GOP strategist and Executive Director of Principles First Brittany Martinez joined "Forbes Newsroom" to discuss the fallout after a journalist was seemingly inadvertently added to a group chat discussing an upcoming U.S. airstrike on the Houthis in Yemen, plus President Trump deciding to pull Congresswoman Elise Stefanik's (R-NY) nomination to serve as U.N. ambassador.
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Hi, everybody. I'm Brittany Lewis, a breaking news reporter here at Forbes. Joining me now
00:07is Republican strategist and executive director of Principles First, Brittany Martinez. Brittany,
00:12thanks so much for coming back on. Thanks for having me. Brittany, I want to talk today
00:17about arguably the first biggest staffing scandal in President Trump's second term,
00:23and that is Signalgate. So just to recap the story, the Atlantic's editor in chief, Jeffrey
00:28Goldberg, said that he was inadvertently added to a group chat with the nation's top security
00:33leaders when they were discussing an impending U.S. airstrike on the Houthis in Yemen. So
00:40to start off the conversation, what is your reaction to this story and then the subsequent
00:43fallout?
00:44I think this is so ridiculous. How could this happen? There are so many smart people on
00:49this chat. I can understand if, you know, someone maybe had put the wrong Jeff on a
00:56chat, right? And maybe someone else not realizing because it was a number that didn't appear
01:01obvious to them. But how do you do that? There were 19 people on this chat. No one caught
01:06that. And thank God it was only not only a reporter, like reporting is a great thing,
01:12but like it was only a reporter and not some sort of spy or something really bad. I could
01:19have been terrible and they're making it seem like it's not a big deal. And it is. And they're
01:22being very flippant about it and not really taking ownership and accountability. And so
01:27I just have so many thoughts on Signalgate, all of them bad. And I can't believe that
01:32this just happened.
01:34And I think that's what a lot of people are saying, like, thank God this was an American.
01:38Thank God he revealed the text after and not before the attack happened. Thank God it wasn't
01:45one of our enemies. So I want to talk about what exactly the issue is here or what's the
01:49biggest issue? Because there's a lot of different factors here. Is it that Jeffrey Goldberg,
01:53a journalist, was seemingly inadvertently added to the chat? Is it that signal itself
01:58was being used? Is it that Michael Waltz seemingly somehow had Michael Gold or Jeffrey Goldberg's
02:05number on his phone? And for what purpose he did have a journalist's number on his phone
02:09or that the nation's top security leaders were talking about these plans in an app and
02:14not a skiff, which, as we know, is a very highly classified room you go when you don't
02:18even bring your phone?
02:20I think all these things are a big deal. Maya's having a reporter's number. I mean, members
02:23of Congress and electeds all the time, you know, will be in communication with reporters.
02:28And that's normal. That's just how the business works. I don't think that's a big deal. But
02:31I think the other three things you mentioned are a huge deal. Why are we using Signal app?
02:36It's 2025. Like, I've used Signal in a professional setting as well, but I'm not discussing government
02:42secrets. I'm asking my colleagues, like, hey, I'm going to go to lunch. If anybody want
02:45to come with me, do you want me to bring you back a salad? I'm not giving airstrike
02:50times and those sorts of things, which is absolutely ridiculous that these things are
02:53being discussed. Yes, it should have been in a skiff. They shouldn't have had been able
02:59to discuss some of these things in Signal. And the fact that they're relying on Signal
03:03as just talking to someone. And look, when you work for Congress, for example, you use
03:08Microsoft. That is what we use. We use that for email and you use Microsoft Teams. We've
03:14also adopted ZoomGov in a lot of capacities, but it's the Gov version, right? Maybe we
03:19make a SignalGov. I think that Elon Musk has no business being around the administration
03:24and doing all the things he is with Doge. However, maybe we can lean into him with his
03:28expertise in innovation and say, like, hey, can we create a public private partnership
03:32for a SignalGov app or something similar? It is crazy that this is what happened. And
03:38we should be concerned. And as I said, the administration is doubling down when really
03:43what they should have done is said we made a mistake. Own it and tell American people
03:47who are going to make sure that I haven't really seen a lot of accountability. They're
03:50trying to, you know, pretend it's not a big deal, but it is. Let's talk about that accountability
03:56or lack thereof, because the national security adviser, Michael Waltz, he didn't blame it
04:01on a staffer when he was in an interview with Laura Ingram on Fox News. He said, I created
04:05the chat, but somehow Jeffrey Goldberg's number got sucked in. Those were his words. And I'm
04:11not a technology expert at all. If something's not working, I just shut it off and then back
04:15on. And if it doesn't go past that, I don't really have a solution. But I do use Signal
04:20and never in my experience with Signal has a number accidentally inadvertently been sucked
04:25into a group chat. I talked with a cybersecurity expert. She said that really doesn't happen.
