From "Trump’s Top Aide Acknowledges ‘Score Settling’ Behind Prosecutions/In interviews with Vanity Fair, Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff, said Trump 'has an alcoholic’s personality,' called JD Vance a 'conspiracy theorist' and concluded that Pam Bondi 'completely whiffed' the early handling of the Epstein files" (NYT)(gift link)..
Here's the Vanity Fair article: "Susie Wiles, JD Vance, and the 'Junkyard Dogs': The White House Chief of Staff On Trump’s Second Term (Part 1 of 2)Throughout the first year of Donald Trump’s second administration, Vanity Fair writer Chris Whipple has interviewed Wiles amid each moment of crisis. This insider’s account joins a portfolio of portraits for an unflinching, up-close look at power—and peril."
Here's Wiles's response, on X. It's quite generic: "The article published early this morning is a disingenuously framed hit piece on me and the finest President, White House staff, and Cabinet in history. 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. The truth is the Trump White House has already accomplished more in eleven months than any other President has accomplished in eight years and that is due to the unmatched leadership and vision of President Trump, for whom I have been honored to work for the better part of a decade. None of this will stop our relentless pursuit of Making America Great Again!"
Posts
123 comments:
What did you expect susie whipple was one of those enablers if tds and the shambling fraud
Dont squeeze the charmin
Very Trumpy response from her. Instead of leaving the initial critique of the article concise, she had to go and wildly boast about accomplishments.
Suzy Wiles is not stupid, so why on earth would she talk to Vanity Fair? I am looking for the 3D chess motive here. Please tell me there is one?
It's very very puzzling that Susie Wiles would speak to anybody associated with Vanity Fair. Hell, it's weird she spoke to anybody in the media. This is obviously a miscalculation on her part and out of character. It won't happen again. We have heard to last from Susie Wiles.
Whoa whoa...you mean the media is lying to me again!?! I feel betrayed.
Miss wiles yoi have everything so nailed down you can waste time with mr whipple
Mark said...
Very Trumpy response from her. [...]
Disagree in that it sounds like a very standard political response, not one that is specifically in the Trump style. How many times did we hear Biden allies reject criticism and, in the same breath, glorify the living crap out of him and his administration? I will answer my own question: lots of times every day.
Trump-style would have included mud-slinging and name calling. "Vanity Unfair", etc...
Why in the heck would she talk to Vanity Fair? Ugh.
She should have made her own recording of interviews to keep the media moderately honest. Haven't Republicans learned that yet? Foolish woman.
Her honesty is refreshing.
"well sure, we are a bunch of psychologically broken freaks. I enable horrible behavior from the President because I see my alcoholic father in him"
... Its a perfect encapsulation of the modern Republican Party. I didn't think they were that self-aware
Susie, this is a doozie!
She’s stupid to talk to Vanity Fear.
The horror of being accurately quoted on the record.
The only reason to read Vanity Fair is because you want to be misinformed, or at the very least don't mind it. Of course it was poor judgment to give them anything to work with.
It could be that Wiles did all of this tactically. Scaring the shit out of the Left & The Bush/Rommey Republicans, as well as China and The Muslims is good strategy.
Bondi did more than whiff on the Epstein files. She should have been fired months ago.
Vance is why Larry Fink is going to negotiations in Ukraine
Susie, why so schmoozy?
They could make up carp like michael wolf
WTF is this woman doing giving insider interviews to a Vanity Fair reporter?
Eleven interviews why not 12
It's quite generic
…based on the animosity they sure have accomplished a great deal. That’s not something every administration could claim without being fact checked…
Very interesting article. Why would the Vanity Fair author allow the NYTs to scoop her. Most of the "quotes" are single snippets. Nice hit job they pulled here. Just wait for the Vance hit and the Cruz hits next.
The defamation lawsuit for not quoting Susie Wiles exactly the way she wanted to be quoted will be filed in 3, 2, 1.
Note how Kak automatically assumes that Vanity Fair is 1) accurate and 2) not lying like the BBC did.
Because for Kak and the rest of the left, no lie is wrong as long as it is "for the greater good, i.e. leftist political dictatorship!"
boatbuilder said...
WTF is this woman doing giving insider interviews to a Vanity Fair reporter?
---------------
I haven't read the article but the WH must of known that VF would publish a hit piece.
Therefore, just maybe this was a intentional warning shot from Trump to people in his administration.
