Karoline Leavitt Shuts Down Kaitlan Collins in Tense White House Briefing Over Signal Chat Controversy

In a dramatic and highly publicized confrontation, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt delivered a sharp rebuke to CNN’s chief White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins during a press briefing on March 26, 2025. The clash, which centered on the controversial use of the Signal messaging app by Trump administration officials to discuss a military strike, underscored the growing tensions between the administration and mainstream media outlets. Leavitt’s firm seven-word dismissal—“Kaitlan, I’m not taking your follow-up”—quickly became a viral moment, igniting debates about press access, government transparency, and the role of media in holding power to account. As the incident reverberates across political and media circles, it highlights the challenges of navigating a polarized landscape where every exchange is scrutinized for deeper implications.

The Signal Chat Controversy: A Brewing Storm

The controversy that sparked the fiery exchange began when The Atlantic editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg revealed he had been mistakenly added to a Signal group chat involving senior Trump administration officials. The chat, which discussed a military strike against Houthi rebels in Yemen, raised concerns about the security of classified information and the administration’s communication protocols. According to The Atlantic, the messages included minute-by-minute operational details and specifics about weaponry, contradicting initial White House claims that no classified information had been shared

The leak, dubbed “Signalgate” by some media outlets, quickly escalated into a major talking point, with reporters pressing the administration for clarity. During the March 26 briefing, Leavitt found herself at the center of this storm, facing a barrage of questions about the incident. She opened the session with a defensive tone, dismissing The Atlantic’s reporting as “sensational spin” and labeling Goldberg an “anti-Trump hater.” Leavitt went further, highlighting Goldberg’s political affiliations, noting that he is a registered Democrat and that his wife, also a Democrat, had ties to Hillary Clinton’s campaign [Web ID: 0] [Web ID: 20]. This personal attack on Goldberg set the stage for a contentious briefing, as Leavitt sought to discredit the story while defending the administration’s actions.

The Clash: Leavitt vs. Collins

The tension reached its peak when Kaitlan Collins, known for her tenacious reporting, posed a pointed question to Leavitt: “Does the president feel that he was misled by his national security advisors—whoever it was that told him there was no classified information in there—now that he’s seen these messages?” The question was a direct challenge to the administration’s narrative, especially after Trump himself had downplayed the incident as a “glitch” and expressed continued trust in his national security team [Web ID: 0] [Web ID: 7].

Leavitt’s response was immediate and unyielding. “I’ve now been asked and answered this question three times by the both of you, and I’ve given you my answer,” she said, her frustration palpable. “The president feels the same today as he did yesterday.” Undeterred, Collins attempted to press further, raising her hand to ask a follow-up question about Goldberg’s reporting. Before she could finish, Leavitt cut her off with a now-infamous seven-word retort: “Kaitlan, I’m not taking your follow-up.” Collins persisted, reiterating that she had a follow-up, but Leavitt doubled down, repeating the phrase more firmly before moving on to another reporter, Philip Wegman of RealClearPolitics [Web ID: 0] [Web ID: 1].

The exchange was captured on live television, with cameras showing Collins maintaining her composure but visibly staring down Leavitt, who appeared unruffled as she shifted focus to the next question [Web ID: 3]. The moment quickly went viral, with clips circulating on social media platforms like X, where users praised Leavitt for standing her ground or criticized her for evading accountability, depending on their political leanings [Post ID: 0] [Post ID: 4].

Leavitt’s Defense and the Administration’s Stance

Leavitt’s handling of the briefing reflected the administration’s broader strategy of deflecting criticism and casting doubt on the media’s credibility. In her opening remarks, she accused Democrats and the mainstream media of orchestrating a “misinformation campaign,” claiming that the Signal chat story was a “hoax” despite acknowledging its legitimacy earlier in the briefing [Web ID: 3] [Web ID: 21]. She also defended President Trump’s trust in his national security team, arguing that the administration would not be “lectured about national security and American troops” by Democrats and media outlets that had failed to hold the Biden administration accountable for the deaths of 13 service members during the Afghanistan withdrawal in 2021 [Web ID: 0] [Web ID: 20].

