Susie Wiles, naif?
Susie Wiles is supposed to be a savvy and hyper-knowledgeable political advisor. And yet she gave an interview to Vanity Fair and apparently thought the periodical would treat her – fairly? What planet does she live on?:
Wiles is featured in a VF cover article by Chris Whipple, after the White House gave the outlet access to the West Wing for the better part of the year. In the piece, the Chief of Staff opens up about the last 11 months on the job under Trump at each “moment of crisis.”
Most of the article is very negative, down to even the awful photos that were selected, featuring people like Wiles, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Deputy chief of Staff Stephen Miller, Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and deputy chief of Staff Dan Scavino. Miller, Scavino and Deputy Chief of Staff James Blair are even described as the “pit bulls.”
Wiles herself wrote on X:
The article published early this morning is a disingenuously framed hit piece on me and the finest President, White House staff, and Cabinet in history.
Significant context was disregarded and much of what I, and others, said about the team and the President was left out of the story. I assume, after reading it, that this was done to paint an overwhelmingly chaotic and negative narrative about the President and our team.
The truth is the Trump White House has already accomplished more in eleven months than any other President has accomplished in eight years and that is due to the unmatched leadership and vision of President Trump, for whom I have been honored to work for the better part of a decade.
I’m sorry, but what on earth did Wiles think would happen? I am actually very perplexed by this. Either the periodical distorted what she said in order to make the administration look bad, or she really did say things that made the administration look bad. Why the own goal?
Do you really think this wasnt approved or even pushed by trump?This wasnt a one off convo, and it involved more than just her. He loves this type of stuff. And as we found out in trump 1, hes not actually very good on the youre fired aspect. And it looks like hes using some of this to push out bongingo , bondi etc. I wouldnt say 4d chess, because inevitably when you allow someone inside from the press, theyre gonna get off the cuff remarks and some might actually be detrimental, but i think he wanted this
It’s Lucy and the football.
Vanity Fair comes calling, acting all nice-like, and Wiles (or Trump by proxy), desperate to be liked and approved of, fell for it.
It’s hard to believe that people in this administration don’t understand that outfits like Vanity Fair not only hate them, they want them dead.
The first two comments are certainly opposing points of view. I’d lean more towards israel’s interpretation. If this were Trump’s first term, it might be purely an “own goal.”
It’s an interesting point that israel makes about using such an opportunity to push out disliked individuals. The problem with that strategy is that you are sort of letting Vanity Fair do the picking and choosing. Or possibly, Trump sees Whipple as a mole in journalist’s clothing. Who is bad mouthing me?
I imagine that there is a considerable amount of duplicity going on when someone like Whipple is working the scene. I’m your buddy and pal, then I’ll stab you in the back in the hard copy. (The movie Almost Famous comes to mind.) Who in the White House falls for it? Those folks can leave now.
Certainly, Trump had a terrible time in his first term dealing with bad appointments. I wonder just how difficult it is to vet these appointments, and alternately; how toxic and corrupting is this environment that these appointees find themselves in? Maybe it is a case of trial by fire, then if they can’t stand the heat, let them go.
Remember how in his first term Trump used Anthony Scaramucci to reshape his White House staff? Seems a long time ago, doesn’t it?
Indeed, very bizarre.
Either a huge blunder in judgment or a planned Trump op.
(The problem with believing the latter is that one would then have to believe that Wiles is faking being brutally distressed… Maybe she IS acting, but I don’t think so…)
Speaking of brutal:
“DISPATCHES FROM THE LOST GENERATION”—
https://instapundit.com/763308/
Like that dumbass big-mouth Gen. McChrystal and his dumbass aides getting all drunk and blabby with Rolling Stone writer Michael Hastings.
Proverbial tempest in a teapot.
This kind of stuff makes people who hate Trump feel better about hating Trump, but will not change anything on the ground.
Trump’s supporters (I am one) will roll their eyes, wish he and his people would stop verbally stepping on their own dicks, and continue to support him because of the many good things he has done and will continue to do for our country.