04:30So what do you think of his his his interview, his response, his account of what happened?
04:37I mean, you know, I'm actually not sure how old Waltz is. So when I say boomer, he might
04:42not literally be a boomer. But honestly, maybe it's helpful. Boomer talk to say it just got
04:46sucked in, because as we know, as people use the app, that's not how it works. And that's
04:50generally not how texting somebody works. You don't get sucked in. You accidentally
04:54put the wrong number. Right. Which is clearly what happened in this case. Yeah, I don't
04:59know what something means. I don't think he knows what it means. I don't truly what I
05:05imagine happened, which is what seems to be what was earlier discussed at a staffer
05:08accident and put the wrong person on there. I will give him credit for not blaming a staffer
05:13and throwing them under the bus scene so far. And for I guess owning that part of it. But
05:19yeah, I don't really I don't really know what sucked in.
05:25And then I want to talk about the other piece of this because there's a popular phrase. It's
05:30not the crime. It's the cover cover up. And the things that were talked about in this
05:36signal chat, I mean, there are arguments whether there any laws were broken here. But at first
05:41after it was leaked on Monday, then it was people saying in the administration, Pete
05:46Hegseth, especially nothing was classified. We didn't talk about war plans. And he was
05:51trying to discredit the journalist Jeffrey Goldberg. Then when he I mean, it essentially
05:57egged him on to egg the Atlantic on to release the exact texts which were released. They
06:02said exactly the temperature where this was. I mean, they were very detailed. And then it
06:08was said, hey, see, we were right. They're not war plans. They're attack plans. What do
06:12you make of that? That whole fallout?
06:16I think that's really lame. And I think that they're taking no accountability for it,
06:21whether it's a war plan or attack plan or people use those terms synonymously. Right.
06:26There was information that should not have been put in a signal plant, excuse me, in a
06:30signal app or any sort of format that is not a SCIF or very classified or very safe to
06:37do. And they shared information that they should have. So, OK, if it's not a big deal,
06:41if that if that wasn't such a big deal, would it have been a big deal if they had put
06:46that up on the White House website?
06:47I think that would have been a big deal. Right. If they'd accidentally put it up on the
06:51website or if they decided intentionally to press send on a press release, add all those
06:55details, that would have been an issue.
06:57They would have said that shouldn't have been on the press release on the website.
07:01Maybe they think because it was a private conversation with people that it was
07:04something that was OK to share.
07:06But again, they rather than, you know, punch of the Atlantic and it's them flip flopping
07:11on the terminology and even they disagree with what they even think that just own it.
07:15And you're right. I think that's what's upsetting me as an American.
07:19People make it because if there was a Democrat, Republican would be up in arms about
07:24this situation. Yet a lot of people are saying it's not a big deal.
07:28It is a big deal. And we shouldn't be hypocritical just because there's an R next to
07:32their names. And it gave the story more legs because if there was more accountability,
07:39the Atlantic wouldn't feel the need to have released those text messages.
07:44And when you admit something in general in life, it stops a story in the tracks.
07:48What I mean, I think the best version of how this could have went for Mike Waltz, if he
07:54just said, hey, this was my mistake, it won't happen again.
07:57But what we really should be talking about is how successful this strike was redirected
08:02the conversation that way.
08:03Do you think because of what happened, the mistake that was seemingly made and the
08:08subsequent fallout, what do you think needs to happen here?
08:11Because President Trump earlier this week apparently told NBC News Michael Waltz
08:15learned his lesson. He's a good man.
08:17I mean, does someone have to get fired for this?
08:19What do you think? I mean, I think that Americans might want someone to have to take
08:25accountability in that way, whether that's being fired.
08:28I don't know that you can put them on some sort of probationary period.
08:31Right. I mean, it's the first few months anyway.
08:32So in theory, they're kind of in a probationary period anyway.
08:36Look, I don't think Waltz is a bad guy.
08:38He spent a lot of a long time in Congress.
08:40He is a veteran.
08:41I think he's probably one of the most qualified folks of the administration next to
08:46Senator Rubio, who actually like done the thing that they're been tasked to do.
08:51People do make mistakes.
08:52We're humans. We're not perfect.
08:54I think that had they done what you suggested, it would still be a story.
08:58But away from now, it probably wouldn't be as big of a story.
09:01We're going to continue talking about it, I think, for the foreseeable future.
09:04Just own it. At this moment, I would give the White House that that same piece of
09:09advice, even if it is a few days late to just own it.
09:12And I know I've said that like 10 times, probably already during this conversation.
09:15But tell people how you're going to ensure it's never going to happen again.
09:19And this is why.
