Vice President J.D. Vance faced backlash from within his own party this week — not for a policy mistake, but for taking time to ask whether U.S. military strikes in Yemen were justified. In a closed-door Signal chat, Vance voiced concerns about the operation’s impact and whether the public had been adequately prepared.
Although he ultimately backed the plan, Vance noted that European interests were more directly threatened than U.S. ones and raised concerns about possible spikes in fuel prices. His suggestions were met not with direct rebuttals but with anonymous criticism leaked to Jewish Insider.
That outlet quickly came under fire after publishing a report that falsely blamed the Houthis for a January attack on U.S. forces. The error was later corrected after Vance pointed it out publicly. The rest of the article included unnamed senators calling Vance’s viewpoint “perplexing” and worrying about how it might shape the party’s future.
Donald Trump Jr. was blunt in his response. He called the critics “genuine pussies” and said their refusal to speak on the record showed they knew they had lost the debate. He pointed to Vance’s growing popularity as a reason for the attacks.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) said Vance’s approach is exactly what Americans want — a leader who thinks critically and places U.S. interests above foreign demands. Others, including Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), said private policy discussions should allow space for all views.
Even Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), who disagreed with Vance’s position, acknowledged that the vice president has been consistent. That consistency is exactly what voters seem to value.
The leak itself came after The Atlantic mistakenly received access to the chat thread. What it revealed was not recklessness, but restraint — and that appears to be what worries the D.C. insiders most.