Will she be resigning soon, her last act before the end in order to save her own skin? Rats jumping the ship. Or more distraction before Friday?
Shades of Trump and Bob Woodward/Maggie Haberman or Scaramucci and Ryan Lizza. I thought the Trump people learned the lesson from his first term.
Scaramucci should have confided in Olivia Nuzzi. At least he might have gotten something in return.
LOL!
ChrisC said...
Suzy Wiles is not stupid, so why on earth would she talk to Vanity Fair? I am looking for the 3D chess motive here. Please tell me there is one?
Why? It's the name of the magazine - Vanity...
Maybe Suzie did the interview because she enjoys knowing that Igna, Mark, Kaki and Howard will be so thrilled that they wet their panties.
Yes. It is an obvious distraction from what the Trump administration is doing to fix the damage caused by 12 years of the Obama administration.
Ms. Wiles will need a job in 2029. Adjusting her resume.
Maybe, WisRich. I'm thinking that this woman didn't get the point of the fable about the scorpion and the frog the first 47 times she heard it.
Interview journalism is a haven for those who delight in deception and seduction.
Although, frankly, if all they have on Trump is that Suzie Wiles thinks he has "an alcoholic personality", and on JDV is that he has political reasons for aligning with Trump, then so what?
I want to know who was the moron who agreed she should do an interview with Vanity Fair?
Chris Whipple wrote the acclaimed 2018 The Gatekeepers, about WH chiefs of staff. So unsurprising she would accept his interviews. That she would say what she told him reflects her lack of time at the top when she got the job immediatelely after the election.
The Mar-a-lago raid was illegal and unnecessary.
All that was required, instead of FBI agents and open drawn guns - was a subpoena. And the Documents requested by name.
Vanity Fair is a joke(D)
Read the section about USAID. Try not to laugh.
It tells you all you need to know about the politics at work. (Hint--GWB and "a former GOP White House Chief of Staff" are aghast, as is...Bill Gates. No mention of Democrat-allied NGO's or Politico).
This is not pay back.
The fake felonies against Trump & the people behind the fraud must be held to account. If they are not - we live in Soviet-Democratic America.
The pics are about as tasteful and flattering as you would expect. Snort.
Again - The Mar-a-Lago raid was illegal and unnecessary.
All that was required, instead of FBI agents with open drawn guns - was a subpoena. A subpoena and a list of the documents requested, by name.
The corrupt left could not make that list happen. Gee - we all wonder why?
Wait! They’re still publishing Vanity Fair? Why?
Define alcoholic personality.
Note the magazine for dem-cultists and Hollywood fakery - stayed away from direst quote marks.
direct
Peachy: Trump was served with a document subpoena in Spring 2022. He responded with a false written statement that he had no classified materials.
RELEASE THE SUSIE WILES TAPES. 😂
NOTHING published or said by democrats and their media is honest or true. Complete liars and pricks. I have no use for them or their lies. Promoting their lies is a mistake.
FullMoon: she defined it to whipple and it's in the article. Based on her experience with her fanous dad.
IOW, Wiles is a moderate Republican who didn't want to do anything MAGA or fufill any promises to the base. She wanted the approval of the Democrats and MSM. She wanted Jeb Bush as POTUS. She even uses the language of liberal/left in describing others: Rightwing zealot.
I suppose she makes the trains run on time and (unlike Kelly) isn't constantly leaking to the press to make sure everyone knows how wonderful she is. So, there's that.
Anyone who gives 11 interviews to a far-left magazine like Vanity Fair knows exactly what they are getting into.
why anyone would talk to Vanity Fair(D) - is puzzling indeed.
Readering- Trump's document possession was legal.
The raid was not.
The Subpoena needed to include a list of the documents.
It’s a nothingburger. Is there a sentient person who does not believe Pam Bondi screwed the pooch handling the Epstein files? That Elon Musk is not an avowed ketamine user and an odd, odd duck whose actions are not always rational? That JD Vance’s conversion from Trump critic to supporter was touched by more than a whiff of weaseliness? If these all aren’t yet articles of faith on the right they soon will be. Remember, a gaffe is when you tell the truth.
Also Remember- when a leftist Biden gaffes - it's ignored by the Tabloid Soviet Press.
