I considered this objection before writing my hypothesis post.
This White House leaks. Susie didn’t want frenemies like JD Vance calling the New York Post to say why she walked out a top level meeting. I could be wrong, but that’s my idea.
My own two cents on the Trump 4D chess thing…
The last thing that Trump will ever be is subtle. He doesn’t do subtlety. He doesn’t just lie, he brays like an ass. Loudly, repeatedly, with his chest stuck out. He’s challenging you to call him on his bullshit, if you do then you’re questioning his authority. He cows people. It’s his default way of interacting with anyone else. That or tactical obsequiousness to try and set up an advantage down the road.
Was the Vanity Fair article planned? Was it a ham handed attempt at a distraction that backfired slightly? Followed up by another ham handed attempt to tell the country to “look over there!” Certainly I think all these things can be true. They would much rather we be talking about these interviews rather than Epstein or an impending war with Venezuela. I’m sure he knows enough at least to understand the concept of a media distraction. But he always has to be the alpha male. He is always betrayed by his ego and constant need for attention.
The reason why this is an apples and oranges situation, is that Trump “leaked” things that he wanted people to think about him. He wanted to spread rumors that made him look like a free-wheeling ladies’ man. Things that were (in his mind at least) salacious and newsworthy, but not in a way that hurt his reputation in a manner that he cared about.
In contrast, those interviews did not make Donald Trump look good. If he intended her to give interviews to leak things that would be a benefit to him, which is what he did in the past, somebody screwed something up. Either he didn’t convey what she was supposed to say very well, or she went off-script, but either way it seems pretty negative.
It would be “4D chess” if it turns out that everyone else is wrong, that somehow this ultimately ends up being a positive for Trump, and everyone’s reactions to it now are shortsighted for the genius long game. And that’s what people are casting doubt on. Either Trump had no part of this, or it’s intentional and he blundered. The fact that the White House is scrambling to provide damage control is evidence that if this was a planned thing, it clearly did not turn out how they wanted it to.
Lots of officials are somewhat vain and have succumbed to the idea of national pictorials and interviews.
I think Trump does what Trump always does. This isn’t about multidimensional chess, and if it was Wiles and not Trump would be playing it.
There is an element of distraction to this, and Trump is likely amused someone who likes talks slight shade. Nothing in the interview is very damaging, some of it distracts. Probably Wiles does regret the comments about Musk but not USAID, and I don’t know what to make about Clinton. Wiles did not mention Biden that I know of. If Wiles felt guilty or complicit, that doesn’t come across - but the loyalty still does, mostly.