Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

The interview that could change history

Opinion

The interview that could change history

White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles looks on during a bilateral meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Polish President Karol Nawrocki in the Oval Office at the White House on Sept. 3, 2025 in Washington, D.C.

Alex Wong/Getty Images/TCA

Susie Wiles has a reputation. Ask anyone in Washington and words like “strategic,” “disciplined,” and “skilled” come up. She’s widely held to be one of the most effective tacticians in modern politics.

She’s also known for her low-key, low-drama energy, preferring to remain behind-the-scenes as opposed to preening for cameras like so many other figures in President Trump’s orbit.


Trump’s nickname for his chief of staff is “The Ice Maiden,” referring to her coolheaded nature. The former mayor of Jacksonville said Wiles is “a political savant” who possesses “just otherworldly sort of political instincts.” She herself has said her specialty is “creating order from chaos.”

So, how the hell did a two-part, 11-interview Vanity Fair exposé, in which Wiles unabashedly and recklessly critiques members of Trump’s inner circle, contradicts Trump himself, and reveals some truly stunning behind-the-scenes details — on the record — come to be?

The astonishing set of interviews writer Chris Whipple conducted with Wiles over months has rocked Washington, sent Trump’s comms shop into hyperdrive, and has everyone wondering how Wiles, such a political pro, let this even happen.

Is she sabotaging him? Is she trying to get out and in the most explosive way possible? Is she using the press to force some course-correction inside the White House?

I suspect the explanation is far more simple and less sinister: ego.

For one, it’s hard to say no when a glossy outlet like Vanity Fair pitches a longform profile, complete with photo shoots. For another, it’s not hard to imagine someone like Wiles believing they could outsmart the reporter and control the narrative. But when you give 11 interviews worth of access, you relinquish control. Wiles either got too comfortable or too cocky.

Regardless, the damage is done. Her revelations are out there for everyone to read — and, thanks to recordings, hear.

But just what will the damage be? Are Wiles’ admissions merely salacious or could they hurt Trump and Republicans as we approach a midterm election year?

There’s good reason to believe it will be the latter. Here are the most damning parts of her interview:

Retribution: One of the most immediate effects of Wiles’ interview could be her admission that Trump is pursuing political opponents for retribution. It’s an argument his targets, including New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI head James Comey, are making right now to judges who will decide whether those cases have any merit. Expect the comments to end up cited in current and future court filings.

Regime change: Wiles contradicts Pentagon and White House messaging on Trump’s lethal boat strikes, which Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Trump have justified as a war on drugs. Wiles admits Trump “wants to keep blowing boats up until [Venezuelan President Nicolas] Maduro cries uncle.” Regime change, in addition to being unconstitutional, isn’t what the America First MAGA crowd voted for, and they’ll likely let him know that. Additionally, that admission could end up being instrumental if someone like Hegseth is ever tried for war crimes.

Tariffs: Wiles says what everyone but Trump seems to know, which is that not everyone agrees with his trade war. Of the rollout, she says “So much thinking out loud is what I would call it.” And, “There was a huge disagreement over whether [tariffs were] a good idea.” As voters gear up for midterms and blame tariffs for rising prices and unemployment, this admission could haunt Trump and Republicans.

Epstein: Wiles absolutely demolishes Attorney General Pam Bondi on her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, and how it angered some in the MAGA fold, like Joe Rogan fans. “I think she completely whiffed on appreciating that that was the very targeted group that cared about this,” she says. “First she gave them binders full of nothingness. And then she said that the witness list, or the client list, was on her desk. There is no client list, and it sure as hell wasn’t on her desk.” Discrediting the AG casts a pall on the entire administration, as well as its attempts at burying the investigation.

At a time when Trump’s world is caving in on him, these kinds of free-wheeling, inner-sanctum revelations, and from one of his most trusted and respected advisers, could be disastrous for Trump, disastrous for some of his cabinet members, disastrous for Republicans looking to hold onto their majority.

