JD Vance Hints He's OK With Deporting Menswear Writer Who Mocks His Attire
JD Vance suggested on social media Monday that he is OK with the idea of deporting a menswear expert who has skewered the vice president's fashion sense.
Derek Guy writes about men's fashion for various outlets and has a popular account on X where he often criticizes the fashion choices of public figures, including right-wing politicians.
In March, Guy suggested that the vice president's pants are too slim, which causes them to ride up his legs when he sits.
i spoke to a bespoke tailor about this and he confirm: jd vance's pants are too slim, hence why they ride up on him like this https://t.co/dZmbrvxbV7
— derek guy (@dieworkwear) March 12, 2025
Although Guy keeps much of his identity private, he wrote a deeply personal X post on Sunday about his family fleeing the Vietnam War, calling the Trump administration's immigration policy 'inhumane.' He also shared that his mother brought him from Canada to the U.S. as a baby without legal documentation so they could reunite with his father.
Part of his X post mentioned the following:
I'm still unsure whether we technically broke an immigration law. The border between Canada and the United States was pretty porous (as it is today, for the most part).
But either way, since I came here without legal documentation, I eventually fell into the category of being an undocumented immigrant.
Yet, I've been in the United States since I was a baby. My identity and roots are very much based in this country, no different from anyone else.
I debated whether to share my story on here, but I guess I will.I think there's an idea out there that millions of violent criminals are pouring across the border, carrying machetes and drugs, looking to harm Americans. Certainly, while some people fall into that category, the…
— derek guy (@dieworkwear) June 8, 2025
Guy's post pointed out that the vast majority of immigrants ― undocumented or not ― are not 'MS-13 members' but 'are all like your neighbors.'
However, his points were lost on some.
X user @growing_daniel saw the opportunity for Vance to get revenge on Guy for teasing the vice president's socks and pants, and seemed to suggest he should deport the menswear expert. 'JD Vance I know you're reading this and you have the opportunity to do the funniest thing ever,' he tweeted.
JD Vance I know you're reading this and you have the opportunity to do the funniest thing ever https://t.co/xqWP0781p7
— Daniel (@growing_daniel) June 9, 2025
The vice president responded a short time later with a meme of Jack Nicholson from the 2003 film 'Anger Management' nodding vigorously in agreement.
pic.twitter.com/V243VfvAtD
— JD Vance (@JDVance) June 9, 2025
Of course, people had thoughts.
Do more of this. It's your only skill
— Keith Olbermann (@KeithOlbermann) June 9, 2025
Seriously fuck off. He harms nobody and add levity and interestin insights (unlike you, vance)
— ThisBarbara 🇺🇦 (@ThisBarbara) June 9, 2025
"How'd you get deported?""Well, I had a feud on a menswear forum with a guy who ended up in a high ranking position at the State Department and friends with the VP. How about you?""Uh, yeah, same"
— Covfefe Anon (@CovfefeAnon) June 9, 2025
Jd Vance supports forced births of girls impregnated by their fathers. So, I'll stick with watching a very talented guy discussing men's attire.
— Susie 💙 (@Homeoffree61) June 9, 2025
Guy then responded to the vice president with some hilarious snark.
'i think i can outrun you in these clothes,' he wrote, posting photographic evidence of Vance's constricting pants and shirts.
i think i can outrun you in these clothes https://t.co/zun1mvpHlNpic.twitter.com/D9o4FfzRWN
— derek guy (@dieworkwear) June 9, 2025
As of Monday afternoon, Vance hadn't responded to Guy's tweet.
