Waltz Nearly Faced Termination and Might Yet

On Wednesday evening, following a tumultuous day filled with headlines about the controversial Signal chat, Vice President JD Vance, along with chief of staff Susie Wiles and personnel official Sergio Gor, offered President Donald Trump some private counsel.

The accidental inclusion of a journalist in the chat by national security adviser Mike Waltz was causing significant embarrassment for the White House. They hinted that it might be time to consider letting Waltz go, according to two individuals familiar with the discussions who requested anonymity.

The president acknowledged that Waltz had made a mistake, these sources indicated; however, Trump ultimately chose not to dismiss him at this time, primarily because he was unwilling to give "the liberal media and pearl-clutching Democrats a win."

“They don’t want to give the press a scalp,” noted one ally close to the situation.

Despite the building frustration within the White House toward Waltz, he held onto his position five days after The Atlantic released its damaging story about the Signal chat. Still, this doesn’t guarantee his long-term safety, the two sources emphasized.

In fact, they indicated that some officials are waiting for the opportune moment to part ways with Waltz, eager to avoid further media scrutiny during this transition.

One of them made a prediction: “They’ll stick by him for now, but he’ll be gone in a couple of weeks.”

Vance’s office opted not to comment. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated that “President Trump continues to have the utmost confidence in his national security team, including National Security Advisor Mike Waltz.”

Interestingly, news of the previously unreported Wednesday night meeting, coupled with the widespread belief that Waltz’s time in the administration is limited, surfaced while top officials rallied publicly to defend him.

On Friday, Vance, a loyal team player who seemingly accepted Trump’s decision quickly, included Waltz in a notable trip to Greenland, leaving personnel matters to the president's discretion, as per an anonymous source familiar with internal dynamics.

He went further, poking fun at reporters and suggesting they were merely seeking drama, pledging that they wouldn’t get it.

“If you think you're going to force the president of the United States to fire anybody you've got another thing coming!” he exclaimed. “I’m the vice president saying it here on Friday: We are standing behind our entire national security team.”

The president himself mentioned this week that Waltz took responsibility and “has learned a lesson.”

Fortunately for Waltz, the intensity of the drama seems to have subsided. The top headlines are shifting from “Signalgate” to Trump’s impending April 2 tariff deadline. Meanwhile, the upcoming special elections are bringing into focus the party’s politically precarious situation.

Nonetheless, behind the scenes, despite the White House’s public portrayal of the episode as a smear campaign, there is an underlying sense that Waltz has eroded the trust of his colleagues and mishandled his response.

Brian Hughes, a spokesman for Waltz, countered claims about Waltz’s uncertain future, arguing that “the chattering of unnamed sources should be treated with the skepticism of gossip from people lacking the integrity to attach their names.”

“Mike Waltz serves at the pleasure of President Trump and the president has voiced his support for Mike,” Hughes continued. “The entire National Security leadership team has led a successful and effective counter-terrorism mission, and that is what media and Democrats are trying to obscure.”

The Wednesday evening gathering occurred amid growing frustration with Waltz at the White House. The day prior, he had informed reporters that he had “never met, don’t know, never communicated with” Jeffrey Goldberg, the Atlantic editor-in-chief included in the chat. “Wouldn’t know him if I bumped into him, if I saw him in a police lineup,” Waltz asserted on Fox News Tuesday night.

However, the following day, officials—already doubtful of his claim—grew more frustrated after a viral social media post revealed Waltz standing next to the editor at a past embassy event.

One ally of Waltz, speaking anonymously, said it was absurd to think that being pictured next to someone at a large private event implied acquaintance.

As officials circulated the tweet, they shared another aggravating story: Waltz’s Venmo contacts were public and included several mainstream journalists.

Top officials were particularly irked by what they perceived as Waltz’s failure to take responsibility. They were displeased by his insinuation that the journalist had intruded into the Signal chat, a claim that could potentially lead to an investigation and prolong the scandal.

Most disappointing for some was Waltz’s decision not to offer his resignation to Trump, in an act to gauge the president’s response.

“When you’re a staffer and you become a liability or distraction for your principal, you fucking resign—I don’t care what the situation is,” stated one of the sources.

Meanwhile, dissatisfaction with Waltz has started to leak out—not only due to his hawkish ideological views that some believe lean away from the “America First” isolationism favored by parts of the administration.

Multiple Trump allies have noted that prior to the controversy, Waltz was viewed by some in the administration as having an inflated sense of self-importance. Two insiders remarked that he often lingered too long around Trump, projecting an air of superiority.

“People don’t like him. He thinks he’s a principal, and he’s not. He’s a staffer, and he has a hard time wrapping his fucking head around that,” said one source.

Conversations among White House allies also hinted at issues in Waltz’s relationship with fellow Floridian Wiles, suggesting that it had soured since his appointment. At one point, Waltz reportedly tried to exclude her from top NSC meetings, asserting he would brief her later. Wiles countered by stating that it was not his decision to make.

“He doesn't treat her with the kind of respect that he should be treating a chief of staff, and he was probably going to be gone at some point anyway,” said another individual familiar with the situation. “So he probably will be gone, but they just don't want to make it about this.”

A Waltz supporter maintained that Waltz holds deep respect for Wiles.

Notably, Trump has found himself in similar predicaments before. During the early months of his first term, he faced substantial pressure to dismiss his then-national security adviser Michael Flynn after reports emerged that Flynn had lied to Vice President Mike Pence and other officials about his discussions with Russian representatives during the transition.

Trump ultimately yielded to the pressure and removed Flynn, someone he considered a loyal ally, only to later express regret over his decision. He and some advisors felt that by acquiescing, they had succumbed to a narrative regarding Russia that shadowed his presidency moving forward.

This time around, however, things might be different.

“His superpower has been that he doesn't care or respond to the press,” noted one insider.

Yet, while this has saved Waltz for now, the same may not hold true in the future, the individual cautioned.

Emily Johnson for TROIB News