This week, Senator J.D. Vance from Ohio, who is President Trump’s running mate, had a chat with the far-left *New York Times*. This interview showed once again why Trump made a smart choice in picking him.
The paper shared clips of this conversation on Friday, and it was another example of how Vance outsmarted the failing corporate media. While they tried to steer the discussion toward whether Trump “lost” the 2020 election—hoping to stir up trouble within Trump’s camp—Vance turned their tactics against them.
Instead of playing along with reporter Lulu Garcia-Navarro’s agenda, he focused on real issues that matter to Americans today.
Shining Light on Censorship
As many readers know, during a recent Vice Presidential debate, leftist moderators pressed Vance about whether Trump lost in 2020. He stood his ground and refused to give in to their demands.
Vance took control by pointing out one of the biggest scandals from that election—the censorship by big tech companies aimed at protecting Biden’s campaign. He highlighted how blocking access to truthful stories like the Hunter Biden laptop scandal likely cost Trump millions of votes.
Garcia-Navarro kept repeating her question like a broken record while Vance skillfully redirected her focus back onto an issue that still affects everyday Americans today.
This censorship not only helped Biden win but also paved Kamala Harris’ way into power—a situation we are all feeling now.
A Battle of Wits
Here’s how it went down:
**GARCIA-NAVARRO:** Do you believe he (Trump) lost the 2020 election?
**VANCE:** I think Donald Trump and I have raised several concerns regarding that election; however, my focus is more on what happened after—like our open borders and skyrocketing grocery prices…
**GARCIA-NAVARRO:** Senator, yes or no? Did Donald Trump lose?
**VANCE:** Let me ask you something: Is it okay for big tech firms to censor news about Hunter Biden? Independent studies suggest this could’ve cost Donald Trump millions of votes!
She tried again:
**GARCIA-NAVARRO:** Did Donald Trump lose?
But instead of answering directly, he flipped it back:
**VANCE:** Did those tech companies censor information that independent research shows affected voter turnout?
Her frustration grew as she repeated her question yet again without addressing his point about censorship affecting democracy itself.
Finally fed up with her insistence on slogans rather than substance, he pointed out:
“I’m worried about Americans who feel there were problems in 2020—not just repeating catchphrases.”
He emphasized real issues over political gamesmanship while making clear his concerns about future elections being compromised through similar tactics.
Standing Firm Against Ambush Questions
After realizing she wasn’t getting anywhere with him, Garcia-Navarro asked if he would have certified the results from 2020. His answer was straightforward: No! He backed up this stance by referencing his earlier points about serious concerns regarding fairness in voting processes during that time.
When she finally asked if he’d commit to a peaceful transfer of power post-election results—he agreed but added politicians should be allowed to protest when they see potential issues arise in those outcomes!
When Republicans communicate clearly like Vance did—and stand firm on facts—they can take down even corporate media giants trying hard to push their narratives.
The rest of our party could learn a thing or two from watching how effectively Vance handled himself under pressure because too many fall into traps set by these left-wing journalists looking for sensational headlines instead of honest discussions.
Leave a Comment