“Mike Waltz can call me a loser if he wants, but at least I know how to text and manage a group chat,” Jeffrey Goldberg said while speaking in McAlister Auditorium. During his conversation on March 27 at the annual New Orleans Book Festival, The Atlantic Editor-in-Chief Jeffrey Goldberg talked about his recent experiences with U.S. leadership. U.S. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz mistakenly added Goldberg to a group chat in which government officials discussed plans for U.S. war strikes in Yemen against Houthi targets.
The Signal group chat included U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Vice President J.D. Vance and U.S. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. Goldberg wrote an article for The Atlantic about the controversial messages in the chat and how the breach of security seemed unbelievable, as officials were chatting about plans to bomb Yemen. Goldberg’s reporting employed journalistic standards; he did not divulge full details until the Trump administration stated that the information was “not classified,” and was simply “sensitive policy discussion.”
During Goldberg’s visit to Tulane, he spoke to my class, The Digital Revolution, taught by Walter Isaacson, Tulane’s Leonard Lauder professor of American history and values. Goldberg discussed the global noise surrounding his article and the unwarranted repercussions he has experienced.
After the piece was published, the administration attacked the messenger, insulting Goldberg and his magazine. Both in the class discussion and at Book Fest, Goldberg explained that he considered the best interests of the readers when releasing the story. He mentioned the importance of holding powerful people accountable and letting the public decide what is right from wrong.
In response to Goldberg’s article, Waltz said that Goldberg was “the bottom scum of journalists” and that he had “no clue who he was,” according to an article in the New York Post. Trump called Jeffery Goldberg a “sleazebag,” according to a The Wall Street Journal article.
It is absurd that Waltz would brutally and publicly criticize Goldberg, when the entire situation was his fault. The Trump administration excoriated Goldberg for honestly exposing wrongdoing. This is a pattern in modern United States politics. This is not the first time a member of the administration has used crude and inappropriate language at the expense of another to deflect from their own faults.
In recent years, the United States’ political leadership has lost any sense of respect for the opposing side. Waltz’s outlandish insults are a perfect example of this. In Trump’s campaign for the 2024 presidential election, Trump called his opponent former Vice President Kamala Harris “slow, low IQ” in October 2024. That same month, Trump referred to Harris as “a s— vice president.”
The inflammatory rhetoric used by our current leaders has influenced the way we treat each other based on political preference. If our elected leaders, often deemed the most qualified, respectable individuals in our country, show each other disrespect, the citizens of the United States can see it, internalize it and repeat that behavior. The lack of civil discourse between our leaders has created a new surge of hatred and division between Americans. Politicians should change the language they use towards one another and respect each other as equals, despite any differences in political affiliation. Americans and political leaders can make a shift in conversation from personal attacks and name-calling to rational discussion.