Susie Wiles Turns Against Trump Admin Today

[robosmith]

Susie Wiles, JD Vance, and the “Junkyard Dogs”

Vanity Fair

https://www.vanityfair.com › News › politics

 

11 hours ago — As she related it later, President Donald Trump was holding forth on the filibuster when Wiles stood up and started for the door. Trump eyed her ...Read more

 

Susie Wiles, Trump's chief of staff, criticizes Bondi's ...

PBS

https://www.pbs.org › newshour › politics › susie-wiles-...

 

4 hours ago — Wiles described much of her job as channeling Trump's energy, whims and desired policy outcomes — including managing his desire for vengeance ...Read more

 

Susie Wiles pulls back curtain on Trump administration

AP News

https://apnews.com › article › susie-wiles-interview-don...

 

1 hour ago — Wiles defends Trump while comparing him to an alcoholic · Trump's revenge crusade has gone longer than Wiles initially wanted · On Epstein, Pam ...Read more

 

Trump allies defend Susie Wiles after controversial Vanity ...

Fox News

https://www.foxnews.com › politics › trump-brushes-of...

1 hour ago — White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles receives strong support from Trump administration after controversial Vanity Fair story sparks ...

Susie Wiles calls out Bondi, Vance and Trump in Vanity Fair ...

YouTube · ABC7

9 views · 16 minutes ago

 

 

2:11

 

In candid interviews with Vanity Fair, White House chief of staff Susie Wiles opened up ab

[robosmith]

https://www.facebook.com/reel/1363125788878288 VIDEO

[Radiorum]

I read the Vanity Fair article today, and I came away with a mild dislike for Wiles. It's like she's playing it on both sides, wants the important position, but doesn't seem to be in the position for any reason beyond her own ambitions.

In another thread, I made the point that Trump is not really the one in charge, that he is a figurehead, and the main star, and is in it only for his own personal ends, but when it comes to policy, his inner circle of self-serving sycophants - who feed his megalomaniac delusions - are determining the direction of this administration's actions. 

This article confirms the truth of this. Wiles tells an anecdote that shows it was really Musk in charge of the way the cuts to USAID went down:

In his executive order freezing foreign aid, Trump had decreed that lifesaving programs should be spared. Instead, they were shuttered. “When Elon said, ‘We’re doing this,’ he was already into it,” said Wiles. “And that’s probably because he knew it would be horrifying to others. But he decided that it was a better approach to shut it down, fire everybody, shut them out, and then go rebuild. Not the way I would do it.”

Wiles knew that fixing this was on her. “The president doesn’t know and never will,” she told me. “He doesn’t know the details of these smallish agencies.”

Wiles continued: “So Marco is on his way to Panama. We call him and say, ‘You’re Senate-confirmed. You’re going to have to be the custodian, essentially, of [USAID].’ ‘Okay,’ he says.” But Musk forged ahead—all throttle, no brake. “Elon’s attitude is you have to get it done fast. If you’re an incrementalist, you just won’t get your rocket to the moon,” Wiles said. “And so with that attitude, you’re going to break some china. But no rational person could think the USAID process was a good one. Nobody.”

 

[gatomontes99]

It is so devastating that JD Vance is making jokes about it:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/12/16/vance-defends-susie-wiles-after-vanity-fair-article/87794022007/

“Sometimes I am a conspiracy theorist,” Vance said. “But I only believe in the conspiracy theories that are true.”

“Significant context was disregarded and much of what I, and others, said about the team and the President was left out of the story,” Wiles said. “I assume, after reading it, that this was done to paint an overwhelmingly chaotic and negative narrative about the President and our team.”

**********

If Susie says it is out of context, I am going to bet it is out of context. #fakenews

 

[Radiorum]

48 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

“Significant context was disregarded and much of what I, and others, said about the team and the President was left out of the story,” Wiles said. “I assume, after reading it, that this was done to paint an overwhelmingly chaotic and negative narrative about the President and our team.”

I didn't see the article as painting an "overwhelming chaotic and negative narrative" - 

What games are Wiles playing here?

[robosmith]

28 minutes ago, Radiorum said:

I didn't see the article as painting an "overwhelming chaotic and negative narrative" - 

What games are Wiles playing here?

Wiles has already denied saying what the article quoted but they have it ON TAPE.

That doesn't stop gato from lying for her.

[User]

1 hour ago, Radiorum said:

I didn't see the article as painting an "overwhelming chaotic and negative narrative" - 

What games are Wiles playing here?

You are here saying she is playing games… and what do you base that on? 

[Radiorum]

9 hours ago, User said:

You are here saying she is playing games… and what do you base that on? 

