The infamous Signal group chat where top Trump administration officials were discussing U.S. airstrikes in Yemen has sparked a political furor that includes a bipartisan inquiry into concerns that classified or highly sensitive information was communicated on an unsecure platform.
Yet brewing under the surface are Vice President JD Vance’s messages in the chain. Vance argued against striking Houthi terrorists, which stunned many Republicans despite knowing full well that the views Vance expressed are in line with his long-held beliefs on foreign policy.
Vance lamented that the strikes would amount to “bailing out Europe again.”
In a subsequent tranche of messages published by The Atlantic on Wednesday, Vance said he was “not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now.” Vance noted that European nations would benefit more from the strikes than the United States because a much higher percentage of European trade runs through the areas Houthi terrorists are disrupting.
President Donald Trump ultimately ordered the strikes, prompting cheers from GOP leaders. But the messages showed that Vance is consistent in his foreign policy views even when the cameras are off, no matter how intensely Republicans disagree with his position.
“I would rather see debate than no debate,” Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said, before adding: “I disagree with [Vance’s] assessment personally.”
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), a defense hawk who has sparred with Vance over Ukraine aid, nodded to Vance’s consistency as well. The Signal messages not being intended for public reveal only served to underscore Vance’s views on Europe, dispelling any notion that this is just for show or simply intended to play to the MAGA base.
Vance’s argument in the text chain is born out of a belief that European nations aren’t doing enough to provide for their own security. Many Republicans agree with that general notion. But they don’t think it’s a reason to not go after terrorists who threaten U.S. interests. These Republicans were heartened that Vance was in the minority within Trump’s national security team.
“Let’s just say I’m glad that President Trump’s position won out in this particular moment,” said a GOP senator who was granted anonymity to deliver a candid evaluation. “It’s a stunning admission to say you hate the Europeans so much that you’re willing to abandon our own responsibilities.”
Vance’s team declined to comment.
The internal deliberations that played out on the Signal chain were normal for major national security decisions, although this would usually happen in a more secure setting.
Vance’s allies in the Senate said it showed that Trump isn’t surrounding himself with yes-men.
“They all thought it was private. It wasn’t. They learned their lesson from it,” Sen. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) said. “President Trump likes and respects JD. He likes having him around. And I think it says a lot that JD can flag concerns, speak up. I think President Trump expects that.”
Newsy McConnell speech: Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) accepted an award Thursday night at the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation. The former Senate GOP leader not only doubled down on his support for Ukraine, but also had some harsh words for the Trump administration’s ongoing peace talks with Russia.
McConnell called out Trump’s advisers, though not by name, and said they are essentially urging the president to ignore history. Here’s an excerpt:
“When his representatives in negotiations masquerade as neutral arbiters, or legitimize sham elections, or treat aggressor and victim as morally equivalent, they do so in full view of longtime partners across the globe — some who know the taste of aggression, and some who have good reason to fear its imminent arrival.”
The Kentucky Republican went on to slam the “embarrassing naivete” of Trump’s team. He said that unless the U.S. changes course, “the outcome we’re headed for today is the one we can least afford: a headline that reads ‘Russia wins, America loses.’”