For a woman known for creating order out of chaos, she just poured gasoline on a fire.

S.E. Cupp is the host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" on CNN.


Read More

Whenever political violence erupts, Washington starts playing the blame game

Agents draw their guns after loud bangs were heard during the White House Correspondents' dinner at the Washington Hilton in Washington, D.C., on April 25, 2026. President Trump is attending the annual gala of the political press for the first time while in office.

(Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images/TNS)

Whenever political violence erupts, Washington starts playing the blame game

A heavily armed California man was caught trying to storm the White House correspondents’ dinner Saturday with the apparent intent to kill the president.

It didn’t take long for Washington to start arguing. Democrats denounce violent rhetoric from the right, but the alleged assailant seemed to be inspired by his own rhetoric. President Trump, after initially offering some unifying remarks about defending free speech, soon started accusing the press of encouraging violence against him. Critics pounced on the hypocrisy.

Keep ReadingShow less
Fulcrum Roundtable:  ‘Chilling Effect’ on Dissent
soldiers in truck

Fulcrum Roundtable:  ‘Chilling Effect’ on Dissent

Congress and the Trump administration are locked in an escalating fight over presidential war powers as President Donald Trump continues military action against Iran without congressional authorization, prompting renewed debate over the limits of executive authority.

Julie Roland, a ten-year Navy veteran and frequent contributor to The Fulcrum, joined Executive Editor Hugo Balta on this month's edition of The Fulcrum Roundtable, where she expressed deep concerns regarding the Trump administration’s impact on military nonpartisanship and the rights of service members.

A former helicopter pilot and lieutenant commander, Roland has used her weekly column to highlight what she describes as a systemic attempt to stifle dissent within the armed forces.

Keep ReadingShow less
Florida Democrat resigns, moments before the Ethics Committee was supposed to weigh her expulsion

House Ethics Committee Chair Michael Guest, R-Miss., says the committee is committed to accountability for members of Congress on both sides of the aisle.

(Photo by Samantha Freeman, MNS)

Florida Democrat resigns, moments before the Ethics Committee was supposed to weigh her expulsion

WASHINGTON – Florida Democrat Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick resigned from the House of Representatives on Tuesday, moments before the full Ethics Committee convened to weigh expulsion for allegedly stealing millions of dollars and funneling some into her congressional campaign.

Cherfilus-McCormick was not present at the hearing. “After careful reflection and prayer, I have concluded that it is in the best interest of my constituents and the institution that I step aside at this time,” her statement read.

Keep ReadingShow less
People protesting in the Cannon House Office Building on Capitol Hill, holding tulips and signs that read, "We can't afford another war" and "end the war on iran.'

Veterans, military family members, and supporters occupy the Cannon House Office Building on Capitol Hill calling upon the Trump administration to end the war on Iran on April 20, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Leigh Vogel

Trump’s Iran “Victory” Echoes Iraq’s "Mission Accomplished"

It didn’t exactly end well the last time a president declared victory this quickly. On May 1, 2003, President George W. Bush landed on the USS Abraham Lincoln in a flight suit, strutted across the deck for the cameras, then changed into a suit and tie, stood in front of a banner that read “Mission Accomplished,” and declared the end of major combat operations in Iraq. It was 43 days after the invasion began. Over the next eight years, as the conflict devolved into a protracted insurgency and sectarian war, more than 4,300 Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died.

On April 7, Trump—presumably not wearing a flight suit—declared in a telephone interview with AFP that the United States had achieved victory in Iran. “Total and complete victory. 100 percent. No question about it.” This was the day after the President threatened to destroy a “whole civilization,” hours after a two-week ceasefire was announced. It took six days for the whole thing to fall apart. By April 15, he was back on Fox Business: “We've beaten them militarily, totally. I think it’s close to over.”

Keep ReadingShow less