She says:
“I’ve not seen him throw anything, I’ve not seen him scream. I didn’t see that really horrible behavior that people talk about
“The president, it turns out, is a junkie of that and is like a statistical savant,”
Wiles said Trump has “an alcoholic’s personality.” He “operates [with] a view that there’s nothing he can’t do. Nothing, zero, nothing.”
Wiles explained: “In every case, of the ones he was looking at, in every case, they had already served more time than the sentencing guidelines would have suggested. So given that, I sort of got on board.”
Trump has empowered her; when Wiles weighs in, everyone knows she is speaking for him
“The challenge with Elon is keeping up with him,” she told me. “He’s an avowed ketamine [user]. And he sleeps in a sleeping bag in the EOB [Executive Office Building] in the daytime. And he’s an odd, odd duck, as I think geniuses are
In Wiles’s view, RFK Jr.’s shock treatment of HHS is warranted. “He pushes the envelope—some would say too far. But I say in order to get back to the middle, you have to push it too far.”
Will the president use the military to suppress or even prevent voting during the midterms and beyond?
“I say it is categorically false, will not happen, it’s just wrongheaded,” she snapped.
Define alcoholic personality.
The VF piece says that her father, the late, great Pat Summerall, was an alcoholic (who stopped 20 years before his death) and a difficult man with a strong personality. Which she says is something that gave her the background to deal with a guy like Trump. Sort of a nothingburger, as Mr. Prole notes.
Trump has basically said he’s an addict. He saw enough of it in his brother that he never started any booze or drugs, because he figured he’d go down the same road. He also would agree with the suggestion that he has applied the addictive personality to constructive ends in his business (literally) and in politics. Hell hath no fury like a dry drunk! CC, JSM
Clandestine
@WarClandestine
Holy shit…
"The FBI admittedly never had probable cause to raid Mar-a-Lago, but the Biden DOJ essentially told the FBI to create/find some probable cause.
Meaning the Biden White House and Garland weaponized the DOJ/FBI to go after Trump.
Not a surprise, but now confirmed."
Dear Vanity Fair(D) - say one negative thing about any democrat - anywhere. Just one. Newsum - perhaps?
Oh right - you can't.
> Larry Fink is going to negotiations in Ukraine
I have absolutely no problem with that, as long as we don't let him back in the country.
Wiles apparently never read Janet Malcolm on journalists and their subjects: "They are not your friends."
“After reading that I for one will never vote for Trump again!”And other banalities.
The #1 characteristic of a real alcoholic is an inability to control or limit apetite. An example, would be an answer as to why would the son of a famous Hollywood director, kill his parents? The son, if truly addicted, can imagine jail as a place of unhindered and unlimited supply. Father and mother, achieving in death what they were incapable of doing for their son in life.
So, the question becomes, based on your assessment, Ms Wiles, do you believe the president would kill to get what he wants?
Nothing smells right.
Susie Wiles is not a naïve operator. She’s disciplined, media-aware, and has survived Trumpworld precisely because she understands message control.
Vanity Fair is long-form, meticulously fact-checked, and legally cautious of the sue happy Team Trump.
Now Wiles is playing the fake news card.
What gives me pause isn’t Vanity Fair—it’s the sequence. Wiles is too seasoned to misunderstand the nature of a long-form VF interview.
This feels less like a media dispute and more like a familiar pattern: controlled candor followed by strategic denouncement. Say just enough to signal seriousness and competence, then reframe it as “fake news” once it circulates. Confusion becomes the feature, not the bug.
More muddying the waters while throwing sand in the air, more distrust of the “fake news”, regardless of how air tight of a case VF has. Timely chaos.
Suzy Wiles is not stupid, so why on earth would she talk to Vanity Fair?
This is a Trump sanctioned interview. The reporter had wide access to multiple people, including Rubio and Vance. Photographs of everybody. This is Donald Trump deciding to grant Vanity Fair wide-level access to his chief of staff.
I liked this bit from the article...
Wiles’s relationship with Trump almost ended at his Miami golf club one night in the fall of 2016. Unhappy with a poll showing him doing worse than expected in Florida, Trump berated her in front of a gaggle of cronies. “It was a horrific hour-plus at midnight,” Wiles told me. “And I don’t think I’ve seen him that angry since. He was ranting and raving. And I didn’t know whether to argue back or whether to be stoic. What I really wanted to do was cry.”
