Susie Wiles’s Vanity Fair Interview Continues to Haunt Her

White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles might have revealed more than she ought to about the Epstein files.

The Vanity Fair profile on the president’s famed “ice maiden” has continued to haunt the administration weeks after its publication, in large part thanks to Wiles’s candid responses. Now, Democratic Senators Sheldon Whitehouse and Dick Durbin have demanded answers regarding a particularly lurid detail that came out of the article: Wiles’s apparent familiarity with the contents of the Epstein files.

In a joint letter made public Tuesday, Whitehouse and Durbin questioned which components of the investigation she had reviewed, how she obtained the sensitive material, and “under what authority” she gained access to it.

The lawmakers asked Wiles a series of questions, requesting her responses by January 5.

“Had material in the file you reviewed been presented to a grand jury? When did you first gain access to ‘the Epstein file’ and what was the schedule of your review of it? For what purpose did you gain access to this information?” they inquired.

The duo also questioned if she had shared any of the information with Donald Trump, and asked her to explain what role she had in “any process related to the review, redaction, withholding, or release of material in the ‘Epstein file,’ including any processes involving the Department of Justice or Federal Bureau of Investigation.”

The wide-ranging profile on Wiles’s first year atop the Trump administration sent shockwaves through the political establishment earlier this month, and offered many Americans their first intimate glimpse into the inner machinations of Trump’s White House. Over the course of “many on-the-record conversations,” several of which took place after church on Sundays, documentary filmmaker and author Chris Whipple depicted a Cabinet structure that could not exist without Wiles and her unparalleled knack for translating the president’s agenda.

But her loose lips about her Cabinet coworkers have stirred up quite a bit of trouble in the workplace. Some of those comments include claiming that Trump has “an alcoholic’s personality,” and flagging that Vice President JD Vance’s shift into MAGAworld was opportunistic and “sort of political.”

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement detained more than a hundred people in their Chicago “Midway Blitz” operation in September. But as it turns out, at least half of those people were kidnapped for no reason, as their charges were dropped. Only nine arrests resulted in pending felony charges.

The administration has claimed countless times that ICE agents were harassed, stalked, attacked, and abused by the various protesters—many of them American citizens—they detained during the Midway Blitz. But a Chicago Tribune story published found that these claims were flimsy at best, as was reflected in the numerous failed prosecutions.

Some citizens claimed they were mistreated in detainment, experiencing excessive force, facing false charges, and being driven around for hours in the back of a van or SUV before eventually getting dropped off at some random location such as a gas station with their charges dropped.

One man spent four days in jail before all charges against him were dropped. A Montessori school teaching assistant who survived several gunshots from Border Patrol agents had the felony case against her dismissed.

One detainee, 27-year-old accountant Ian Sampson, told the Tribune he was documenting a protest with his camera when he was detained for not listening to orders from agents to move back. He claimed the instructions were warbled and hard to hear.

During the protest Sampson was documenting, which took place at the ICE processing center in the Chicago suburb of Broadview, agents emerged to move the perimeter farther away from the west suburban facility. Their commands to the crowd to move back were unintelligible, several protesters allege.

“All of a sudden they were there, in your face,” Sampson said. “So I stepped back on the grass.… I tried to move out of the way and then they just grabbed me by my backpack, pulled me down and … I had four or five guys on top of me, putting a knee in my back, smashing my head into the ground.”

It’s apparent that the Trump administration sent militant immigration agents into one of the biggest cities in America to kidnap, beat, and abuse immigrants, citizens, or anyone expressing any kind of opposition to Donald Trump’s “blitz.” And it was almost all for nothing.

“The system isn’t designed to move at a speed like a blitz,” said Christopher Parente, a former federal prosecutor and current lawyer for one of the detained protesters. “The whole point of federal prosecutions, and why they win so many cases, is because they do all the work before they charge and then once they charge a case, it’s rock solid. Here, they sort of flipped that on its head and they charge first, and investigate later. And I think that’s why you’ve seen all the problems you’re seeing.”

Israel is about to break tradition for its highest civilian honor with the 2026, non-Israeli recipient: Donald Trump.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced Monday that the award would be given to the U.S. president, marking the second time that the prize has gone to a non-citizen for the first time in its 72-year history.

Trump will receive the award under its newly invented peace category.

“President Trump has broken so many conventions to the surprise of people, and then they figure out, ‘Oh, well—maybe, you know, he was right after all,’” Netanyahu told reporters. “So we decided to break a convention too or create a new one, and that is to award the Israel Prize.”

Trump remarked that the award was “really surprising and very much appreciated.”

The last non-Israeli to receive the honor was Indian conductor Zubin Mehta, who was named in 1991 for his work directing the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra over the span of five decades.