The fact is that Wiles really said these things:

Trump has an “alcoholic’s personality” and that he employs prosecutorial power for “score settling,” – that Vought is “a right-wing absolute zealot,” – that Vance has been a “a conspiracy theorist for a decade,” - and that Musk’s erratic style is because of his “avowed ketamine” use.

It’s naïve in the extreme to believe that she didn’t know what she was saying or how those things would land. She’s not some blabbermouth lightweight, but the chief of staff, and you don’t get to that position without a razor-sharp sense of strategy. Indeed, she’s been called a “brilliant strategist.”

Experience has taught us that very little of what the Trump administration does is what is seems to be, and it’s reasonable to assume this whole scenario is more of the con - more of the distraction machine, and an opportunity to attack the left.

After all, Wiles did not say anything that is not already known (and I am sure stuff they knew the base would accept). But now the administration has an excuse to play the victim and attack the press.

No, this whole episode is more of their political tricks.

What do you think would have happened if Biden’s chief of staff had told a reporter that the president at least sometimes charged his political enemies with federal crimes because he didn’t like them, and that his most influential officials were ideological zealots, conspiracy theorists, and drug users?

[John Stone]

................. the beotch needs to retire ................. thanks Susie, don't let the door hit you on the A$$

[Nationalist]

Wiles did an interview with Vanity Fair and it turned out to be a hit-piece. Go figure. One has to wonder about her motives.

[User]

2 hours ago, Radiorum said:

The fact is that Wiles really said these things:

The point was that they claimed vanity fair took things out of context and your source for those things is vanity fair…. And you are even presenting them in some spliced up lump sum with no context. 

[John Stone]

41 minutes ago, User said:

The point was that they claimed vanity fair took things out of context and your source for those things is vanity fair…. And you are even presenting them in some spliced up lump sum with no context. 

The WH does not deny the comments were made by her

It sounds like she is trying to distance herself from the Executive decisions. 

What does she suspect - or is she just trying to protect her CV, post mids if things go south. 

One thing for sure, she cannot be trusted. 

[Radiorum]

1 hour ago, John Stone said:

sounds like she is trying to distance herself from the Executive decisions. 

Actually, my first reaction to the article was that Wiles was jockeying for her own position - somehow looking out for her own interests. I read something in the NYT this morning that suggests the same thing:

 

An important subtext of Ms. Wiles’s comments is the quiet rivalry between Mr. Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who are vying for Mr. Trump’s nod to succeed him in 2028. The distinction she made between the two was seen as evidence that she is propping up Mr. Rubio, her fellow Floridian, over Mr. Vance, the more MAGA-friendly front-runner.

Here is the way she described how each of them went from being a sharp critic of Mr. Trump to a key deputy: “Marco was not the sort of person that would violate his principles,” she said. “He just won’t. And so he had to get there.” As for Mr. Vance, “his conversion came when he was running for the Senate. And I think his conversion was a little bit more, sort of political.”

[Radiorum]

I watched Trump’s “Address to the Nation” – all 18 desperate minutes of it. Here it is:

 

 

I actually felt bad for him, he came across so desperate. Love me, love me, love me! I am the absolutely greatest! Biden, Biden, Biden!

Anyway, after the address, his staff of course praised him, but Trump, as if excusing himself, said -

“Susie told me I had to give an address to the nation.”

Wiles told him he had to do it – and that leads me to wonder – did she know he would mess up so badly? Was she trying to sabotage him – and his regime? Did she have an ulterior motive for making him do it?

[gatomontes99]

Lol...the article turned out to be a big bust so now they are making shit up about the speech. What's next? Schumer saying Trump shouldn't use the law that Schumer wrote? 

[Radiorum]

5 minutes ago, Radiorum said:

Trump’s “Address to the Nation”

And the lies! A lie a minute. So many made-up numbers. I’ll just give you two examples:

One, he said he’s brought $18 trillion worth of foreign investment into the US. Well, in the last 20 years, new foreign investment ranged between around $100 – 450 million per year. (The highest year was actually when Obama was president.)

https://www.bea.gov/news/2025/new-foreign-direct-investment-united-states-2024

And he’s bringing in $18 trillion??

Two, he said that he’s brought the price of eggs down by 82% -

But, according to Google, here’s the average price over 2025 of one dozen large eggs, grade A -

• January 2025: Prices hit highs around $4.95.
• May 2025: Averaged about $4.95, with some sources showing $4.55.
• September 2025: Dropped to around $3.49.
• November 2025: Further decreased to roughly $2.86. 

So, from the high of 4.95, the price came down to 2.86, and that is a decrease of 42% - not 82%

So be warned that every number Trump says is a made-up number.

