JD Vance defends Trump's call to investigate Biden family: Full interview

[0:00] Joining me now is Senator J.D. Vance, a top finalist to be former President Trump's running [0:04] mate. Senator Vance, welcome back to Meet the Press. Good morning. Thanks for having me. [0:10] Thank you so much for being here. I want to talk to you about the immunity ruling and the [0:14] implications. This is what Donald Trump said last year about wanting to target his political [0:21] opponents. Take a listen. I will appoint a real special prosecutor to go after the most corrupt [0:28] president of the history of the United States of America, Joe Biden, and the entire Biden crime [0:36] family. Senator, if former President Trump were to win, if you were to be his vice president, [0:43] would you support him appointing a special prosecutor to go after his political enemies, [0:48] the Bidens? Well, first of all, Kristen, I find it interesting how much the media and the Democrats [0:55] have lost their mind over this particular quote. Donald Trump is talking about appointing a special [1:00] prosecutor to investigate Joe Biden for wrongdoing. Joe Biden has done exactly that for the last few [1:07] years and has done far more in addition to that to engage in a campaign of lawfare against his [1:13] political opposition. I think what Donald Trump is simply saying is we ought to investigate the prior [1:17] administration. There are obviously many instances of wrongdoing. The House Oversight Committee has [1:22] identified a number of corrupt business transactions that may or may not be criminal. Of course, [1:26] you have to investigate to find out. So I think Donald Trump saying, look, let's do the basic work [1:31] of investigating wrongdoing is a totally reasonable thing for him to do. And frankly, the Biden [1:37] administration has done far worse. So if you think that what Donald Trump is proposing is a threat to [1:42] democracy, isn't what Biden has already done a massive threat to our system of law and government? [1:47] Senator, just to be very clear, though, Joe Biden didn't appoint a special prosecutor. The attorney [1:50] general did that. Trump was indicted by grand juries. He was found guilty by a jury of his peers in New [1:56] York. But can we just go back to the core question here? Would you support him taking such an action? [2:01] It sounds like you're saying, yes, you would. I would absolutely support investigating prior wrongdoing [2:09] by our government. Absolutely. That's what you have to have in a system of law and order, Kristen. But I have [2:14] to reject the premise here. Joe Biden appointed the attorney general Merrick Garland, who, of course, [2:19] answers to Joe Biden can be fired by Joe Biden. So the idea that the Biden administration has nothing to do [2:24] with the appointment of the special prosecutor, I think, completely betrays an understanding, [2:29] a misunderstanding of how our system of government actually works. And of course, Kristen, [2:33] we have to make this point, Kristen, that the prosecution of Donald Trump in New York, [2:39] which I think now has fundamentally been thrown in doubt by this immunity case, [2:44] it was one of the main guys was a Department of Justice official in the Biden administration [2:49] who jumped ship to join a local prosecutor's office to go after Donald Trump. And yet the DOJ [2:54] told Congress, Senator, that doesn't make you question the legitimacy of the prosecution. [2:57] That's a problem. Well, Senator, that happens all the time. People are appointed [3:00] from Washington. But the DOJ told Congress, testified this week that it reviewed all. Hold on, [3:05] Senator, let me finish. Are you really saying, Kristen? [3:07] Senator, Senator, let me finish my sentence. It happens all the time. Then I'll let you finish. [3:10] Hold on. Let me just finish this. The DOJ told Congress this week it reviewed all communications [3:16] since Biden took office and found no contact between federal prosecutors and those involved [3:22] with that case in New York. Can you stick to the substance of the question, though? Let me just [3:26] ask, because you are, I just want to stick with this line of theory that you are laying out, [3:34] which is you are saying it's not OK for Joe Biden to weaponize the Justice Department. [3:38] If it's not OK for Joe Biden to weaponize the Justice Department, as you say, which there's no [3:42] evidence of that, why is it OK for Donald Trump to do that? [3:45] Well, Kristen, first of all, you said that it happens all the time, that the number three [3:51] person in the Department of Justice jumped ship to join a local prosecutor's office [3:55] to go after the president's political opponent. I don't think that's ever happened in the history [3:59] of American democracy, and I don't think that we should legitimize it. Now, if Donald Trump's [4:04] attorney general had his number two or his number three jumped ship to a local prosecutor's office [4:09] in Ohio or Wisconsin, and that person then went after Donald Trump's political opposition, [4:13] that's a different conversation. All he's suggesting is that we should investigate [4:18] credible arguments of wrongdoing. That's all that Donald Trump is saying. That is not a threat [4:23] to democracy. That's merely reinforcing our system of law and government. [4:26] Bottom