It’s the second instance in which a foreign entity has attempted to cozy up to Trump with a shiny medal masquerading as a respectable peace prize after Trump begged, pleaded, and failed to win the Nobel Peace Prize in October. Earlier this month, FIFA—the global soccer organization—named Trump as the inaugural recipient of their own newly minted FIFA Peace Prize.

Trump has coveted the Nobel Peace Prize for years, going so far as to lie about solving nonexistent international conflicts and phoning Norwegian officials this past summer in lame efforts to snag the title. (Norway’s government has no influence on decisions made by the committee.)

Trump has complained for years that his name has not yet been added to the ranks of the prize’s highly lauded recipients, who span some of the greatest figures of the last century, including Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr., Mother Theresa, and Malala Yousafzai.

Part of the reason for his desire could be that Trump’s supposed political nemesis, former President Barack Obama, received the award in 2009 for “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” Three other U.S. presidents have also won a Nobel Peace Prize.

Border Czar Tom Homan’s CAVA bag bribe investigation came as a pre-inaugration surprise to Donald Trump—due to the then-incoming president’s own refusal to allow the FBI to background check his nominees, MS NOW reported Tuesday.

Trump learned just days before taking office that the FBI had footage of Homan accepting $50,000 in a paper CAVA bag last year from two agents undercover as private contractors purportedly trying to get in with the new Trump administration.

Justice officials were initially worried that Homan wouldn’t be able to get a security clearance, but when he did, federal prosecution planned to monitor him during his time as border czar to see if he continued to move corruptly. But the probe was eventually dropped by Kash Patel’s FBI—even as Justice Department internal documents pointed to proof of Homan’s CAVA bag bribe.

This wouldn’t have happened if 1) Homan wasn’t so easy to bribe and 2) Trump had actually given the FBI a list of appointees to background check after his election victory in November, like nearly every president does. Trump didn’t agree to send that list until December 3, and when he did, it was incomplete. Now, the White House has been forced to fully defend Homan while ignoring the fact that the federal government was actively investigating him for bribery.

“This was a blatantly political investigation, that found no evidence of illegal activity, and was yet another example of how the Biden Department of Justice was using its resources to target President Trump’s allies rather than investigate real criminals and the millions of illegal aliens who flooded our country,” White House Spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement. “Tom Homan is a career law enforcement officer and lifelong public servant who is doing a phenomenal job on behalf of President Trump and the country.”

Washington has a lot more demolition on the menu if the Trump administration gets its way.

The president is eyeing another major project in the nation’s capital, planning to destroy some 13 historic buildings on the grounds of St. Elizabeths in order to expand facilities for the Department of Homeland Security, The Washington Post reported Tuesday.

St. Elizabeths was the first government psychiatric hospital, erected in 1855 and formerly known as the “Government Hospital for the Insane.” It was designated a national landmark in 1990. But earlier this month, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem sought emergency approval to destroy it, alleging that the site had become a safety hazard for her agency.

Some of the buildings currently at risk of facing a wrecking ball include the 1891 addition of Burroughs Cottage, which was constructed by a wealthy couple to house their daughter and her nursing staff. At St. Elizabeths’ height, the sprawling campus housed more than 8,000 patients and was also the location of a nursing college. But the vast acreage of St. Elizabeths has since been reclaimed for government purposes. Over the last 15 years, DHS has occupied a significant portion of St. Elizabeths’ West Campus, while the East Campus remains under the control of the District of Columbia Department of Mental Health.

In a December 19 memo to the General Services Administration, Noem claimed that the buildings warranted a complete demolition on the basis that they “constitute a present risk to life and property.” She argued that the vacant buildings could be utilized by a shooter attempting to attack Homeland Security agents.

“Demolition is the only permanent measure that resolves the emergency conditions,” Noem wrote.

Preservationist groups were given just three days to respond to Noem’s request, and respond they did. Organizations fighting for the buildings’ ongoing conservation argued that Noem’s filing was “problematic,” and that if the buildings on the campus were deemed unsafe, then it was the DHS’s fault for failing “to effectively secure them.”

“A unilateral declaration like this is problematic because it bypasses the procedural safeguards designed to ensure stability, legitimacy and fairness,” read a letter jointly signed by the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the D.C. Preservation League. The two groups, writing to the GSA, further argued that Noem’s concerns “imply a fundamental flaw” in her agency’s “security as a whole.”

But the Trump administration is no stranger to steamrolling historic sites, even without the proper approval. After promising Americans in July that his ballroom proposal would “be near but not touching” the White House East Wing, Donald Trump completely razed the FDR-era extension in October, plowing forward without prerequisite approval from the National Capital Planning Commission or the express permission of Congress. Conveniently, Trump started demolition during the government shutdown, when the commission was consequently closed.