BUT – Trump had nothing to do with the decrease in eggs! Why must he take credit for things he had nothing to do with?

According to Google:

Egg prices have fallen due to a combination of stabilizing supply after severe avian flu outbreaks, decreased consumer demand (as people bought less at peak prices), and seasonal factors, with improved biosecurity helping farmers rebuild flocks, leading to a gradual return to normal production and lower wholesale costs that eventually reach consumers. 

 

[Radiorum]

5 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

the article turned out to be a big bust

What article? What do you mean, "a bust?"

 

9 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

they are making shit up about the speech

Who is they? What shit?

[Radiorum]

2 hours ago, Radiorum said:

he said he’s brought $18 trillion worth of foreign investment into the US

I had to share this quote I read about Trump's $18 trillion dollar claim:

Then came the eighteen trillion. That number landed like a stone. Eighteen trillion in investment. Eighteen trillion in promised glory. It felt like someone tossing a jewel into the air and expecting everyone to gasp.

I come from Southern people. We do not clap at big numbers. We ask to see the paperwork. My grandma said never trust a man who throws out money figures without explaining whose hands it lands in. Eighteen trillion means nothing if it lives on a teleprompter and dies at a grocery checkout.

 

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, Radiorum said:

I watched Trump’s “Address to the Nation” – all 18 desperate minutes of it. Here it is:

 

 

I actually felt bad for him, he came across so desperate. Love me, love me, love me! I am the absolutely greatest! Biden, Biden, Biden!

Anyway, after the address, his staff of course praised him, but Trump, as if excusing himself, said -

“Susie told me I had to give an address to the nation.”

Wiles told him he had to do it – and that leads me to wonder – did she know he would mess up so badly? Was she trying to sabotage him – and his regime? Did she have an ulterior motive for making him do it?

Congrats on your courage to listen to Trump's LIE FEST.

[gatomontes99]

12 hours ago, Radiorum said:

What article? What do you mean, "a bust?"

 

Who is they? What shit?

The article about Susie. The one this entire thread is based on.

Turns out most of the quotes were taken out of context. The "Trump has an alcoholics personality" quote, for example, was talking about how he is optimistic and thinks he can do grand things that other people think are impossible. The author tried to make it sound like Susie thought he was a drunk or flawed. instead she was talking about how good he is at setting lofty goals and meeting them.

These lying hit pieces don't work. Everyone sees right through the lies now. The media has jumped the shark and people get their news from TikTok and X now, for better or worse. 

[John Stone]

Why the fk would this woman give an interview to Vanity Fair??

Supposedly she was the architect of Trump's '24 win. 

 

[Radiorum]

8 hours ago, robosmith said:

Congrats on your courage to listen to Trump's LIE FEST.

Gotta stay informed. If I am to comment on it, I gotta watch it.

[Radiorum]

1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

The "Trump has an alcoholics personality" quote, for example, was talking about how he is optimistic and thinks he can do grand things that other people think are impossible.

Yeah, I got this from the article. But Wiles' father was an alcoholic, and she was basing her comment on her less-than-stellar experience with him. What you are actually describing here is the alcoholic's delusion.

 

1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

The author tried to make it sound like Susie thought he was a drunk or flawed.

Not drunk, but flawed. Why, do you think Trump has no flaws?

1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

instead she was talking about how good he is at setting lofty goals and meeting them.

Alcoholics don't reach their goals.

1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

These lying hit pieces don't work. Everyone sees right through the lies now.

But there was no lies in the piece.

 

[Radiorum]

41 minutes ago, John Stone said:

Why the fk would this woman give an interview to Vanity Fair??

Supposedly she was the architect of Trump's '24 win. 

I've read part 2 of the articles now, and a comment from Wiles blows apart Trump's narrative about why he is blowing up people in the ocean. From the article:

Wiles told me about Trump’s Venezuela strategy: “He wants to keep on blowing boats up until Maduro cries uncle. And people way smarter than me on that say that he will.” (Wiles’s statement appears to contradict the administration’s official stance that blowing up boats is about drug interdiction, not regime change.)

 

[gatomontes99]

3 minutes ago, Radiorum said:

Yeah, I got this from the article. But Wiles' father was an alcoholic, and she was basing her comment on her less-than-stellar experience with him. What you are actually describing here is the alcoholic's delusion.

 

Not drunk, but flawed. Why, do you think Trump has no flaws?

Alcoholics don't reach their goals.

But there was no lies in the piece.

 

Yeah, no, she said he does achieve the goals and the alcoholics personality reference was just that he had lofty goals but she contrasted it with the fact that he actually achieved them. Like ending 8 conflicts/wars. That was a lofty goals that he achieved. The article was a lie.