2 hours ago
6
As you astir apt already know, connected Tuesday, Vanity Fair published portion 1 of a two-part profile of White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, successful which she offered a bid of unusually candid and crisp remarks astir President Trump and his interior ellipse arsenic she reflected connected his 2nd word successful office. She described Trump's benignant arsenic having an "alcoholic's personality," offered blunt assessments of radical similar Vice President JD Vance and Elon Musk, and weighed successful connected argumentation decisions from tariffs to Venezuela.
Many of her comments drew contiguous attraction due to the fact that Wiles, who notorioulsy shuns the spotlight, pulled backmost the curtain connected interior disagreements and tensions wrong the administration. After the portion came out, Wiles pushed backmost hard, calling the article a "disingenuously framed deed piece" and saying it near retired important context, adjacent arsenic she didn't quality the existent quotes, which were recorded implicit a bid of 11 interviews with writer and writer Chris Whipple. Whipple himself is an authorization connected chiefs of staff, having written the 2017 behind-the-scenes book, The Gatekeepers: How the White House Chiefs of Staff Define Every Presidency.
Earlier today, Whipple made a astonishment quality implicit connected the r/politics subreddit, wherever helium hosted an AMA and asked redditors to inquire him thing astir the Vanity Fair profile.
Needless to say, Whipple's AMA drew a flood of sharp, skeptical, and precise nonstop questions from redditors who sought answers astir however the Susie Wiles illustration came unneurotic and wherefore it sparked specified an aggravated reaction. Below are immoderate of the astir absorbing and revealing exchanges from the thread:
"Why did Susie hold to the interviews successful the archetypal place? Did she cognize they were recorded? She indispensable have, I person nary thought wherefore she'd bash this arsenic the existent main of staff."
"All I tin archer you is what Susie Wiles told me. She believed that Donald Trump was unfairly maligned by the mainstream media during his archetypal term. And I judge she thought she could get a just proceeding from me. Everything was connected the record, but erstwhile we explicitly agreed otherwise—and her disconnected the grounds comments stay disconnected the record. I was amazed by however unguarded and freewheeling and candid she was."
"Did Susie truly not cognize that this was each connected the record, origin it seems highly evident that it was? Why the abrupt astonishment from them? I’m precise funny arsenic to wherefore she thought it was harmless to talk similar this to an interviewer? In immoderate case, bully occupation with the interviews, and I’m gladsome y’all are sticking to it with receipts and all!"
"The reply is simple: perfectly she knew she was connected the record. As for her surprise, I tin lone conjecture that this is governmental harm control."
"What were your thoughts erstwhile Wiles said this was a deed portion and each her answers, that negatively reflected those successful Trump's administration, were taken retired of context?"
"When the White House uses words similar 'context' oregon 'disingenuous,' you cognize you're connected the close way arsenic a journalist. It means that they're not disputing the grounds oregon the accuracy of the piece. And that's due to the fact that they cognize that the communicative is stone solid."
"Out of each the interviews you did for the Wiles/Trump piece, what's 1 infinitesimal that wholly amazed you but didn't marque it into the article?"
"You know, unluckily the reply is that I can't speech astir worldly that didn't marque it into the piece. But I was astonished by however candid she was astir the interior workings of the Trump White House and her thoughts astir about each infinitesimal of situation during Trump 2.0."
"In the piece, Susie Wiles offers the lame excuse that Trump, a antheral successful his precocious 40s, was a 'young playboy' erstwhile helium was partying with Epstein, and that's wherefore he's successful the files. Critics accidental your portion is cautiously timed propaganda to easiness the stroke of Trump being successful the Epstein files. What's your effect to that?"
"In reply to the 2nd portion of your question, the timing of the Vanity Fair portion had thing to bash with the merchandise of the Epstein files, though it is timely, isn't it? And I hold with you that the mode she talked astir Trump and Epstein was remarkable. She seemed a small embarrassed erstwhile she utilized the connection 'playboys' to picture them, saying that she knew the connection was 'passé.'"
"Since you wrote the authoritative publication connected Chiefs of Staff, what is your appraisal of Susie Wiles arsenic a Chief of Staff?"
"On the 1 hand, Wiles has earned the president's spot and runs a overmuch smoother White House cognition than her predecessors during Trump's archetypal term. But the eventual trial for a White House Chief of Staff is telling the president hard truths—a task which is exponentially much hard with a president similar Donald Trump."
"In your experience, who has been the astir effectual Chief of Staff? Secondly, with the multi-decade displacement of powerfulness and authorization to the enforcement branch, however bash you spot the relation of Chief of Staff evolving implicit time? This appears, from the outside, to beryllium an enormously consequential relation with fewer authoritative limits and virtually nary oversight."
"The reply to your archetypal question: In my view, Ronald Reagan's James Baker and Bill Clinton's Leon Panetta are the golden standard. Not lone could they execute the president's agenda; they could archer the president hard truths. As for your 2nd question, you're right: the enforcement subdivision is much almighty than ever. Most of the important decisions are made successful the West Wing. That makes the White House Chief of Staff much almighty than ever. He, oregon she, is unelected and unconfirmed and answers to the president alone. For amended oregon worse."
"Could you explicate wherefore a idiosyncratic with Wiles' years of acquisition successful authorities is improbable to really beryllium caught disconnected defender erstwhile dealing with journalists?"
"My acquisition arsenic a journalist/historian is that radical privation to archer their story, nary substance however experienced they are oregon however exalted their position. Often, it's that simple."
"Did you person immoderate contact/see/hear astir Steven Miller portion you were there?"
"Yes, we did. I interviewed each subordinate of Trump's interior ellipse featured successful the portfolio. Miller is arsenic aggravated successful idiosyncratic arsenic you mightiness imagine—totally dedicated to Donald Trump's advancement and, supra all, a loyal worker for the MAGA cause."
"Thoughts connected Karoline Leavitt arsenic Trump's property Secretary. Like, however important is she to him and the admin?"
"Susie Wiles is simply a large instrumentality of Karoline Leavitt and says she's 'scary good.' She definite doesn't mince words, does she? Trump is besides a large fan, arsenic I'm definite you've noticed. She's 1 of a kind. Mark Guiducci wrote successful his editor's letter, 'Leavitt has brought gyration to the White House property briefing room, prevaricating connected everything from tariffs and soybean income to condom contracts and Tylenol.'"
"When volition Vanity Fair interrogation Mike Pence? I stake helium knows wherever skeletons are buried."
"Feel escaped to springiness him my contact!"
"Hey Chris, tin you walk connected a large kudos to the phototeam that did an astonishing job!"
"Absolutely. Chris Anderson and his squad were astonishing partners."
You tin work the archetypal AMA connected Reddit.
Note: Some questions person been edited for magnitude and/or clarity.
English (US) ·