line, you are OK with Donald Trump appointing a special prosecutor to go after his political [4:31] enemies, which would include Joe Biden. You're just to button that up. It sounds like you're saying [4:36] yes. Let me move on, though, to my next question. I want to talk to you about the Heritage Foundation. [4:40] It's a conservative think tank in Washington. It shapes the agenda they would like to see [4:45] in a Trump second term. The president said this after the Supreme Court's ruling this week. Take a [4:51] look. We're in the process of taking this country back. No one in the audience should be despairing. [4:57] No one should be discouraged. We ought to be really encouraged by what happened yesterday. We are in the [5:01] process of the second American revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be. [5:07] Do you support those calls for a revolution? And would political violence ever be justified? [5:16] Well, of course, political violence is never justified, Kristen. You'll have to ask the [5:20] president of the Heritage Foundation to defend his remarks if you'd like to do that. I will say, [5:24] look, the Heritage Foundation does a lot of good work. It does a lot of things that I disagree with, [5:28] a lot of things that I agree with. But the Heritage Foundation is a nonprofit organization that works [5:33] on public policy. And I think it's an important part of how D.C. functions and operates. We'll continue [5:39] to have important conversations in the Republican Party with a whole host of think tanks from the right [5:44] and from the left as we craft public policy. That's the way the city works. And again, I'm not going to [5:50] be the person who serves as the spokesperson for the Heritage Foundation. I don't have any affiliation. [5:55] Sounds like you're distancing yourself from those comments that talk of political violence. [6:00] Look, Kristen, I certainly don't think political violence is justified. That's certainly actually [6:06] not what I think that Kevin Roberts was saying to begin with. But again, have him on your program [6:12] to defend what he said. And I think that's the best thing to do. Let me ask you specifically about [6:17] Project 2025 for our viewers so that they know. It's basically a policy blueprint for a second Trump [6:23] presidency. It's supported by the Heritage Foundation and other conservative groups. [6:27] The Biden campaign has said Project 25, quote, [6:30] should scare every single American. It would give Trump limitless power over our daily lives. [6:38] Among the things they are calling for is reversing approval of the abortion pill, [6:42] Mifepristone. But Donald Trump says he supports access to that pill, actually. Do you support [6:48] access to abortion medication as Donald Trump does? Well, Kristen, you asked about Project 2025, [6:55] and I want to be clear here that Trump explicitly has said his own transition team runs the Trump [7:01] transition and will run the Trump administration. Again, you have a whole host of organizations, [7:06] some of which have good ideas, some of which have bad ideas, and some of which have both. And I'm sure [7:11] the Trump administration will talk to a lot of people as it's crafting an agenda to bring back [7:15] American manufacturing jobs, to lower inflation, and to bring peace and prosperity back to the [7:20] world. That's the whole reason why me and so many others are trying to reelect Donald Trump is [7:24] because the agenda actually worked. It was his agenda, and I think it'll work again for the [7:29] American people. On the question of the abortion pill, what so many of us have said is that, look, [7:34] we certainly don't, the Supreme Court made a decision saying that the American people should [7:40] have access to that medication. Donald Trump has supported that opinion. I support that opinion. [7:44] I think it's important to say that we actually have to have an important conversation in this country [7:51] about what our abortion policy should be. Donald Trump is the pragmatic leader here. He's saying [7:57] most abortion policy is going to be decided by the states. We want to make it easier and more [8:01] affordable for young women and parents to have families to begin with. We want to lower housing [8:05] costs, eliminate the surprise medical bills that so many families see after they have a baby. [8:10] That's the Trump and Republican approach to this issue. Meanwhile, Joe Biden wants taxpayer-funded [8:16] abortion up to the moment of birth. It's so crazy to me how the Democrats frame this as Republicans. [8:22] Just let me finish, Kristen. They frame Democrats as being reasonable and pragmatic, when in reality, [8:30] Republicans are the one trying to find some common ground here. [8:32] Senator, as you know, abortions, very few abortions take place later in pregnancy and almost always [8:37] because there is a medical emergency. I know Trump is trying to distance himself from Project 2025, [8:43] but we have to point out that a number of people who are involved with it are former [8:47] Trump officials, Ben Carson, Peter Navarro, Ross Vaught, and others. But just to be clear, [8:54] you support Mifepristone being accessible. [8:59] Yes, Kristen, I do. But again, on the Project 2025 issue, what the media and the Democrats are trying to do [9:04] is attach