Wiles steeled herself. “I finally said, ‘You know Mr. Trump, if you want somebody to set their hair on fire and be crazy, I’m not your girl. But if you want to win this state, I am. It’s your choice.’ ” Wiles walked out. Trump turned on a dime. “Lo and behold, he called me every day.” Wiles never looked back. Trump carried Florida, the first big prize in his stunning 2016 upset over Hillary Clinton.
Vanity Fair is long-form, meticulously fact-checked
oh bullshit!
Vanity Fair Staffers Shocked Over Olivia Nuzzi's Alleged Affair With Mark Sanford
CT Ginger said, "They’re still publishing Vanity Fair? Why?"
It's in their name - "Vanity"
Biden's gaffes had nothing to do with "telling the truth" and everything to do with his brain being a cauliflower.
From DJT's take: "“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.”
In the interview, Wiles said: “High-functioning alcoholics or alcoholics in general, their personalities are exaggerated when they drink. And so I’m a little bit of an expert in big personalities.”
“I didn’t read it, but I don’t read Vanity Fair — but she’s done a fantastic job,” Trump also told The Post.
“I think from what I hear, the facts were wrong, and it was a very misguided interviewer, purposely misguided.”
Saint (Biden actually won) Croix, you’re kind of proving my point.
Whether VF is trustworthy or not has become irrelevant—because the reflex now is to dismiss any outlet on command.
That didn’t happen by accident. It’s the end product of years of conditioning.
What does matter is this: if VF materially misquoted or deceptively edited a senior Trump operator, we’d already be hearing about lawyers, demand letters, or at least specific examples with receipts. That’s how this ecosystem works.
Instead we get broad denunciations and zero documentation.
That tells me this isn’t about truth or fact-checking—it’s about inoculation. Label it “bullshit” and move on before the substance lands.
You don’t have to trust VF to notice the pattern.
When, oh when, will Republicans learn to never engage with Liberal media.
'Finest White House staff in history" is hilarious in the same way that "wise Latina" is hilarious. Ladies, ladies, ladies, you do think highly of yourselves.
I challenge anyone to tell me that Pete Hegseth and Pam Bondi and Howie Lutnick are members of the "finest" cabinet ever without breaking the fourth wall. Good luck. The only people who believe that work at the White House. (And, they don't believe it either.) Shit for brains keystone cops.
The Biden Administration gave us a lot of bullshit. Trump will NOT be outdone.
Trump has decided to own his alcoholic personality. I didn’t have that on my bingo card.
"Whether VF is trustworthy or not has become irrelevant—because the reflex now is to dismiss any outlet on command."
Including the outlets on either end of Ronald J. Ward.
“ The Mar-a-lago raid was illegal and unnecessary.
All that was required, instead of FBI agents and open drawn guns - was a subpoena. And the Documents requested by name.”
They couldn’t name the documents that would fit a subpoena. Trump didn’t know either - the boxes were mostly from aides clearing his desk between appointments and phone calls. All that they knew that was marked Classified were in the binder Trump formally ordered declassified, that incriminated the DOJ CES and FBI CD in their RussiaGate malfeasance, misfeasance, and perfidy. And those two groups sat on the ordered declassification for the entirety of the Biden Administration. And now that Bondi is AG, etc, and they are finally coming out, it is clear why they wanted those documents. DOJ CES and FBI CD were bad boys (and girls), going back to the Crooked Hillary illegal email investigation, if not further.
Those documents were still marked Classified, because DOJ CES and FBI CD were sitting on the Presidentially ordered formal declassification of those documents. It’s just that they couldn’t subpoena those documents because then they would have to explain why Trump, despite formally ordering their declassification, couldn’t legally have them.
Interestingly, the news out today is that the FBI WF didn’t believe that the DOJ had probable cause for the search warrant. And, interestingly, that DOJ CES head (and, later, Deputy Special Counsel) Jay Bratt had no interest in negotiating with Trump’s attorneys. Never had. They asked for extensions of time and rolling document production. Both requests denied by Bratt. He wanted thatsearch warrant, and got it.
You can call a dog a bird, but you can't make it fly.
You can call Trump an alcoholic personality, but you can't make him drink.
As a retired psychologist, I am not familiar with that term,, but l may be out of touch with popular pop psych phrases.
