The Atlantic publishes more Signal messages after Trump admin denials

• The newly disclosed messages include a text from Hegseth with specific times and sequencing of planned U.S. strikes against Houthi rebels in Yemen.
• The texts and group chat member list released Wednesday do not include the name of CIA director John Ratcliffe's chief of staff at the request of a CIA spokesperson but are otherwise unredacted.

The other side: White House spokesperson Taylor Budowich slammed The Atlantic as "scumbags" in a response posted to X, saying that the publication had "abandoned their bulls**t 'war plans' narrative," highlighting that the new story refers to "attack plans."

• White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt echoed that argument, contending in a statement: "The Atlantic has conceded: these were NOT 'war plans.'"
• "No locations. No sources & methods. NO WAR PLANS," National Security Advisor Michael Waltz posted Wednesday.

Driving the news: The early discussion Goldberg observed in the conversation titled "Houthi PC small group" concerned the timing and reasoning behind the strikes (and an airing of grievances about the country's European allies).

• But on the day of the attack — Saturday, March 15 — "the discussion veered toward the operational," Goldberg and staff writer Shane Harris noted.

The details: At 11:44am ET, Hegseth shared a "TEAM UPDATE" that included specific timing for the launch of U.S. warplanes and the sequencing of strikes.

• Included in the breakdown of the strikes Hegseth detailed was the timing of when the "Target Terrorist" would be in his "Known Location" and "WHEN THE FIRST BOMBS WILL DEFINITELY DROP."
• After sending the timeline, Hegseth wrote, "We are currently clean on OPSEC" — operations security — in a chat that inadvertently contained a journalist.
• Vice President Vance responded, "I will say a prayer for victory."

Waltz — who first invited Goldberg to the chat — later told the group, in previously undisclosed messages, that a target building had collapsed.

• U.S. intelligence had received "positive ID" of "the first target" walking into "his girlfriend's building," which had collapsed, Waltz wrote.
• "Excellent," Vance responded.
• Waltz replied with a fist, flag and fire emoji (👊🇺🇸🔥) — a trio that has been repeatedly memed in the wake of the fiasco.

Catch up quick: Goldberg, in his initial story, said he would not release the specific attack details Hegseth and Waltz shared to him and other group members, noting that if the plans were obtained by an adversary, they "could conceivably have been used to harm American military and intelligence personnel."

• But as Democratic lawmakers and reporters pressed administration officials over the alleged leak of sensitive information, members of the chat remained defiant — despite the White House National Security Council confirming the chat's apparent authenticity.
• Hegseth lashed out at Goldberg on Monday in response to the explosive reporting, characterizing him as a "deceitful and highly discredited so-called 'journalist' who's made a profession of peddling hoaxes time and time again."
• Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and Ratcliffe testified that there were no specific targets or weapons systems discussed in the Signal chat before a Senate panel Tuesday.

The bottom line: Those and other statements disputing the facts of Goldberg's story led "us to believe that people should see the texts in order to reach their own conclusions," Goldberg and Harris wrote.

Editor's note: This is a breaking news story. Check back for updates.