Grassley: "I just don't understand" why Hegseth texted family about Yemen strike

"Why would you need your family on there?"

Photo first published on Senator Chuck Grassley’s official Facebook page on December 11, 2024

This original reporting and analysis first appeared at Bleeding Heartland and is shared here as part of the Iowa Writers Collaborative. For regular emails linking to all recent Bleeding Heartland articles and commentary, subscribe to the free Evening Heartland newsletter.

U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley has avoided public criticism of President Donald Trump’s cabinet members. But in an unscripted moment this week, he questioned why Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had texted family members about a planned military operation.

The New York Times reported on April 20 that Hegseth “shared detailed information about forthcoming strikes in Yemen on March 15 in a private Signal group chat that included his wife, brother and personal lawyer.” Among other things, the defense secretary texted “the flight schedules for the F/A-18 Hornets targeting the Houthis.”

Grassley’s office didn’t release any statement about the new controversy, nor did the senator mention it on his social media feeds. But Raccoon Valley Radio news director Coltrane Carlson raised the topic during a Q&A session published on April 25 and shared in the senator’s weekly newsletter.

Carlson asked whether Grassley could recall another secretary of defense who had used an unsecured channel to share military attack plans, and whether those individuals had faced consequences. Initially, Grassley seemed to defend the administration. He noted Trump “is standing by Hegseth” and declined to call for the secretary’s resignation, since “the president’s entitled to have a secretary of defense that he wants.” He added that he agrees changes are needed at the Pentagon, and Trump has “picked Hegseth to do it.”

Grassley went on to say “it’s just beyond my imagination” why someone would be texting such information. He wondered, “why would you even want to be talking about a military action the very hours that it’s going on in Yemen? And why would you want your lawyer and your family and all those people to know about it? I just don’t understand why you’d be talking about it in the first place. And I don’t understand why you’d have non-military people involved in the conversation.”

After The Atlantic’s editor Jeffrey Goldberg disclosed in March that Trump’s national security adviser had mistakenly added him to a Signal group chat about the operation in Yemen, Grassley told some Iowa reporters “he had not read the full transcript of the messages and probably would not.” He characterized the incident as “some screw-up” and accepted the Trump administration’s claims that Hegseth and other officials had not shared classified information—even though operational details about a forthcoming strike are normally classified.

When responding to Carlson, Grassley questioned the wisdom of texting relatives about a military action, regardless of whether any secrets were revealed. Even if the attack plans “could be talked about publicly, why would you want to be talking about it while the war’s going on? And why would you need your family on there? I just don’t understand it,” he said.

Grassley told Iowa reporters in March he would “take the administration’s word for it” that no classified information was shared in the Signal chat involving government officials and Goldberg. And the self-styled advocate for “transparency” and “accountability” isn’t demanding further information about Hegseth’s texts to family members. “Now if there’s a good reason for it, I’d like to know,” Grassley told Carlson. “But I’ll never get an answer to that question,” he said before moving on to the next topic.

This exchange was part of the latest “Capitol Hill Report.” Grassley has held these sessions regularly for many years; his office calls them “unrehearsed interviews” and “public affairs programs.” His staff select the rotating cast of reporters, who typically represent small Iowa media outlets.

---

Listen to the relevant portion of Senator Chuck Grassley’s Capitol Hill Report, released on April 25:

Transcript by Laura Belin:

Coltrane Carlson: All right, so Senator, this is Coltrane again. It was most recently reported that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had apparently texted some military information, classified or not, to some of his family members and his lawyer through his personal cell phone. And obviously earlier in March, he released some attack plans on an air strike in another foreign country of Yemen, which also included a journalist. Since your time in the Senate, and you also serve on the Senate Judiciary Committee, can you recall another secretary of defense that has done something similar to Hegseth, where you’re sharing information from the military, attack plans, again classified or not, and using an unsecured method of communication? Were those individuals ever held accountable or face consequences?

Grassley: Well, there’s no way I could answer the first part of your question. And the second part of it is, and then I’m going to give you yet a third part of it that you didn’t ask about.

But the president is standing by Hegseth. And I believe with what I know now, I wouldn’t call for any resignation like some of my colleagues have. I think the president’s entitled to have a secretary of defense that he wants. And I happen to agree with the president that there needs to be a lot of changes in the Defense Department, and he’s picked Hegseth to do it, and I think those changes need to be made and they could be made at this point.

But the other thing is, it’s just beyond my imagination, without knowing any of the circumstances, but why would you even want to be talking about a military action the very hours that it’s going on in Yemen? And why would you want your lawyer and your family and all those people to know about it? I just don’t understand why you’d be talking about it in the first place. And I don’t understand why you’d have non-military people involved in the conversation.

Now that’s beside the point of whether or not there was any secret information that shouldn’t have been disposed. Even if it was totally non-secret, non-secure, not affecting our national security, I suppose is what I should say, and it could be talked about publicly, why would you want to be talking about it while the war’s going on? And why would you need your family on there? I just don’t understand it.

Now if there’s a good reason for it, I’d like to know. But I’ll never get an answer to that question.