JD Vance Tells Theo Von Musk Made A 'Huge Mistake' Going After Trump
'Good Lord!': Stephen Colbert Blasts JD Vance Over His Not-So-'Valuable' Talk With The Pope
JD Vance Tears Into John Roberts' Assessment Of The Role Of Courts
JD Vance Claims He's 'Not Entitled' To 2028 Presidential Bid
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
41 minutes ago
- Newsweek
JD Vance Issues Warning on Trump Admin's 'Biggest Red Line' for Iran
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. "I think our biggest red line is the Iranian nuclear weapons program," Vice President JD Vance told NBC on Meet The Press on Sunday. "We're not at war with Iran," Vance insisted, adding, "We're at war with Iran's nuclear program." "We do not want war with Iran. We actually want peace, but we want peace in the context of them not having a nuclear weapons program, and that's exactly what the president accomplished last night," Vance explained. Why It Matters The U.S. strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites—dubbed Operation Midnight Hammer—in Isfahan, Fordow and Natanz marks the first direct involvement of American in the escalating crises between Iran and Israel. The action has received backlash, with many citing the lack of Congressional approval for the military move. What To Know President Donald Trump decided to continue with the planned attack because he believed the Iranians "stopped negotiating in good faith," according to Vance. Opportunity was another factor for the timing of the strikes, with Vance saying they had a "narrow window in which" to "set that program back," adding, "Which is why Fordow was destroyed last night." When asked if the strikes have completely destroyed Iran's nuclear capabilities, Vance declined to discuss specifics, citing it as intelligence, but did say the nuclear program had been pushed back considerably. Vance described the strikes as an opportunity for a "reset" in U.S.-Iran relations and reiterated that the administration remained open to negotiation if Tehran abandoned its nuclear ambitions. "I really think there are two big questions for the Iranians here. Are they going to attack American troops, or are they going to continue with their nuclear weapons program?" Vance said. "And if they leave American troops out of it, and they decide to give up their nuclear weapons program once and for all, then I think the president has been very clear, we can have a good relationship with the Iranians." Vance also responded to Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi declaration that the strikes were the end of diplomacy, saying, "We didn't blow up the diplomacy. The diplomacy never was given a real chance by the Iranians. "Our hope…is that this maybe can reset here," he continued. President Donald Trump, right, and Vice President JD Vance sit in the Situation Room on Saturday, June 21, 2025, at the White House in Washington. President Donald Trump, right, and Vice President JD Vance sit in the Situation Room on Saturday, June 21, 2025, at the White House in Washington. The White House via AP Earlier Sunday during a press conference, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the operation, executed with B-2 bombers and decoy maneuvers, avoided confrontation with Iranian air defenses and resulted in "significant destruction" at all three target sites. In the wake of the strikes, Iran's Revolutionary Guard launched missiles at Israel, injuring civilians and damaging infrastructure. Israel claimed it swiftly neutralized the threat and responded militarily against positions in western Iran. What People Are Saying Vice President JD Vance said Sunday on Meet The Press: "We felt very strongly that the Iranians were stonewalling us. They weren't taking this seriously. They were trying to draw this process out as long as possible so that they could rebuild their nuclear weapons program without the threat of American action. We had a limited window in which we could take out this Fordow nuclear facility." Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said at a Pentagon news conference Sunday morning: "This is a plan that took months and weeks of positioning and preparation so that we could be ready when the president of the United States called. It took a great deal of precision. It involved misdirection and the highest of operational security." What Happens Next The Pentagon has said that additional strikes remain possible if Iran retaliates. Global leaders have called for diplomatic engagement to prevent a larger war, while both U.S. and Iranian officials have stated conflicting intentions for the path forward. The status of Iran's nuclear material and capabilities has not been fully determined at this time.
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
Iran parliament reportedly backs closing Strait of Hormuz, which could spike oil prices
Iran's parliament has endorsed closing the Strait of Hormuz, a vital oil transit point off its coast, but the authority rests with regime security officials, per summaries of state-controlled media. Why it matters: Impeding the strait would likely bring a massive spike in oil prices that would flow through to U.S. consumers. The narrow channel between Iran and Oman is the chokepoint for a quarter of the world's seaborne oil trade — and around one-fifth of all oil movements. Catch up quick: The threat is among the initial responses to yesterday's U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear sites. Trying to block the strait would be the first time that the Israel-Iran conflict meaningfully affects global oil flows. Yes, but: Iranian efforts to close the strait and attack energy infrastructure in the Persian Gulf are "unlikely," Eurasia Group analysts said in a note earlier Sunday morning. "The US has amassed a massive military presence in the Gulf and surrounding region, and a move by Iran against the strait would almost certainly trigger a significant military response," they write. Eurasia said Iran is unlikely to hit strike targets while its own exports remain intact, but added: "Increased Iranian harassment of tanker traffic is likely in coming days." Driving the news: Vice President JD Vance said Sunday that closing the channel would be economically "suicidal" for the Iranians. "Their entire economy runs through the Strait of Hormuz. If they want to destroy their own economy and cause disruptions in the world, I think that would be their decision," he told NBC's "Meet the Press."
