Donald Trump has once again left audiences puzzled after remarks in a media interview appeared to take a swipe at his own vice president.
Known for his blunt, free-flowing interview style, Trump typically directs his sharpest criticism at political rivals. This time, however, a clip circulating online suggested he may have accidentally included Vice President JD Vance in a verbal attack aimed at Minnesota Governor Tim Walz.
The comments were made during an exchange with reporters on December 2, when Trump was asked about the debates during the 2024 presidential campaign. A reporter specifically questioned him about Walz, who served as Kamala Harris’s running mate, and whether the governor should resign amid a fraud scandal in his state.
Trump quickly labeled Walz “grossly incompetent,” but his winding response created confusion. While discussing the debate performance, Trump said he had watched “J.D. destroy him,” then added: “I was saying, who is more incompetent? That man or my man?”
Because JD Vance was present at the time, the phrasing made it sound as though Trump was grouping his own vice president into the criticism. He continued with similarly unclear remarks, saying both candidates were “incompetent,” before shifting to comments about female candidates and Democratic leadership—further muddying the message.
The clip sparked confusion online. One viewer asked, “Why is he cooking JD Vance?” while another joked, “JD catching strays is wild.”
Despite the apparent slip, Trump was not actually criticizing Vance, according to fact-checking outlet Snopes. After reviewing the incident, Snopes reported that the White House clarified Trump was referring to his debate opponent—former president Joe Biden—when he said “my man,” not his vice president.
This interpretation is supported by Trump’s follow-up comment that he had run “against a man and a woman,” which could reference either Kamala Harris replacing Biden as the Democratic nominee or Trump’s 2016 race against Hillary Clinton.
As is often the case with Trump’s off-the-cuff remarks, the confusion stemmed less from intent than from his characteristically tangled delivery, which left room for multiple interpretations.
