Vanity Fair has refused to give our beautiful first lady a feature piece, and it regularly bashes the president, so I am not sure why Trump chief of staff Susie Wiles would give the magazine an interview, but she did.
The published interview blasted just about every official in the administration, including Attorney General Pam Bondi and Donald Trump himself.
However, Wiles now says that her comments were taken completely out of context, and now MAGA and the White House are going nuclear over it.
The comments in the piece were brutal, particularly those pertaining to Trump and Vice President JD Vance.
The question in the MAGA world has been, “Why?” Considering how this particular outlet has treated Trump in the past, I was asking that question myself.
The Federalist editor-in-chief Mollie Hemingway was very critical of Wiles for giving the interview, posting, "Genuinely sick to death of people on the right who seek the approval of left-wing media. Or even play with them for a minute. I can’t take it. It’s the saddest fetish.”
California Post opinion editor Joel Pollack was also furious, adding, "I don't know why Republicans continue to give privileged access to mainstream media or center-left publications determined to destroy them. Journalists are not your friends, especially from Democrat agenda-driven outlets like the @nytimes and @VanityFair."
Vance took Wiles' comments in stride, even saying that he and the chief of staff often joke around about him being a conspiracy theorist, but then he added that he only believes in true conspiracies.
Wiles defended herself first, stating, "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."
Then, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt unloaded, responding, "This was unfortunately another attempt at fake news by a reporter who was acting disingenuously and really did take the chief’s words out of context.”
She continued, "But I think most importantly, the bias of omission was ever present throughout this story. The reporter omitted all of the positive things that Susie and our team said about the president and the inner workings of the White House."
Bondi, who was really made to look bad in the interview, with Wiles quoted as saying she had “whiffed” on the Epstein files, defended the chief of staff as well, but I have to imagine the comments stung. Secretary of State Marco Rubio claimed that the publication had also manipulated photos to present everyone in the worst possible light.
The big question, however, was how Donald Trump would respond to Wiles saying he had an “alcoholic’s personality.” As it turns out, Trump also stuck up for her, responding, "No, she meant that I’m -- you see, I don’t drink alcohol. So everybody knows that -- but I’ve often said that if I did, I’d have a very good chance of being an alcoholic. I have said that many times about myself, I do. It’s a very possessive personality.
"I’ve said that many times about myself. I’m fortunate I’m not a drinker. If I did, I could very well, because I’ve said that -- what’s the word? Not possessive -- possessive and addictive type personality. Oh, I’ve said it many times, many times before."
I think this will wind up being mostly a nothing burger, except for the comments about Bondi. I would really like to know the full context of the statement, because if you noticed, Wiles did not deny having said it; she only noted that it was not properly put into context. It further leads me to believe that Bondi’s time in this administration is running out, but that is just my thought on the subject. Everything else, I believe, will blow over.
