Jeffries Defends VA Candidate Who Fantasized About Shooting Republican

In a disturbing display of partisan loyalty over principle, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) has doubled down on his support for Virginia Attorney General candidate Jay Jones, despite the Democrat’s documented violent fantasies about a Republican lawmaker and his children.

The controversy stems from text messages Jones sent in August 2022, where he explicitly described shooting then-House Speaker Todd Gilbert “two bullets to the head.” In a particularly chilling exchange with Republican Delegate Carrie Coyner, Jones grouped Gilbert with Hitler and Pol Pot, stating Gilbert would receive “both bullets every time.”

This isn’t merely heated political rhetoric – it represents a dangerous escalation in partisan hostility that should disqualify any candidate from public office. Governor Glenn Youngkin rightfully called for Jones’s immediate withdrawal from the race, emphasizing the gravity of threatening not just an elected official but his children.

The left’s response has been predictably tepid. While Democratic leaders have offered perfunctory condemnations, they’ve stopped short of withdrawing support – a clear indication that party loyalty trumps basic moral standards. Former Congresswoman Abigail Spanberger, currently running for governor, demonstrated this ethical gymnastics during a recent debate, refusing to withdraw her endorsement while attempting to distance herself from the controversy.

The facts are clear: A Democratic candidate for state Attorney General – the very office tasked with upholding law and order – explicitly fantasized about executing a political opponent. In any rational political environment, this would be an immediate disqualification. Instead, Democratic leadership has chosen to circle the wagons, with Jeffries claiming a simple apology suffices for such egregious behavior.

This incident highlights a growing double standard in American politics. While Democrats routinely accuse Republicans of threatening democracy, they appear willing to overlook actual violent rhetoric from their own candidates. The left’s selective outrage and situational ethics demonstrate why conservative voters must remain vigilant about the true nature of their opposition.

The Virginia Attorney General race now stands as a stark reminder of the moral compromise required to maintain Democratic party unity. As election day approaches, voters must decide whether they want their top law enforcement official to be someone who casually contemplates political violence against his opponents.

For conservative Americans watching this unfold, the message is clear: Democratic leadership will apparently tolerate any behavior, no matter how extreme, as long as it serves their political interests. This is precisely why maintaining Republican control in Virginia and beyond remains crucial for preserving civil discourse and democratic norms.