To be highly successful often requires what people want to call an "addictive personality" or "workaholic". Both are unduly negative phrases perhaps born out of dislike for people who work obsessively AND succeed. (Many just like to work obsessively regardless of success) .
At some point pop psych phrases do more to muddle the waters than clarify them.
I don’t know if Trump has “an alcoholic personality” or not. I’m no where near as close to the president as Ms Wiles is. Maybe she used that characterization as a throw away, an offhand remark. Then again, she’s supposedly very smart, as some people have said here, again and again.
What Maynard just said 👆🏽
I am in Susie Wiles country as I type this. One does not "use" Susie or her words in this manner and not pay a price. That's all I have to say.
You and I will never see it, but they will. Do not piss off Susie. M-m-m. Big mistake.
Yo, Chuck--there aren't any disputed "facts" in the VF piece. It's a lightweight gossip column. Nobody's suing anybody.
mustapha kharbouch
is a murderous douche bag?
film at eleven
Left Bank said: Trump has decided to own his alcoholic personality. I didn’t have that on my bingo card.
Like most Democrats, there is something wrong with your bingo card.
I don't buy for a second that neither Trump nor Susie Wiles knows why Ghislaine Maxwell was transferred to a minimum-security prison—or that Trump's former personal attorney, Todd Blanche, acted entirely on his own.
Trump's kids do not want to harm their father.
Just sayin
Kak - 4 years of Crook Joe - he and his team had the files.
Isnt it fascinating iman abouf this fellow
Who they suspiciously erased his profile
Or did they
https://web.archive.org/web/20251216151721/https://anthropology.brown.edu/news/2025-03-24/research-apprenticeship-spotlight
None of these things are revelations. They just sound like terrible things, because great effort was put into making them sound terrible by interspersing quotes (often only one word) within the creative writing. Which of these is a great revelation we did not know?
Why did VF give the NYT an advanced look at their exclusive article and interviews? Aren't they supposed to be competitors in the journalism business? Are they not really competitors, or are they not really journalist?
Apparently, the White House Chief of Staff has fallen victim to the outrageous crime of having her own words accurately quoted and printed in a story.
Just part of the hive
Funny that
https://x.com/BostonByBirth/status/2000962681063243854
Vanity Fair lives up to its name.
The defamation lawsuit for not quoting Susie Wiles exactly the way she wanted to be quoted
and
Apparently, the White House Chief of Staff has fallen victim to the outrageous crime of having her own words accurately quoted and printed in a story.
Ah, I remember it as if it was yesterday. It was the second semester of my freshman year and I was in my favorite prof's class. Mrs. (not Dr. or Prof.) Platzner, of revered memory.
She was showing us how to quote people to create a sense of the opposite meaning to what they said. She used book reviews as an example. The critic might say, for instance, "This book is a collection of fantastic falsehoods, brilliant in its utter divorcement from reality. The writing is pedestrian, the metaphors otherworldly in their inapplicability, only the typeface showing any indication of having been meticulously researched. To the publisher who saw for to publish this dreck, I say, Bravo! You have accomplished what decades of fan fiction could not."
And the book jacket could then accurately quote the critic as saying, "This book is... fantastic... brilliant... utter... reality. The writing is... otherworldly... meticulously researched. To the publisher[,] I say, Bravo!"
As for the quality of Trump's cabinet, it's telling that there is not one crossdresser, diaper changer, or autopen weilding traitor in the bunch. This lack of "normalcy" says a lot.
Wince said...
“After reading that I for one will never vote for Trump again!” And other banalities.
Well, it worked on me. I will definitely NOT be voting for Trump in 2028.
RJ Ward (3:42): “Label it “bullshit” and move on before the substance lands.” See, here’s the problem with saving the Republic. The Republic has a plethora of simpletons who think “Trump [the teetotaler] has an alcoholic’s personality” is “substance,” but closing the border, reducing gasoline prices, busting a record number of child sex traffickers, reducing crime in DC, etc., is not.
It's either great damage control or magnificent messing with the media. Have your top aide say unflattering things about you and then spin the negative things around to plusses, rather than denying or arguing or trying to defend yourself.
"but closing the border, reducing gasoline prices, busting a record number of child sex traffickers, reducing crime in DC, etc., is not."
The left considers those things to be 'substance', too. They just happen to be 'substance' they're opposed to.
Susie Wiles is saying that what she said to Vanity Fair was taken out of context, but she hasn't denied a single quotation.
