Susie Wiles’ Vanity Fair interview prompts White House claims of media bias
Susie Wiles rarely seeks the spotlight. But a rare, two-part interview with Vanity Fair magazine has suddenly placed President Donald Trump’s chief of staff, and the White House itself, at the center of a fast-moving political response.
The interview, conducted over several months and published this week, features Wiles offering candid assessments of Trump and key members of his inner circle. Her comments quickly drew attention both inside and outside the administration.
What Wiles said
In the profile, Wiles describes the president, who doesn’t drink alcohol, as having what she calls an “alcoholic’s personality.”
Trump responded in an interview with The New York Post, saying he stands by Wiles and has long described himself in similar terms.
“I’ve said that many times about myself,” Trump said. “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.”
Wiles, a longtime Trump adviser who worked on both of his successful presidential campaigns, also offered blunt critiques of others in the administration. She is quoted calling Vice President JD Vance a conspiracy theorist, saying Attorney General Pam Bondi “completely whiffed” the handling of the Epstein files, and criticizing Elon Musk’s approach to reshaping federal agencies.
The interviews also touch on internal disagreements over issues including tariffs, Venezuela and major policy rollouts.
In one example, Wiles suggests the U.S. boat strikes that the administration has publicly tied to drug trafficking are, at least in part, about applying pressure on Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.
The White House responds
Within hours of publication, Wiles publicly pushed back. She called the article a “disingenuously framed hit piece on me and the finest President.” Wiles also said the piece stripped away context to create a negative narrative. She didn’t dispute that the quotes were hers.
Trump soon echoed that defense, praising Wiles’ performance as chief of staff and dismissing the profile as inaccurate.
Other senior officials followed suit.
Vance was asked about the “conspiracy theorist” label after a speech in Pennsylvania. He brushed it off with humor, saying, “I only believe in the conspiracy theories that are true.”
Bondi publicly praised Wiles’ loyalty and leadership. Budget Director Russ Vought, whom Wiles labeled a “right-wing absolute zealot,” also defended her, calling her an “exceptional chief of staff.”
The message from the administration was clear: unity, not fracture.
Why this matters
Beyond the personal remarks, the interview raises questions about how the administration’s message is shaped, and how much internal disagreement exists behind a unified public front.
Wiles’ comments point to tension on issues like the Epstein files and U.S. policy toward Venezuela, even as the White House has worked to project cohesion.
Bias watch: how this story is being framed
The disagreement here is less about the quotes themselves than about how they’re presented.
From the White House’s perspective, the criticism centers on omission. In her post on X, Wiles 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.” She argued that blunt quotes were emphasized while context and positive assessments were downplayed to create a negative and chaotic narrative.
From Vanity Fair’s perspective, the defense is straightforward: Wiles’ words are presented as spoken, and candor from a sitting chief of staff is inherently newsworthy.
For readers, the distinction matters. The administration is asking audiences to focus on why the story was written, while the article itself invites readers to focus on what was said, and what that candor reveals.
The post Susie Wiles’ Vanity Fair interview prompts White House claims of media bias appeared first on Straight Arrow News.
Ella Rae Greene, Editor In Chief