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Don't fall for the lies about the GOP's plan for Medicaid: We're actually STRENGTHENING it
President Donald Trump has asked Congress to follow through on his domestic-policy agenda by extending tax cuts for Americans, investing in our military and border security and cutting waste, fraud and abuse in entitlement spending, which threatens the solvency our nation's safety-net programs. For my House Committee on Energy and Commerce, this meant hitting a 10-year savings target of $880 billion across our jurisdiction — energy, environment, telecommunications and health care — which I knew could only be reached through careful consideration and resolve. Advertisement The committee came through, and then some: The most recent estimate from the Congressional Budget Office found that our efforts will save nearly $1.1 trillion. More than a quarter of this amount, $344 billion, comes from new community-engagement rules (i.e., work requirements) for able-bodied adults who receive Medicaid benefits but choose not to work. The rules will promote greater accountability and refocus Medicaid to better serve the most vulnerable. Advertisement What exactly do these community-engagement requirements consist of? If you're an able-bodied, unemployed adult who receives Medicaid, they ask that you demonstrate that you are either working, volunteering, in job training or in school for an average of 80 hours per month. Health care and work are inextricably linked in this country: Nearly half of all Americans get their health insurance through their jobs, seniors get Medicare after years of contributing payroll taxes and members of our military and our veterans get their coverage through their service to our country. To require Medicaid recipients who are able-bodied and unemployed to either work, go to school or volunteer in their communities in order to continue receiving subsidized health insurance should be a no brainer. Advertisement You may have heard misinformation that work requirements are really just a sneaky way to take health care away from hard-working Americans, or even people with disabilities. Let me set the record straight: This policy applies only to able-bodied, unemployed adults who have chosen not to work. Our bill couldn't be clearer about that; it includes a long list of exempted individuals. For instance: If you're pregnant, a member of a federally designated tribe, a caregiver or parent, under 19 or over 65, you're exempt from the requirements. Advertisement You're exempt if you're medically frail, which includes anyone who's blind, disabled, battling a chronic substance-use disorder or living with a serious and complex medical condition like cancer. If you meet work requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps) or Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (welfare), you're also relieved of the requirements. If you're in jail, prison or were released from incarceration within the past 90 days, you're exempt. And if you're a former foster youth under 26, the requirements don't apply. Plainly, the policy is targeting just a subset of fully able adults who are voluntarily choosing not to work or give back to their communities. There are strong grounds for this policy: A new study from the American Enterprise Institute found that able-bodied, unemployed adult Medicaid recipients without dependents average 6.1 hours a day — 184 hours a month — watching television and socializing. That figure is 50% higher than for employed beneficiaries. These individuals spend less than a combined one hour a day looking for work or caring for others. Advertisement And we're only asking that, in return for their Medicaid coverage, they choose from an array of options — work, go to school or volunteer — for just 80 hours per month. That's eminently reasonable, and can help them become more self-reliant and productive. Note, too, that a sizable number — 38% of beneficiaries, per a new White House Council of Economic Advisors study — are able-bodied, working-age adults. There's no good reason for them not to be contributing to their communities or at least on a path to becoming productive. Advertisement Americans are smart enough not to fall for the false narratives, lies and smears against work requirements. They share Republicans' desires to purge government programs of rampant waste, fraud and abuse. Our requirements help do just that, strengthening Medicaid for those who truly need it. Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) is chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
