Intel chiefs again say they did not share classified info amid new questions on war chats

President Donald Trump's intelligence chiefs on Wednesday maintained they did not share classified information about an eminent U.S. military strike on a messaging app, even as more details about the discussion came to light.

Republicans and Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee sparred with each other and the leaders of major U.S. spy agencies during the public segment of the panel’s annual Worldwide Threats hearing. The session convened less than two hours after The Atlantic released the full transcript of the Signal conversation among Cabinet-level officials ahead of a recent strike on the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen, including the timing and kinds of aircraft used.

"I think that it's by the awesome grace of God that we are not mourning dead pilots right now,” Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the committee’s top Democrat, said in his opening statement.

Despite new questions arising from the latest disclosure, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe stood by the testimony they gave the panel’s Senate counterpart on Tuesday and said they did not share classified information.

“It was a mistake that a reporter was inadvertently added to a Signal chat with high-level national security principles having a policy discussion about imminent strikes against the Houthis and the effects of the strike,” Gabbard said.

National security adviser Mike Waltz “has taken full responsibility for this, and the National Security Council is conducting an in-depth review, along with technical experts working to determine how this reporter was inadvertently added to this chat," the spy chief added, calling the conversation "candid and sensitive."

Ratcliffe, a former member of the House panel, also said his answers had not changed since Tuesday’s testimony.

“I used an appropriate channel to communicate sensitive information. It was permissible to do so. I didn’t transfer any classified information.”

Gabbard highlighted guidance released last year by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) following the breach of U.S. telecom networks by Chinese hackers that urged “highly targeted individuals” to use “end-to-end encrypted communications.” She noted Signal comes pre-installed on federal government devices.

Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX) said it was a "lie" to say that information discussed in the Signal chat would not be considered classified.

He asked National Security Agency Director Timothy Haugh if similar information intercepted from China or Russia would have been considered classified information. 

"We would classify based off of our sources and methods," Haugh replied.

The four-star general was later asked if the electronic spy agency last month issued a cybersecurity advisory to its staff about Signal because there are risks to using the app.

“There are,” Haugh replied.

For their part, committee Republicans argued that the discussion did not reveal U.S. sources or methods and that military terms used in texts from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth lacked specific context and could have been used in any number of operations.

As the hearing was underway, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-MS) told reporters the panel would make a bipartisan request for an inspector general probe into the incident and suggested the information shared among officials, including Vice President JD Vance, would be considered classified.

Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA) urged Gabbard to investigate the incident, speculating that there is "likely to be more than just this chat."

“Because if there's one, there's more than one,” she said. “If there's smoke, there's fire.”