I Like the Way You Talk, Susie W
Susan Wiles's interview should still shock us.
Hey everyone. I said last time around that there would be one more Jackal before the annual End of Year Piece™ and this is it. But that’s sort of a lie, because one more is coming. Get ready to do some reading (over the next few weeks; this will be short).
Lots has happened this week. The New York Times released two bombshell reports on Jeffrey Epstein, the first detailing how he made his fortune and then the second detailing his (weird) relationship with Donald Trump. Both come ahead of a new tranche of Epstein files being released tomorrow. But I think they are only a small part of a bigger story floating underneath.
Earlier this week, Vanity Fair dropped their interview with Susan Wiles, President Trump’s chief of staff. Wiles got that job because she led Trump’s 2024 Campaign, and obviously did a good job of getting him into the White House. And in the interview you can see why she excels in both roles: She is candid, honest, and clear-eyed about reality. Throughout the eleven (!) interviews she did, Wiles admits a lot of stuff, like:
Trump has an “alcoholic’s personality” (Trump has actually said this himself).
J.D. Vance is a conspiracy theorist (and that his conversion to Trumpism was political).
The tariffs were a bad idea and got lots of pushback.
There is no coherent strategy regarding Venezuela.
Trump’s targeting of enemies through the Department of Justice is, in fact, vindictive and not based in legal reality (Wiles’s interview is going to get cited to a lot).
She (and others) advised him against pardoning the most violent offenders of January 6th, to no avail.
Elon Musk is addicted to ketamine and didn’t really know what he was doing with DOGE (RIP).
Despite all these admissions that made headlines, one thing in the interview stuck out to me more than anything else:
Most senior White House officials parse their words and speak only on background.1 But over many on-the-record conversations, Wiles answered almost every question I put to her.
The “I” in that sentence is from Chris Whipple, the number one chief of staff historian in the country, who has written numerous books about the position. He is the premier writer on the subject, and Susie Wiles knows him. Why would she go on the record so frequently and for so long? First, look at this picture:
Wiles is in the center of that photo and has a higher IQ than anyone in the room. In fact, she probably has a higher IQ than Stephen Miller and Karoline Leavitt combined. Why would she go on the record with Whipple and for so long?
I think the answer to that question is way more interesting than anything else going on right now. To be clear: Wiles goes on the record with Chris Whipple (1) and says lots of devastating things about the Administration (2). Then, she not only doesn’t get fired immediately (3), but is defended by the Administration (4).
In Trump 1.0, Wiles would have been sacked already. But she knows something, and it’s letting her keep her job while also allowing her to build a parachute for herself.
Wiles is no idiot. She did not make a “mistake” and accidentally say a bunch of stuff on the record to Chris Whipple. Wiles spoke to the Press throughout 2024 - on background and otherwise - and never made a similar mistake. Then, she sits down with one of the country’s most well-known interviewers and just has an oopsie?
I think Wiles can read, and she is reading the writing on the wall. Trump 2.0 has been a historic failure, to the point where she knows nothing can right the ship. Maybe the economy survives Trump’s trade war, but Wiles has to know that the U.S. economy turns like a boat, and that boat is a-turnin’.
If we are not already in a recession, we are currently headed towards one. Last month’s job data were particularly bad: We only hired 64,000 people in November, and we lost 105,000 jobs in October. This year - combined with losses in other months - we have created only 55,000 jobs a month on average; that is the lowest number (ever) outside of a recession. And if it weren’t for healthcare, the U.S. economy would have lost jobs over the past six months, during which we averaged only 17,000 jobs a month being created. Take that with (still) increasing inflation and you can see why Americans are giving Trump his lowest numbers ever in economic approval.
I think Wiles knows all of this and she is not alone. There are rumors floating around that the biggest wave of GOP retirements in the House is coming up, and that is likely because they know they are losing control of the chamber next year, bigly. Wiles is getting out ahead of a looming disaster and will eventually be able to point to these interviews when she is trying to land her next job. “I tried to stop him and couldn’t.”
Still, I don’t think that’s the whole story. Wiles has to know that economic performance is temporary and in the same way that voters are blaming Trump’s tariffs for bad economic outcomes, they could give him credit if he turns the his own bad economy around.
So, I think Wiles knows something else. Either Wiles is privy to the the long-rumored issues surrounding Trump’s health (he fell asleep in the Oval Office again today 🫠), or she knows that the eventual release of the Epstein files is going to tar Trump forever. Put simply: She wants off the ship, but whatever she knows is so damaging that they do not want to throw her overboard. At least for now.
I have said this to a few friends: I am fascinated by people who thought Trump 2.0 was going to be “fine.” In the Wiles interview, you can see why it has been such a disaster: Wiles and others try to hold or contain Trump, and they are no longer able to do so, because Trump trusts himself more than anyone else. He just bulldozes through everyone and anyone.
We are fully in a Night of Camp David moment. Fasten your seatbelts.
I’m sure we’ll talk soon.
Including this here for my readers: “On background” means you can print it, but do not use my name. “Off the record” means it’s for the reporter’s brain and nowhere else. Lots of publications have different rules about sources who want to be “on background” or “on deep background” but these are the general rules.