A panel on Fox News’ The Big Weekend Show reportedly took aim at Vice President JD Vance over comments he made about the Iran conflict, with co-host Tomi Lahren and Fox News contributor Marc Thiessen arguing that his public remarks risk undermining President Donald Trump’s position on the escalating crisis.
The discussion centered on Vance’s July 15 appearance on The Joe Rogan Experience, where the vice president cautioned against further escalation with Iran by pointing to what he described as the consequences of past U.S. foreign policy decisions.
During the podcast, Vance referenced the aftermath of the overthrow of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, arguing that the collapse of the Libyan state created instability with lasting consequences.
“If you look at the end result of our Libya policy after Gaddafi was killed, Libya basically turned into a failed state,” Vance said. “You had a refugee crisis, you had a lot of violence, a lot terrorism come from that.”
He continued by questioning whether a similar outcome would serve American interests if conflict with Iran were to spiral further.
“How is it in the United States’ interest to have 94 million desperate people flooding into Europe, flooding into the United States, to have sort of the terrorist infrastructure that can get established when you fan terrorists all over the world?” Vance asked. “We’ve run this experiment before.”
After playing the clip during Saturday night’s broadcast, Lahren said she did not necessarily disagree with the substance of Vance’s concerns but questioned why he chose to make those comments publicly.
“I don’t disagree with the vice president there,” Lahren said. “But I am a little perplexed at why he did that podcast and why he’s seemingly in some ways undermining the president.”
Thiessen immediately agreed with her assessment.
“I 100% agree with you,” he responded.
Lahren reiterated that while she found Vance’s argument understandable, she believed the timing and venue of the remarks were puzzling.
“I actually don’t disagree with his premise there. I just find it odd that he did it,” she told Thiessen. “Do you share the same concerns? Do you see the merit of his argument? Even if we both agree it was perplexing.”
Thiessen replied that he shared her concerns, arguing that Vance has repeatedly appeared to distance himself from President Trump’s public messaging.
“I agree with your premise,” Thiessen said. “He seems to be going off. Off base a lot and contradicting the president a lot in public lately and it’s not helpful.”
Thiessen also challenged the substance of Vance’s argument, accusing the vice president of mischaracterizing the positions of those who favor stronger action against Iran.
“JD Vance keeps putting up these straw men,” Thiessen said. “He says, ‘Well, the people who want President Trump to go back to war they want to send a hundred thousand, 150,000 troops.’ And nobody’s saying that! Nobody is saying that at all.”
Thiessen argued that military objectives can be achieved without committing a large ground force, pointing to what he described as past U.S. successes.
“We’ve liberated 400 million people during the Cold War without a single boot on the ground,” he said.
He concluded by arguing that President Trump has already established clear objectives regarding Iran, including preventing the country from obtaining a nuclear weapon and ensuring the Strait of Hormuz remains open. According to Thiessen, if those goals cannot be achieved through an agreement, additional military force would be necessary.
“And so he should be backing the president, not contradicting him in public,” Thiessen said.
[READ MORE: Ingraham Questions Trump’s Iran Claims After Report on Air Force One Threat]
