A few days after the White House’s Signal chat scandal erupted, it became clear that Congress’ Republican majority would not launch any oversight investigations, but some key lawmakers voiced support for a different kind of probe.

For example, the top two members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Republican Chairman Roger Wicker and Democratic Ranking Member Jack Reed, formally requested that the acting inspector general at the Department of Defense open an inquiry into the potential “use of unclassified networks to discuss sensitive and classified information, as well as the sharing of such information with those who do not have proper clearance and need to know.”

Soon after, Republican Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union” and rejected the suggestion that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth needed to resign, but added that it’s “entirely appropriate” for the Pentagon’s inspector general to take a closer look.

As it turns out, officials at the Department of Defense agreed. NBC News reported:

The Pentagon Office of the Inspector General just announced a subject evaluation into allegations that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth used an unclassified commercially available messaging app — Signal — to discuss classified information about military actions in Yemen. … In addition to looking at whether Hegseth complied with rules governing classified information, the inspector general will also look at whether rules about record retention were followed.

Time will tell what, if anything, the IG’s scrutiny produces, but there’s no denying that the publicly available information clearly paints an unflattering portrait of the beleaguered amateur Pentagon chief.

By now, the basic elements of the controversy are probably familiar: Top members of Donald Trump’s national security team participated in an unsecured group chat about sensitive operational details of a foreign military strike — and they accidentally included a journalist, The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg, in their online conversation.

The final paragraph of Goldberg’s piece read, “All along, members of the Signal group were aware of the need for secrecy and operations security. In his text detailing aspects of the forthcoming attack on Houthi targets, Hegseth wrote to the group — which, at the time, included me — ‘We are currently clean on OPSEC.’”

“OPSEC” referred to “operations security.” In other words, the defense secretary was certain that he and his colleagues — while chatting on a free platform that has never been approved for chats about national security and classified intelligence — had locked everything down and created a secure channel of communications.

Of course, we now know that Team Trump was most certainly not “clean on OPSEC,” Hegseth’s embarrassing boast notwithstanding.

What’s more, while there was some discussion about whether the discussion included classified information, there’s no denying the online chat included highly sensitive information about times and targets, much of which was put there by Hegseth himself.

“1215et: F-18s LAUNCH (1st strike package),” Hegseth told his colleagues in the chat. “1345: ‘Trigger Based’ F-18 1st Strike Window Starts (Target Terrorist is @ his Known Location so SHOULD BE ON TIME) — also, Strike Drones Launch (MQ-9s).” At one point, the defense secretary literally wrote, “THIS IS WHEN THE FIRST BOMBS WILL DEFINITELY DROP.”

All of this comes against a backdrop of other damaging headlines about the former Fox News personality, including reports this week that he gave an important Pentagon job to his unqualified younger brother and included his wife in meetings in which sensitive information was discussed, despite her lack of a security clearance.

Earlier this week, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt declared, in reference to the “Signalgate” fiasco, that “this case has been closed.” It appears that the Pentagon’s inspector general just opened it back up.