JD Vance's Office Corrects WSJ for Peddling Fake News About VP's Stance on Iran

The Wall Street Journal, or swamp forces in general, because this is DC, decided to chum the waters by peddling a narrative about an alleged split between President Trump and Vice President JD Vance about what to do on Iran. The crux of the reported disagreement centers on VPOTUS pushing for diplomacy over military strikes regarding Iran, which has undergone weeks of protests. Government forces have reportedly engaged in mass slaughter to suppress the popular uprising, with death tolls soaring into the tens of thousands. It’s hard to verify, as the nation has shut down most communications, but the videos and images coming out of the country are ghastly.

Trump has said some strong options are being considered vis-à-vis Iran. He mentioned it on Air Force One this week and warned Ayatollah Khamenei that serious consequences will be rendered should anything befall the protesters. Well, that’s happened. The vice president’s office was swift and loud regarding pushing back against this narrative that the president and Mr. Vance are at odds (via WSJ):

🚨Here’s the statement we sent the @WSJ to correct their fake news report and here’s the way they twisted it to strip out the part where we said they got the story wrong. You don’t hate the media enough. https://t.co/MZbyLAP2Xa pic.twitter.com/qs0EsJu2lH
— William Martin (@VPCommsDir) January 13, 2026

The report linked here was just updated with a correction from the Vice President’s office. The VP and Marco are working to present the President with all options “ranging from a diplomatic approach to military actions.” https://t.co/nmBvhcpOxu pic.twitter.com/tO0Faig1Kt
— Andrew Kolvet (@AndrewKolvet) January 13, 2026

False.

WSJ has corrected their reporting:
Vance and Rubio “together are presenting a suite of options to the president, ranging from a diplomatic approach to military actions.” https://t.co/t9yGIRZeu9 pic.twitter.com/LFcItFXIsW
— ALX 🇺🇸 (@alx) January 13, 2026

This claim made by WSJ has been corrected and per Vance spokesperson, William Martin, there are a "suite of options" being presented to Trump on next steps with Iran.

Iran has been embroiled in protests and reports indicate the gov't has been taking the lives of protesters. https://t.co/hsNEfvO9dK pic.twitter.com/2OiGavqbak
— Media Lies (@MediasLies) January 13, 2026

Some senior administration aides, led by Vice President JD Vance, are urging Trump to try diplomacy before retaliating against Iran for killing protesters during a two-week uprising over a flailing economy and regime repression, the officials said.
Speaking Sunday to reporters on Air Force One, Trump said that Tehran messaged Washington a day earlier that it was willing to enter negotiations over its yearslong nuclear program, which the U.S. seeks to limit. Trump said “a meeting is being set up” though the U.S. was still looking at “very strong options” he could authorize before discussions.
In a statement issued after The Wall Street Journal’s story published Monday, a spokesman for Vance, William Martin, said that Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, “together are presenting a suite of options to the president, ranging from a diplomatic approach to military actions.”
Trump hasn’t made a final decision on what he will do, according to officials, and will meet with senior aides Tuesday to determine his approach. The options could include ordering military strikes on regime sites or launching cyberattacks, approving new sanctions and boosting antiregime accounts online. Some officials have voiced concerns that U.S. military strikes could fuel the regime’s propaganda that the U.S. and Israel are secretly orchestrating the protests.
[…]
Trump currently favors attacking Iran, officials said, but could change his mind depending on developments in the country and discussions with aides. Some officials said Trump may strike first and then seek serious talks with Tehran afterward, which the president appeared to signal Sunday. “We may have to act because of what is happening before the meeting,” he said.
Vance, while generally resistant to engaging in conflicts, remains open to striking Iran, according to a person familiar with his thinking, believing the country is a threat to the U.S. Vance was initially skeptical of bombing Iran during discussions last June before Trump ordered attacks on the Iranian nuclear sites of Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan.
Officials note the U.S. doesn’t have an aircraft carrier in the Middle East but Trump could still deploy bombers, Air Force jet fighters or naval assets to strike Iran.

Well, first, let’s stop the silliness over ‘if the US strikes, it helps the ayatollah,’ because that line has been circling for years, long before Trump was elected president. The Islamists in Iran are going to make that claim no matter what. However, the retaliatory strikes against our forces in the region are a concern.

For now, it’s been reported that Trump has nixed any further diplomatic talks with the regime.

In the past two weeks, Tehran and other major cities have been engulfed by protests, spurred by declining economic conditions, among other factors. Iranian police stations and Revolutionary Guard Corps offices have been overrun and ransacked. Women are ditching their hijabs and lighting cigarettes by using torched posters of Khamenei. It’s quite the image.