There was no classified information, as I understand it.

They used an app, if you want to call it an app,

that a lot of people use, a lot of people in government use,

a lot of people in the media used.

The public understands that he's a very good man.

That man is a very good man right there that you criticize so strongly.

He's a very good man right there that you criticize so strongly. He's a very good man and he will continue to do a good job. I was President Trump yesterday showing support for his national security advisor

while trying to minimize the military plans that were shared over signal with a journalist.

The question is, can Mike Waltz or other top administration officials survive this scandal?

Meanwhile, Trump's intel chiefs were evasive on Capitol Hill when pressed by lawmakers about the

group chat. The question is, will they continue to stonewall Democrats in hopes that this story

fades away? Plus, House Speaker Mike Johnson is floating the idea of Congress eliminating some

federal courts. The question is, can he actually do that? It's way too early, the show that may never have another piece of chewing gum.

We're going to explain why a little later on.

I'm Ali Vitale on this Wednesday, March 26th, and we'll start as always with the news.

President Trump continues to downplay the significance of his top administration officials

inadvertently sharing military plans with a journalist over a signal chat.

The president claimed multiple times yesterday that no classified information was shared,

and he defended his national

security advisor, Mike Waltz, after journalist Jeffrey Goldberg was added to that group chat of

top administration officials. Last night, Trump blamed a Waltz staffer for adding Goldberg.

There was no classified information, as I understand it. It wasn't classified information, so this was not classified.

...