Stay tuned, because she gave eleven interviews, so episode one is just the beginning.
Another Lucy and the football.
It's remarkable that it was not 1 but 11 interviews, over the course of the year. Like they interviewed her once a month in Trump's first year of office. So it's a very major article. And the reporter had wide access not just to her, but to the Vice President and the Secretary of State/NSA. They took photographs of a lot of people. And the reporter interviewed a lot of people, too. He had widespread access to everybody in the White House, apparently (except Trump).
Also, and i know this isn't Playboy, but if you look at the photographs and skip the article, each and every one of the Republicans in the White House look like a bad ass, completely in charge. Those black and white photographs are fantastic.
The other thing that jumped out of me from the interview is that it's very complimentary to Susie Wiles, talking about how important she is and how powerful she is. The article calls her the second most powerful person in the White House. (I thought that was strange. Wouldn't Rubio be more powerful?)
Rubio is very complimentary to her. And she was very complimentary to him.
My take on this is that Trump wanted her to do this interview, and to be open and honest. And she talks a lot about various people in his White House, some of them not complimentary at all.
So I see this as an internal power play, with various people in his administration getting smacked a little, including Russell Vought ("right-wing absolute zealot"). So the blue boys and girls can enjoy a little red-on-red smackdown.
Trump's acknowledgment that he does have an alcoholic's personality suggests that he's completely on board with this interview. And there's a real smack-down of Bondi and her handling of the Epstein stuff.
Wills alleges she was quoted out of context. I'm sure she was. The reporter is obviously biased. But also this article is kind of an internal report card for the White House at the end of Year 1. That's why she did it, at Trump's behest, to let people know how they're doing. And they did it out in the open because that's the way Trump rolls.
“…but closing the border, reducing gasoline prices, busting a record number of child sex traffickers, reducing crime in DC, etc., is not [substantial].”
Mason G responded…
“The left considers those things to be 'substance', too. They just happen to be 'substance' they're opposed to.”
The inevitable conclusion is that the left is all about substance abuse.
I wonder about someone willing to speak to Vanity Fair.
It's Vanity Fair for fucks sake.
Wiles should be guiding Trump's message - and keeping him form saying stupid shit on Social Media. ie(Dude - I know that Felt good to say, but please don't press send) I think she might be a bushie mole.
BTW - this is a thought I had before I learned about her talking to Vanity Fair.
just a thought. I could be wrong.
Yeah that was a concern, follow the script
Her generic response sounds like someone who knows she is full of crap.
Again - I could be wrong.
You would they would have learned from michael wolff
My takeaway is that it took 11 hours of interviews about Trump to get a few moments of non-positive things to quote in a Vanity Fair article. I'd like Vanity Fair to publish those other 10hours, 59 minutes of positive information, please, condensed by AI perhaps into an article of proportionate length. And as for "an alcoholic personality" whether that is a negative or positive depends upon whether the alcoholic is on a binge passed out in a gutter, or holding firm to sobriety and doing well in life because they don't drink. Considering the death of Trump's brother due to alcohol abuse, I wonder if the quoted words were pulled from something about the subject of alcohol, and Trump's well known aversion to booze.
A chief of staff should not be heard and rarely seen. Any action should promote the interests of the boss, the administration, and the GOP. If the CoS gives interviews, they should be carefully formulated and targeted, in a friendly outlet. Giving "candid" interviews to Vanity Fair serves no political purpose. Amateur move, which DJT can ill afford.
You would they would have learned from michael wolff
At that level in politics, hubris is practically a job requirement. You tell yourself, I can talk to this reporter because I know I won't make the dumb mistakes that all those other people who talked to reporters made... blissfully unaware that the dumb mistake is talking to reporters.
yeah play the recordings or put out transcript, see who is spinning and who is not.
@Peachy wrote that it was unnecessary to raid Mar a Lago -
“All that was required, instead of FBI agents and open drawn guns - was a subpoena. And the Documents requested by name.” They had already tried that. The grand jury had subpoenaed documents that were marked “Classified.” Trump’s response was to hide the documents from his in-house lawyer so the lawyer could truthfully respond to the grand jury that he had searched for responsive documents and found none.
You’re welcome.
As for the interview, who cares if Trump has or doesn’t have an alcoholic personality, whatever that is, since he doesn’t drink? I care a lot more about his many other character defects.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.