Leavitt’s attacks on Goldberg were particularly pointed, framing him as a biased actor with an agenda. “Goldberg is an anti-Trump hater,” she declared, emphasizing his and his wife’s Democratic ties as evidence of his lack of credibility [Web ID: 0]. This tactic of discrediting the messenger rather than addressing the message has become a hallmark of the Trump administration’s media strategy, but it did little to quell the reporters’ focus on the Signal chat fiasco. Frustrated by the persistent questions, Leavitt cut the briefing short after just 22 minutes, citing the need to avoid overlapping with a speech by Vice President JD Vance at a military base in Quantico, Virginia [Web ID: 0] [Web ID: 20].

The Bigger Picture: Media vs. Administration Tensions

The clash between Leavitt and Collins is emblematic of the broader tensions between the Trump administration and mainstream media outlets like CNN. Collins, who has a history of sparring with Trump and his team, has been a frequent target of criticism from the administration. Trump himself has called her a “nasty person” during a 2024 town hall and has interrupted her questions at press events, including a notable instance in March 2025 when he told her, “Excuse me, I didn’t pick you” [Web ID: 4] [Web ID: 7]. The administration’s decision to reshuffle the White House briefing room seating plan, moving mainstream media reporters like Collins to the back while favoring certain journalists, further underscores this adversarial relationship

For Leavitt, the briefing marked one of her toughest days on the job since becoming the youngest White House Press Secretary in history at age 27. Her combative style, while effective in rallying Trump’s base, has drawn criticism for its lack of transparency and unwillingness to engage with legitimate questions. Collins, on the other hand, has been praised for her persistence but also faces scrutiny from pro-Trump circles, where her exchanges with Leavitt and Trump are often turned into memes mocking her perceived failures [Web ID: 6] [Web ID: 23].

Public and Media Reactions

The public reaction to the Leavitt-Collins clash has been predictably polarized. On X, some users celebrated Leavitt’s firm stance, with posts commending her for putting Collins “in her place” and refusing to entertain what they saw as biased questioning [Post ID: 0] [Post ID: 4]. Others, however, criticized Leavitt for dodging accountability and stifling press freedom, arguing that her refusal to answer Collins’ follow-up question was a sign of the administration’s broader unwillingness to face scrutiny.

Media outlets have also weighed in, with some framing the exchange as a microcosm of the Trump administration’s fraught relationship with the press. The Daily Beast described the moment as a “fiery clash,” noting Collins’ composure in the face of Leavitt’s stern rebuff [Web ID: 3]. Mediaite highlighted the viral nature of the exchange, pointing out that it has become “cinema for Republicans hungry to see Collins—and other members of the mainstream media—fail” [Web ID: 1] [Web ID: 23]. Meanwhile, progressive commentators have questioned whether Leavitt’s tactics are sustainable, suggesting that her refusal to engage with tough questions could further erode public trust in the administration.

What This Means for the Future

The Leavitt-Collins showdown raises important questions about the state of press relations under the Trump administration. By shutting down Collins and attacking the credibility of The Atlantic, Leavitt may have scored points with Trump’s base, but she also risks alienating a broader audience that values transparency and accountability. The Signal chat controversy, while downplayed by the administration, remains a legitimate concern, particularly given the national security implications of such a leak. The administration’s insistence on framing it as a “hoax” despite confirming its authenticity only deepens skepticism about its commitment to truthfulness

For Collins and other journalists, the incident underscores the challenges of covering an administration that views the press as an adversary rather than a partner in informing the public. As the 2025 political landscape continues to evolve, these tensions are likely to intensify, with more clashes between the White House and the media inevitable. Whether Leavitt’s approach will prove effective in managing these challenges—or whether it will further strain the administration’s credibility—remains to be seen.

Conclusion

Karoline Leavitt’s brutal seven-word dismissal of Kaitlan Collins during the March 26, 2025, White House briefing has become a defining moment in the ongoing saga of the Trump administration’s relationship with the press. By refusing to entertain Collins’ follow-up question about the Signal chat controversy, Leavitt asserted her control over the briefing but also highlighted the administration’s reluctance to address legitimate concerns. The exchange, fueled by Leavitt’s attacks on The Atlantic and her defense of Trump’s national security team, has sparked widespread debate about press access, government transparency, and the role of media in a polarized era. As the fallout continues, this moment serves as a stark reminder of the high stakes involved in the battle for truth and accountability in today’s political climate.