Think of how Trump won last year. He increased his share of black men, Hispanics, and white men. Maybe a dozen total Vanity Fair readers in the entire group?
Pearls clutched, but nothing will change. Meanwhile, millions illegals are being deported, hospitals that do gender surgery are being defunded, gas is ~$2.50, and Obamacare is going down in flames. SCOTUS will reverse Humphrey’s Executor, meaning that the executive agencies will actually reflect what the voters voted for. Birthright citizenship may go down also.
Maybe Susie gets fired. Does that have any effect on any of us? Trump will now realize that there is a reason why even the lefty presidents had only male Chiefs of Staff, and that he can’t and won’t ever get credit for giving a woman a chance (same with Attorney General Barbie).
Regarding Susie Wiles it seems to be as important as any other media “Look, squirrel!” play. It is what the media do for their masters and their living.
I don’t expect perfection in President Trump or his staff. Consider the alternatives: She Cackles, The Knucklehead, and company.
I know, that is a very low and terrible bar.
But where is CC™ on this perilous state of incompetence?
it happened with bannon and michael wolff, that piece of trailor trash,
now these are opinions about things, not actual facts, although some characterizations of motives, re the venezuelan snipe hunt might be problematic,
‘make maduro cry uncle’ it seems her opinions are conventional to the non MAGa faction, about Elon’s budget and government reform, or the prosecutions of errant actors like Leticia James and James Comey,
I marvel at how uninteresting these takes are by the likes of chris whipple, who seemed awol in the reign of the shambling heap, but he doesn’t ooze the slimy trail of wolf or whoever Rolling Stone would have hired out,
Michael Hastings, seemed to be a talented writer and investigator, but he had a touch of Clive Irving disease, in his penchant for making things up, btw this account was turned into a bio pic with Brad Pitt as McCrystal and the actor that plays Dexter as General Flynn (it is curious that the Afghan inquest, found General Flynn skeptical about the Afghan operation, in the late going, in part because of his knowledge of the demography of the country,
this portrayal of Irving comes across, in the screen version of his memoir, about Howard Hughes starring Richard Gere,
I kind of align with WTIC; but it is a bit of a mystery.
It boggles my admitted easily boggled imagination to think that the WH Chief of Staff gave an interview with anyone without the Boss’s approval. Or that the content was not discussed in advance.
I often wonder what Trump’s game is. In that regard I suppose that I am one of millions and millions of people; some of them very sophisticated people.
I do frequently wish that he would just shut up and get on with his great policy initiatives. They will speak for themselves.
Something is not right.
A café friend who has been a political junkie since he learned to read and later mayor of Malibu for a couple terms spoke of Wiles several times as a top-notch chief of staff.
FWIW.
I think she is a good chief of staff.
She’s also vulnerable to the seductive “I want to tell your side of the story” push that reporters do. Then they let the reporter hang around and have casual, what-seem-like-off-the-record sidebar conversations.
But everything’s always on the record, and the reporter is not your friend, no matter how they behave.
And someone like Wiles always thinks they are too smart to get taken in.
If I were advising Trump and if he would listen, I would say:
Remember the first term? You tweeted up a storm and nothing got done because you didn’t realize that the deep state is really, really real.
This time, you were doing great. Remember the first few months? You laid off the mean tweets, appointed good people and gave them room to operate. Every time the Dems came after something, you had a whole new thing that took over the headlines.
Figure out how to do that again. Who gives a crap about Rob Reiner and MTG? You have to clean up this mess, and get it all into law so it can’t be exec ordered away. For that you need more Rs in the congress. So work nonstop to shore up your weak ones and go after the vulnerable Dems.
Someone who votes with you 95 percent of the time is not your enemy. Reagan said that and he got stuff done.
And make nice with Elon and let him revitalize DOGE. He will disagree on some stuff. Find a way, Mr. World’s greatest negotiator, to keep him helping. It’s about winning the war, not winning Twitter.
I think I saw a copy of Vanity Fair once when I picked up my wife at the hair salon.
Susie Wiles can make amends.
She can do her next interview with Al Jazeera
“The Scorpion & the Frog”.