09:20And because we now have come to the realization that a lot of people are using
09:25these apps like members of Congress and senators, et cetera, that we are in the
09:29process of starting some new sort of app, bringing in Elon Musk or whoever else to
09:34ensure that we're able to talk about classified things in this manner.
09:38Is that possible? I don't know, because our adversaries are always watching us.
09:42There was concerns that they that the Chinese were already after Gaiety Dance and
09:46his devices. And so when he is, you know, when there's already that such situation
09:51happening with when Lutnik is in Russia, right, like these are concerns that we
09:55really do need to take seriously.
09:57Thank God it was a journalist.
09:59Thank God nothing bad happened.
10:01But what if it had?
10:02It would be a lot bigger of a story.
10:04We got lucky. It's not because they were strategic about.
10:07And we know when it came out that Hillary Clinton was using a private email server, I
10:12mean, that was a story that didn't die for months and months, and Republicans were up
10:17in arms over that. Do you think because of this lack of full accountability here, this
10:22almost passing the buck of insulting Jeffrey Goldberg, saying other things, do you
10:29think that Republicans here are losing trust?
10:31And then how do they gain that?
10:33Because as we know, I mean, usually weekends are slower news days.
10:37This is going to be probably the leading story on every Sunday news show.
10:41I mean, where do Republicans go from here and how do they regain that trust?
10:46Honestly, I really think that it's incumbent upon Democrats in this situation to sort of
10:50did do what Republicans did with Hillary, you know, lock her up and all of that stuff.
10:54Maybe you don't need to be using that inflammatory language, but to really hold them
11:00accountable, because guess what?
11:01It worked for Republicans back in 2016.
11:03This is something that they can use for themselves to work now as far as Republicans and
11:07regaining trust. My advice to members of Congress or senators who are just sort of
11:11sitting and watching and seeing how this all unfolds is to be really honest about the
11:15situation. I saw Patrick McHenry, who's no longer a sitting member, but his former
11:20speaker, Pro Temp McHenry, say yesterday on the news, he was like, they just need to be
11:24able to take responsibility and say this is how we're going to make sure we move
11:29forward. So it never happens again.
11:31I think that's what all Republicans need to be saying moving forward, whether the
11:34administration does it or not, is we'll see what happens.
11:37I think we're probably more likely not because they already decided not to go down
11:41that path. But yes, I think we can't be hypocrites about the situation because if the
11:46rules were reversed, we would be very upset about what's happening and we would be
11:49calling for someone to resign.
11:52I do now want to switch gears just a little bit and talk about Elise Stefanik.
11:57President Trump nominated her for human ambassador.
11:59He then on Thursday pulled that nomination, citing the razor thin majority, the GOP
12:05majority in the House. What are your thoughts on what happened?
12:09Well, I do feel really bad for Elise Stefanik.
12:12She was the youngest woman to ever be elected to Congress at her time.
12:16I really looked up to her.
12:18She was a member of the Tuesday group.
12:19She was moderate. And then all of a sudden when it was impeachment stuff, that's when
12:23she started the lockstep with Trump.
12:25And I think she saw the potential there to sort of carve a lane out for herself.
12:30I'll be honest, I think that she bet on the wrong horse, which is Trump.
12:33I think she should have been betting on herself because she was already a rising star.
12:36She'll continue to be a rising star.
12:37But what we see is unfortunate when she was, you know, going on her way to becoming
12:43going to the U.N.
12:45the way. But from my understanding is that you're only allowed to take two staff with
12:48you. That means all of her other staff that was part of her conference leadership team,
12:52they've already dispersed to other offices.
12:54Right. And so what? She's not going to have to rebuild her team.
12:57She is not going to be in a leadership position.
12:59They might give her like a fun de facto assistant speaker gig or something like that, but
13:04not an actual troop leadership position or a committee or something like that, because
13:08those have already been decided.
13:10It's a tough spot to be in.
13:12You know, if I was her, I wouldn't be too happy.
13:14Another thing that's really interesting, though, to consider here, we were talking about
13:17the members in the House, is that sadly, two members, two Democrat House members died in
13:22March. And so though we are talking about slim margins here, the margins are actually a
13:27little bit bigger now than they were even two months ago when they were officially
13:31sworn in. So if I was Elise, I wouldn't be that enthused about what's going on.
13:36I'm sure there have been lots of conversations.
13:37Maybe they're trying to promise her a gig later on down the line when the margins are a
13:42little safer. The other thing to think about as well is that this race, if she's to run
13:47again, is supposed to be a tougher race in her district than it has been the last few
13:51cycles. And so that also puts her in a really tough position, too.
13:54And I still think she's got a bright future ahead of her.
13:57She's only 40 years old.
13:59But like, wow, what what a story it's there.
