VP JD Vance unleashes on Jewish Insider over a controversial article that scrutinizes his foreign policy stance, exposing growing tensions between establishment Republicans and the Trump administration.
Quick Takes
- Vice President JD Vance called Jewish Insider an “anti-JD rag” and labeled its editor-in-chief Josh Kraushaar “the biggest hack in Washington” following a critical article about his foreign policy positions.
- The controversy began when Vance’s comments in a Signal chat about military strikes on Houthi rebels were inadvertently shared with The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief.
- Some Republican senators anonymously criticized Vance’s non-interventionist stance, while others like Sen. Thom Tillis acknowledged his consistency.
- Vance highlighted factual errors in the Jewish Insider article, which later issued a correction.
- Donald Trump Jr. defended Vance, dismissing the anonymous critics as “cowardly neocons.”
Vance’s Forceful Response to Media Criticism
Vice President JD Vance has mounted a vigorous defense of his foreign policy positions following what he characterized as a misleading article published by Jewish Insider. The publication scrutinized Vance’s stance on potential military strikes against Houthi rebels in Yemen, portraying the Vice President as isolated within his party. The controversy erupted when comments Vance made in a private Signal chat were inadvertently shared with Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, and subsequently reported on by Jewish Insider.
Vance didn’t mince words in his response, calling Jewish Insider an “anti-JD rag” and its editor-in-chief Josh Kraushaar the “biggest hack in Washington.” His harsh criticism came after the publication ran what he described as a “hit piece” that relied heavily on anonymous sources to paint him as out of step with Republican foreign policy priorities.
This morning, @JoshKraushaar ran a hit piece against me in Jewish Insider, which has become an anti-JD rag. It has many problems, including seven anonymous quotes from cowardly Republicans.
But the most glaring factual error is the below, which says the Houthis killed three… pic.twitter.com/kzbzrqjIYC
— JD Vance (@JDVance) March 27, 2025
Foreign Policy Disagreements Within GOP Ranks
The Jewish Insider article highlighted Vance’s questioning of the strategic value of military strikes against Houthi rebels, suggesting his view that such actions primarily benefited European interests rather than American ones. This stance reportedly alarmed some Republican senators, who expressed concern that Vance’s non-interventionist approach could shift GOP foreign policy away from established norms and potentially confuse European allies. The article portrayed Vance as potentially misaligned with national security priorities, citing anonymous Republican senators.
Senator Thom Tillis acknowledged Vance’s consistent position, noting that the Vice President has long opposed projecting American military power unless there’s a direct threat to the United States. While Tillis indicated he personally disagrees with this approach, he respected Vance’s principled stance. Other senators suggested that the debate was healthy for foreign policy discussions within the party, even as they expressed concerns about potential confusion among allies.
Factual Errors and Journalistic Integrity
Vance took particular issue with what were identified as factual errors in the Jewish Insider piece. Specifically, he pointed out that the article had incorrectly attributed the deaths of U.S. service members to the Houthis, when in fact those deaths were caused by a different militant group. This error formed a central part of his criticism of Kraushaar, whom he accused of allowing demonstrably false information to be published and labeled the “dumbest journalist in Washington.”
Following Vance’s public criticism, Jewish Insider issued a correction to the article, acknowledging the error. The Vice President’s office referred inquiries to a statement from Donald Trump Jr., who characterized the anonymous senators cited in the article as “cowardly neocons” unwilling to attach their names to their criticisms. This incident highlights ongoing tensions between different factions within the Republican Party regarding America’s role on the world stage.
The Broader Implications for Trump Administration Foreign Policy
The controversy surrounding Vance’s foreign policy stance reflects a larger debate within Republican circles about America’s role in international conflicts. Vance’s apparent skepticism toward military intervention aligns with certain elements of President Trump’s “America First” approach, which has often questioned the value of U.S. involvement in conflicts that don’t directly threaten American interests. The pushback from establishment Republicans suggests continuing tensions over the direction of GOP foreign policy.
While one anonymous senator suggested President Trump might be disappointed in Vance’s position, there has been no public indication from the White House about any dissatisfaction with the Vice President’s views. Instead, the strong defense mounted by Donald Trump Jr. suggests that Vance remains firmly within the Trump administration’s inner circle despite the criticism from some Republican senators who prefer more traditional interventionist approaches to foreign policy.