its most unpopular elements to the Trump administration. It's a 900-page document. [9:11] I guarantee there are things that Trump likes and dislikes about that 900-page document, [9:15] but he is the person who will determine the agenda of the next administration. All he said very [9:21] explicitly is, I am in charge of the next administration because I'm the person running [9:25] for president. It's just important to make that clarification. [9:27] Let me ask you something that caught our eye. This is something you wrote in the New York Times [9:32] op-ed in 2017 about former President Barack Obama. You criticized his policies, but you also said, [9:39] quote, it is one of the great failures of recent political history that the Republican Party was [9:44] too often unable to disconnect legitimate political disagreements from the fact that the president [9:49] himself is an admirable man. For at a pivotal time in my life, Barack Obama gave me hope that a boy [9:56] who grew up like me could still achieve the most important of my dreams. For that, you write, [10:02] I will miss him. And the example he set, you wrote that just days before Donald Trump [10:07] was inaugurated. Do you still consider Barack Obama to be an admirable man who you miss? [10:15] Well, you know, I grew up in a broken family, Kristen, and I just wanted to be a good husband and dad. [10:19] And certainly Barack Obama, despite my many political disagreements with him, [10:23] he's clearly a good husband and a father. By the way, I'd say the same thing about Donald Trump, [10:27] whose children love him. And I think this is one of the things the media often misses about Trump [10:32] is how genuinely devoted he is to his family, to his grandchildren, and how part of his pro-life [10:38] messaging, his fundamental pro-life view, is that we ought to make it easier for more American families [10:42] to have those thriving children and thriving families. So certainly I think we've been blessed [10:48] with a lot of good examples across our country. And yeah, absolutely. Was Barack Obama a good [10:52] president? No. Was he a good husband and father? Yes. [10:55] So he's still an admirable man? That's just what I said, Kristen. Absolutely. [11:01] All right. Let me, I have to ask you about deep stakes. Of course, [11:04] have you gotten the call from Donald Trump? Has he asked you to be his running mate? [11:07] I have not gotten the call, Kristen. And I'll certainly, you know, maybe not the first person [11:14] that I'd let know if that happened, but we'll let the media know if I ever get that call. But [11:18] most importantly, Kristen, we're just trying to work to elect Donald Trump. Whoever his vice [11:21] president is, he's got a lot of good people he could choose from. It's the policies that worked [11:26] and the leadership style that worked for the American people. I think we have to bring that [11:29] back to the White House. And I'm fighting to try to do that. [11:32] Well, here we are about a week before the Republican convention. Before I let you go, [11:37] can you say unequivocally, unequivocally here and now that you will accept the results [11:41] of the 2024 election, no matter what they are? [11:46] So long as it's a free and fair election, Kristen, of course we will. We will use [11:50] constitutional processes to challenge issues if we think there are issues. But if it's a free and [11:54] fair election, we will do what the Constitution requires. We will respect the results. And I [11:58] expect those results are going to be to reelect Donald Trump. [12:02] It was a free and fair election in 2020. Donald Trump took his concerns to court. He lost [12:06] in court, but he still has not conceded. Do you understand that when you refuse to commit [12:11] unequivocally, that feeds into people's concerns, skepticism about the nation's electoral process? [12:21] Well, Kristen, I don't agree with that, actually. I think that feeding into people's concerns [12:25] about our electoral process is that one half of America's political segment, [12:30] they won't support legislation that makes it harder for illegal aliens to vote. [12:33] They won't support universal voter ID in our elections, even though you have to present [12:37] ID to do almost anything in this country. I think taking people's concerns seriously [12:42] about election fraud is the way to reinforce security and confidence in our elections. [12:47] Yeah, Senator, it's already against the law for non-citizens to vote. But just on that very point, [12:51] when you, when others refuse to say, yes, we will accept the election results, [12:57] do you understand how that undermines people's confidence in the electoral system? [13:03] But Kristen, what I just said is I don't agree with that. What I think actually undermines [13:07] people's confidence in the electoral system is when the media is incurious about obvious [13:11] examples of problems in our electoral system. I think we've got great elections, but a lot of [13:16] things could be better in certain states. I want to work to make that happen so the American [13:20] people have greater confidence in their elections. That's what I'll keep doing. [13:23] Senator, thank you for being here. Please come back when you get that phone call, [13:28] if not beforehand. Really appreciate it. Thank you so much.