Behold, The Most Dishonest Answer Ever Uttered on Meet the Press by a US Senator
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) appeared on Meet the Press and gave an answer that landed like a soft shoe on hard facts. Host Kristen Welker asked about Virginia’s attorney general race, and Kaine responded by defending Democrat Jay Jones amid a storm of damning texts. The reaction among viewers was immediate: this was not a mere defense, it felt like willful blindness.
Republican incumbent Jason Miyares is running a close reelection against Jay Jones, whose campaign was rocked by old messages. Those texts surfaced from the period when Richmond was debating a qualified immunity bill and showed Jones wishing that then-State House Speaker Todd Gilbert would die. He also wrote that he wished his children would get shot and killed so he’d change his stance on gun control, a comment that shocked even seasoned political observers.
For context, Jones is 36, yet Kaine told Welker he’s known Jones for the past 25 years and vouched that the texts were out of character. That claim doesn’t add up on its face and it didn’t play well with voters watching a senator defend such extreme language. Kaine insisted Jones had apologized and shouldn’t drop out, which raised more questions than it answered.
Welker asked the obvious follow-up: would Kaine feel differently if Jones were a Republican? Kaine answered, ‘no.’ That single word answer landed like a slap of hypocrisy for anyone tracking partisan double standards.
The broader point isn’t just about one exchange on TV; it’s about accountability for someone running to be the state’s top law enforcement officer. Electing an AG whose past messages include hoping for the death of a colleague and invoking horrific violence as a political wake-up call should give every voter pause. Defenders who shrug and point to an apology are asking the public to accept something that’s plainly unacceptable for that office.
Public reaction was swift and bipartisan in its shock, even if partisan lines later colored the fallout. After the AG debate last week, Jones reportedly raised $500,000 in 24 hours, showing how outrage can translate into both support and controversy. That frenzy only highlights the uneasy mix of moral outrage and political calculus at play in modern campaigns.
Kaine’s defense—leaning on a long acquaintance and claiming the behavior was uncharacteristic—reads like a standard party playbook response. But when the behavior in question involves violent wishes and targeted harm, the playbook doesn’t wash away the facts. Voters deserve straight answers, not warm assurances wrapped in partisan loyalty.
Whether you care more about rhetoric or records, the substance here is stark: a candidate’s own words matter, and so do the defenses mounted by their allies. Watching a senior senator dismiss a basic question of principle with a curt ‘no’ was telling. It raised a simple question: when will accountability trump convenience in political circles?
Virginia’s AG race will be decided in the coming weeks, and moments like the Meet the Press exchange will be remembered. The choice facing voters is between rhetoric and responsibility, between excuses and consequences. That’s a sharp, unavoidable choice for a campaign that touches on crime, policing, and public trust.
