would have been a crime. The fact that the Atlantic published them suggested that even the Atlantic recognized the messages did not contain the kind of classified material that would constitute a genuine security breach.

”Fabricate, Orchestrate, and Disseminate”

Leavitt delivered her conclusion about the broader pattern.

“If this story proves anything, it proves that Democrats and their propagandists in the mainstream media know how to fabricate, orchestrate, and disseminate a misinformation campaign quite well,” she said.

She then turned her focus to the Atlantic’s editor-in-chief: “And there’s arguably no one in the media who loves manufacturing and pushing hoaxes more than Jeffrey Goldberg.”

The opposition research was detailed. “Goldberg is an anti-Trump hater,” Leavitt said. “He is a registered Democrat. Goldberg’s wife is also a registered Democrat and a big Democrat donor who used to work under who? Hillary Clinton.”

She then cataloged Goldberg’s history: “This is the same Jeffrey Goldberg who infamously lied about weapons of mass destruction to get us into the Iraq war, which cost trillions of dollars and thousands of American soldiers.”

The list continued: “By absurdly claiming that President Trump was Vladimir Putin during the 2016 campaign. By peddling the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax that tried to hijack President Trump’s first term. By inventing the ‘suckers and losers’ hoax to help Joe Biden in the 2020 election. By peddling a hoax about President Trump involving Gold Star families to help Kamala Harris in the 2024 election — which our campaign at the time vigorously denied. Jeffrey Goldberg didn’t care.”

Leavitt concluded: “There’s more, but we don’t have all day. And we can now add this Signal hoax to this very long list.”

The Goldberg dossier was the most aggressive personal attack the administration had launched against a specific journalist. By cataloging five separate instances in which, according to the administration, Goldberg had published stories that were inaccurate or designed to damage Trump, Leavitt was arguing that the reporter’s track record destroyed his credibility on the current story.

The NSA’s Responsibility

Leavitt noted that the process for addressing the error was already underway.

“The national security advisor has taken responsibility for this inadvertent number being added to the messaging thread,” she said. “But above all, we take the lives of our troops, safety, security, prosperity around the globe with the utmost seriousness.”

The acknowledgment that the national security advisor had “taken responsibility” served two purposes: it demonstrated accountability (someone owned the error) while limiting the scope (it was an inadvertent addition of a phone number, not a deliberate leak or a systemic security failure).

Leavitt’s insistence that “it’s unacceptable to this president and this secretary of defense” signaled that the administration was taking the error seriously while rejecting the characterization that it rose to the level of a national security crisis.

Key Takeaways

• Leavitt refused to accept lectures from Democrats “who turned the other cheek when Biden left 13 service members in Afghanistan and not a single person was held accountable.”
• She characterized the Signal thread as “a sensitive policy discussion” that resulted in “terrorists killed because of this president’s direction and determination.”
• Leavitt called the Atlantic story “sensationalized” and “falling apart by the hour,” noting the Atlantic’s own publication of messages validated the claim that no classified material was shared.
• She cataloged Jeffrey Goldberg’s history: Iraq WMD claims, Russia hoax, “suckers and losers” hoax, Gold Star families hoax, calling the Signal story the latest in “a very long list.”
• Leavitt’s verdict: “Democrats and their propagandists know how to fabricate, orchestrate, and disseminate a misinformation campaign quite well.”