14:04And yeah, let's talk about what that future really looks like, because she had her sights
14:09on leaving and going into the Trump administration.
14:11I mean, if you look at her Instagram, it is a highlight reel of all of her, you know,
14:16congressional best hits because she thought she was out of there.
14:19Like you said, she gave up her leadership position to Lisa or Lisa McClain.
14:23Now has that she was a rising star.
14:25She was very moderate.
14:27She's from New York now.
14:28As you said, she's in lockstep with President Trump.
14:31And it seems like her not her political career was cut at its knees, but it went from
14:36becoming U.N. ambassador. We know Nikki Haley was U.N.
14:38ambassador. She ran for president.
14:40I mean, what does this do for her political future?
14:45I think she'll be OK, ultimately.
14:47I might be rough these next six months or the rest of the year trying to figure out
14:51what lane she does belong in.
14:53I'm sure she'll still continue to, you know, be very supportive of the administration
14:57and President Trump advice with an advance and do her best to sort of continue that
15:02highlight reel and show folks like, hey, I'm like I'm not on the team, but like I'm
15:06still on the team, you know, and I'm sure we'll try to find a spot for her.
15:10If I was her, I would be needling them like every week, like, hey, you want to follow
15:15up? Just want to follow up on that promise that you made me, which maybe there wasn't
15:17one, right? I assume it's politics.
15:20There's always conversations. Doesn't mean it has to be bad, but there's always
15:23conversations happening of like how you can help each other.
15:26So if I were to her, I would be constantly following up, like, you know, being a good
15:30sport, being a team player, but being a team player in this case didn't help her.
15:34So I don't know.
15:35I think she'll ultimately be OK, but I would be incredibly frustrated if I was her.
15:40And this news took a lot of people by surprise.
15:43And I want to talk about Democrats reaction.
15:45Here's what minority leader Hakeem Jeffries said, quote, The Republican agenda is
15:49extremely unpopular.
15:51They're crashing the economy in real time.
15:53And House Republicans are running scared.
15:55What happens? Their so-called mandate.
15:57I mean, what do you think?
15:59Do you think he has a point?
16:00Does this look like Republicans are running scared because President Trump didn't
16:04sugarcoat it? He said the reason he's pulling her is because of the House's slim or
16:08the GOP's slim majority in the House.
16:11I also find it really ironic that now all of a sudden he cares about the majority in
16:16the House, when so far he's just been signing a lot of executive orders, which
16:20ultimately don't have long staying power for actually eliciting change long term
16:26into law. So maybe he's changing his tune now because he realizes, OK, it's been a
16:30few months. I've really actually got to start doing work and not just sign these
16:33pieces of paper that don't actually do anything.
16:36But yeah, he's right.
16:37I mean, it is a majority.
16:38It was always going to be a majority.
16:40I don't quite know what that number is now, given the two members of Congress who
16:45did pass away this March.
16:46But yeah, if I were him, I guess it doesn't really signal strength in doing that.
16:51And I'm sure that hers was last because they were always looking to see what does
16:56this look like? What are the special elections coming up?
16:59Will Republicans win?
17:00Are we going to potentially lose?
17:02And I don't know that this has ever happened before, but within the Congress, from
17:07one side to the other, like that would be crazy.
17:09And obviously anyone in power would want to avoid that.
17:12It'd be really interesting to see, I'll be honest.
17:15But of course, they're not going to want to do that.
17:17They want to do their best to make sure that doesn't happen.
17:19And so if that means pulling her nomination, so be it.
17:23I think it'll be interesting to see who they put into that role and if they're still
17:28having conversations or figuring that out.
17:30But I yeah, I can't imagine that this mandate is doing is it it's not doing so hot
17:37so far. And I think it is a testament to that.
17:40You know, I guess he did win.
17:41It wasn't by overwhelming margins.
17:43So it's really not a mandate after all.
17:46And to that point, is there anyone you would want to see replace Elise Stefanik as
17:51U.N. ambassador nominee and eventually be confirmed?
17:56Nikki Haley again, no, she I don't think she would ever do it.
17:59And at this point, I don't think the administration maybe they had wanted her to
18:03join the admin. Maybe not now.
18:05Who knows? But not really.
18:08I, I think maybe a former senator or member of Congress who's no longer in office and
18:15as retired. I love Patrick McHenry.
18:19I don't think he would do it, but he was in Congress for a few decades and is very
18:23diplomatic. I think he could be a great get for them.
18:27I think he's probably happy not associating with Congress.
18:31So and the admin and doing that's my opinion.
18:35I don't know. Well, Brittany Martinez, per usual, I love getting your input.
18:41Thank you so much for joining me.
18:42You are welcome back anytime.
18:45Thanks for having me.