New Virginia attorney General quote about two bullets

Executive summary — who actually said “two bullets” and why it matters

The phrase “two bullets” originates from leaked text messages sent by Democratic attorney general candidate Jay Jones, in which he fantasized about shooting then-House Speaker Todd Gilbert; the phrase did not come from the new Virginia attorney general as a public quote. Multiple contemporaneous reports describe the texts, Jones’ apology, the national backlash, Republican campaign tactics invoking the line at the polls, and Jones’ narrow election victory that guarantees his tenure will begin under sustained scrutiny ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Claims that attribute the quoted phrase to the new attorney general are unsupported by the available reports; instead, the line has been deployed by opponents and some media to frame the race and influence voters, while allies and advocacy groups responded unevenly across the political spectrum ^{[2] [4] [5]}.

1. How the incendiary phrase entered public view and who actually wrote it

Reporting traces the “two bullets” phrase directly to text messages from Jay Jones, a Democratic candidate, in which he wrote that among three figures—Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot and then-House Speaker Todd Gilbert—“Gilbert gets two bullets.” Journalistic accounts reconstructed the texts as originating in 2022 and becoming public in October 2025, and they record Jones’ apology for the language while noting he did not deny authorship ^{[1] [6]}. The available analyses make clear that the line is part of private communications that leaked; the phrase was not uttered in a press conference or official statement by any sitting Virginia attorney general, and attributing it to the officeholder rather than the candidate conflates an individual’s private messages with an institutional voice ^{[3] [2]}. This distinction is central to assessing the accuracy of claims circulated around the election.

2. The partisan drumbeat: how campaigns and groups weaponized the line on Election Day

Republican operatives and allied groups used the “two bullets” language as a tactical attack, producing stickers and campaign materials meant to remind voters of Jones’ texts; one report described stickers at Virginia polls reading “I didn’t vote for the two-bullets guy,” tying the phrase to a push to depress Democratic turnout and rally conservatives ^[2]. National Republicans and figures like the incumbent opponent emphasized the texts to argue Jones was unfit for law enforcement leadership, while Democratic leaders largely weighed the risk of abandoning the ticket against the potential damage of the scandal. This strategic deployment reflects a political calculation: opponents sought to turn private words into a public liability, while allies weighed party interest against reputational cost ^{[5] [2]}.

3. How political allies and civic groups reacted — silence, withdrawal, or defense?

Responses from advocacy organizations and political allies were mixed and at times muted; some gun-control organizations that had supported Jones were reported to have quietly removed endorsements, and others stayed largely silent, generating criticism for perceived inconsistency given their missions ^{[7] [4]}. Democratic leaders publicly defended Jones to varying degrees, arguing that withdrawing would risk worse outcomes, while law-enforcement-affiliated groups and some observers labeled the messages disqualifying. The pattern shows partisan calculus shaping public rebukes: criticism came from both sides, but institutional reactions often mapped to strategic priorities rather than uniform moral judgments ^{[5] [4]}.

4. Election result and the practical consequences for the attorney general’s office

Despite the uproar, multiple accounts report that Jones won the attorney general race narrowly, ensuring he will assume the office while entering it under unusual scrutiny; analysts predicted a contentious tenure shaped by lingering mistrust and aggressive oversight from opponents who have highlighted the texts as evidence of poor judgment ^[1]. The narrowness of the victory amplifies the political risk: a slim mandate combined with high-profile controversy makes governing more difficult, and opponents have signaled they will continue to press the issue to constrain Jones’ authority and shape public perception of the office ^{[1] [5]}. This context matters for understanding both the short-term political dynamics and longer-term reputational effects on the attorney general’s capacity to carry out statutory duties.

5. What claims are accurate, what’s missing, and why the distinction matters for voters

The verifiable claim is that Jay Jones authored the texts containing the “two bullets” line and that the phrase was used by opponents and media to attack him; the inaccurate or unsupported claim is that the new Virginia attorney general publicly uttered or adopted that phrase as an official quote. Several reports explicitly note the absence of any such statement from the officeholder and instead document the tactic of opponents and the uneven reactions from advocacy groups ^{[2] [3] [7]}. For voters and observers, the difference between an individual’s private texts and an official public statement is consequential for assessing accountability, potential legal or ethical consequences, and the legitimacy of campaign messaging intended to conflate the two.