Trump Accuses Virginia AG Nominee Jay Jones of Being an ‘Animal’
President Donald Trump has called Virginia Democratic attorney general nominee Jay Jones an ‘animal’ over text messages that included threats to kill political opponents. Trump claimed anyone would be in prison for what Jones said, criticizing his rhetoric and calling him a third-rate intellect.
Trump made the comments while speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, just days after Jones had repeatedly criticized the president in a campaign debate in Virginia last week. Reporters pressed Trump on whether he planned to weigh in on the attorney general contest.
‘You mean the one that wanted to kill some of his children and kill somebody? You mean the animal that wanted to kill somebody who should not be allowed to be running for that office?’ Trump said when asked about Jones.
‘He’s a third-rate intellect, he’s a guy who – I’ve never seen anybody say what he said, that he wanted to kill his opponent’s children – he wanted to kill his opponent,’ Trump said. ‘I can’t imagine anybody voting for Jay Jones. Look, you would think he’s totally discredited. I would think he wouldn’t even be allowed to do that; anybody would be put in prison for what he said.’
Following the controversy, it was revealed that Jones had sent texts in 2022 which included threats to kill his political opponent and their children. These messages first came to light earlier this month and sparked a significant public outcry. Jones has since apologized for the text messages and expressed embarrassment over the contents.
The controversy hasn’t stopped prominent Virginia Democrats from endorsing Jones. Virginia gubernatorial candidate Abigail Spanberger endorsed Jones prior to the controversy and has since refused to withdraw the endorsement. Her campaign website is also still selling Jones-branded merchandise. The Republican Governors Association, which is backing Spanberger’s opponent, Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears, criticized Spanberger’s campaign for continuing to market Jones-branded merchandise more than a week after the texts surfaced.
‘Jay Jones threatened to murder his political opponent and their children, and Abigail Spanberger still fully endorses him and is trying to make money off it,’ RGA Rapid Response Director Kollin Crompton told Fox News Digital. ‘If Spanberger is willing to put partisan politics above doing the right thing and standing up to political violence, how can she be trusted as governor?’ Crompton asked.
This case has raised broader questions about political speech, the line between rhetoric and actual threats, and the responsibilities of political figures to uphold ethical standards. The public reaction has been mixed, with some supporting the notion that such rhetoric should not be tolerated, while others argue that political discourse should remain free, even if it includes strong language.
The situation highlights the increasingly polarized nature of political discourse in the United States, where the intensity of rhetoric and the implications of such language have become key issues. As the debate over Jones’ actions continues, the role of public figures in setting ethical boundaries in politics remains under scrutiny.