Washington D.C. — In a confirmation hearing marked by tense exchanges, Congressman Mike Waltz (R-FL) faced aggressive bipartisan questioning over his participation in encrypted Signal groups potentially linked to January 6th activities. The Florida Republican’s nomination as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations hit turbulence as senators demanded transparency about alleged “Burn Notice” protocols and national security implications of his private communications.
The Core Allegations
During the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, lawmakers zeroed in on three critical concerns:
- “Operation Burn Notice” Protocol: Senators cited evidence that Waltz participated in Signal groups where members allegedly activated “disappearing messages” before January 6th—a potential obstruction tactic.
- Content Contradictions: Despite previously testifying his communications involved “routine coordination,” internal messages reportedly discussed “disruptive actions” and “response scenarios” preceding the Capitol breach.
- Security Clearance Omission: Waltz acknowledged failing to disclose Signal participation during his 2023 security clearance renewal—a violation of Standard Form 86 requirements.
Read more: President Trump just called out Adam Schiff for Committing Mortgage Fraud
The Hearing Showdown: Key Exchanges
- Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD): “How can we trust you with classified U.N. deliberations when you used disappearing messages for congressional business?”
- Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL): Pressed whether Signal use violated House record-keeping laws, noting: “Even casual chats about official matters require preservation.”
- Waltz’s Defense: Claimed messages were “personal conversations,” denied discussing illegal activities, and insisted the groups were “social forums for colleagues.”
During a confirmation hearing for U.N. ambassador, former national security adviser Mike Waltz was questioned about the Signal chat controversy.
— ABC News (@ABC) July 15, 2025
"My understanding is the Department of Defense is still conducting an investigation," Waltz said. https://t.co/Amhob6s0bd pic.twitter.com/nqeCJtck3R
Table: The Signal Controversy Timeline
| Date | Event | Waltz’s Position |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 2020 | Joined “Congressional Patriots” Signal Group | “Policy discussion forum” |
| Jan 3-5, 2021 | “Burn Notice” messages activated | “Standard privacy practice” |
| Jan 6, 2021 | Capitol attack occurs | “No group coordination that day” |
| 2023 SF-86 | Failed to disclose encrypted app use | “Oversight; corrected in hearing” |
Why Signal Matters at the U.N.
The scrutiny extends beyond January 6th implications. As nominee for U.N. Ambassador, Waltz would handle:
- Classified Intelligence Briefings: Daily access to top-secret NSA/CIA assessments
- Sensitive Diplomatic Negotiations: Nuclear non-proliferation talks, sanctions drafting
- Secure Communications Protocols: U.N. messaging systems requiring meticulous record-keeping
Experts warn encrypted apps create accountability gaps incompatible with ambassadorial duties. “Signal leaves no forensic trail,” former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley noted recently. “That’s dangerous for policy transparency.”
The Legal Precedents
Waltz’s actions potentially violate:
- Federal Records Act: Mandates preservation of official communications (penalties: suspension/fines)
- 18 U.S.C. § 2071: Criminalizes destruction of government documents
- Security Clearance Guidelines: Willful omission of communication channels = automatic disqualification
The Justice Department recently prosecuted three aides under similar statutes, resulting in probation terms.
Political Fallout
- Democratic Strategy: Framing Waltz as “two-faced” on security—noting his 2023 bill prohibiting encrypted apps in government.
- Republican Dilemma: While most support Waltz, whispers of “alternate candidates” emerged post-hearing.
- Confirmation Odds: Hangs on whether Chairman Ben Cardin (D-MD) subpoenas Signal metadata—a move that could delay confirmation for months.
Read more: AMD Cleared to Resume MI308 AI Chip Shipments to China, Ending $800M Standoff
What Comes Next
- Metadata Review: Judiciary Committee may request Signal’s “last seen” timestamps for Waltz’s account.
- Ethics Investigation: House Office of Congressional Ethics could reopen dormant probes.
- Committee Vote: Scheduled July 25th—unless new evidence emerges.
As Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) stated bluntly: “We can’t have two standards: one for allies, another for opponents. If you used Burn Notice, explain why.” Waltz’s ambassadorial hopes now hinge on disproving what the Signal logs may reveal—or convincing senators that private channels won’t compromise America’s most sensitive diplomatic post.
The hearing exposed a Washington truth: in the digital age, disappearing messages never truly vanish from scrutiny. For Waltz, the U.N. nomination now depends on recovering what he claimed was lost.
Lydia Crawford covers national security and diplomatic affairs. Additional reporting by Senate press pool transcripts and DOJ documents.
1 thought on “Mike Waltz Questioned on Signal Chat Controversy During U.N. Ambassador Hearing”