As someone who’s spent more than eight years delving into the world of Donald Trump, I can tell you with absolute certainty that this man is a salesman through and through! He’ll gladly take your call, sell you his vision for America, or even give you a piece of his mind – all in one breath.
Apart from Melania, Michael Wolff, a seasoned journalist and author, may arguably understand Donald Trump better than most. In 2017, he found himself unobtrusively within the White House’s walls, much like a fly on the wall, during Trump’s turbulent first term’s chaotic initial year. Wolff’s book about this period, titled “Fire and Fury“, was an instant success, shifting nearly 2 million copies as of the last tally. (He subsequently published two more well-received books on the Trump administration: “Siege” and “Landslide.”)
On the day following when the 45th president transitioned to being the 47th, our first point of contact was Wolff. What does he foresee for the next four years? Who will be part of Trump’s new inner circle? How will his second term reshape life in Hollywood and beyond? Should we make preparations to leave for New Zealand? (Not quite yet, according to Wolff.)
When we discussed prior to the election, you seemed quite certain it could have gone either way. However, as it turns out, the outcome was much more decisive than expected.
It wasn’t just my assumption! Many people, including the Trump campaign, believed it would be a tight race. I was communicating with them right up until election night and they were all quite anxious, unsure of the outcome. So, the result came as a surprise to almost everyone. One key takeaway from this campaign, as it should have been in previous ones, is to eliminate the pollsters altogether.
It’s possible that the pollsters might be held accountable for their inaccuracies, but it should be noted that Trump’s victory wasn’t unexpected by betting markets. Upon closer examination of media reports, it seemed quite evident that there was a strong likelihood that Trump would win.
It’s possible that what was true a few weeks back might not hold now. Prior to the election, many knowledgeable individuals I consulted with were convinced that Trump’s popularity had already peaked before his rally at Madison Square Garden. From there on, he only seemed to be inflicting self-damage. This perspective, while initially held by Democrats, gained significant traction even within Trump’s inner circle. They too were taken aback by the extent of his victory in the country.
In many ways, his latest election seems strikingly reminiscent of when he first took office, often referred to as an “accidental president.” However, unlike before, Trump now appears to have a clear mandate from the people. So, what missteps did the Democrats make this time around?
Essentially, nearly everything has gone awry for them. To begin with, the Biden administration hasn’t been able to effectively present their case or handle internal disagreements, especially within the more extreme left faction of the Democratic coalition. The age factor has been a significant challenge – it’s undeniable. They asked people not to trust their own perceptions, but eventually had to switch candidates due to this issue. In the end, they picked a candidate who, in my opinion, was rather average. So, I believe there will be a lot of finger-pointing in the coming days and weeks. It seems like the party is being unwillingly dragged back to 2016.
But with profoundly different implications this time around.
It’s possible that things might unfold similarly due to Donald Trump’s consistent behavior. After all, he tends to stick with what he knows. People often ask me if this time will be different, but based on past experiences, it seems likely we’re in for more of the same.
Aren’t things too straightforward? Despite Trump remaining unchanged, there’s a group of individuals close to him who have been meticulously readying themselves for this very moment over the last four years. They are resolute about executing things correctly this time around.
The statements convey that the press releases of a certain group are unreliable and untrustworthy, as they are not taken seriously by the person in question. This individual, often referred to as Trump, tends to ignore advice from others due to his tendency to act on his own whims. The group known as Project 2025 has seemingly damaged their credibility with negative publicity and have since been overshadowed by the America First Policy team led by Linda McMahon. The scene is characterized by two opposing sides: ideologues versus pragmatists, but it remains unclear which group will ultimately dominate. The overarching theme is that when Trump is involved, there are no clear winners because he maintains control and acts according to his ever-changing desires.
However, I speculate Trump may have changed since then. He might not be as intimidated by the office as he once was. Haven’t you pondered if his loss in the last election, avoiding prosecution by a hair’s breadth, and surviving an assassination attempt could have left any profound impact on him?
To put it simply, I’ve never seen him struck by awe over an office, and he remains the same person regardless of where he is. Whether it was in the White House, Trump Tower, or Mar-a-Lago, his personality doesn’t seem to change much. He seems to live in his own self-contained bubble, making his surroundings less influential on him. In essence, he creates his own environment. And let me tell you, his attention span is remarkably short. You can never take it for granted with Donald Trump, as it’s as brief as it gets. He’s constantly moving on to the next grand gesture or statement. His world revolves around rhetoric – actions, accomplishments, follow-through – all business discipline appears to elude him.
During Trump’s initial period in the White House, you had a unique perspective that allowed for an exceptional insight into his team and his interactions with them. My question is: Are any of those who worked closely with him during that time still part of his inner circle? Additionally, I’m curious to know if your acquaintance Steve Bannon continues to exert influence over him or his decisions?
Stephen Bannon, though influential at a distance, isn’t well-received by Donald Trump and has minimal input. However, Bannon can still sway people who contact Trump to persuade him. But Trump’s inner circle, who understand him better, don’t control him in the traditional sense. Instead, they exert influence by dealing with matters that Trump isn’t keen on, as this is how things get done within his circle. Jared Kushner’s secret was to concentrate on tasks Trump wasn’t interested in, which turned out to be a lot of things.
Jared and Ivanka Trump, the son-in-law and daughter of the former president, have maintained a low profile during this campaign and have expressed no intention of returning to Washington. Interestingly, just two days before the election, Ivanka was sharing Torah verses on Twitter and discussing her spiritual growth. Could their proximity to such immense power be too strong for them to resist?
It’s almost certain that they will return, given their power-hungry nature. Jared and Ivanka are quintessential opportunists. Interestingly, during the early stages of Trump’s campaign, Jared showed no interest at all. However, as the campaign gained momentum and Trump’s popularity grew, Jared became more visible. Now, he seems fully committed. There’s a strong possibility that, with the Republicans controlling the Senate, Jared could potentially hold the position of Secretary of State. [Editor’s note: However, this is not accurate.]
One topic extensively discussed during this election is the blend of fame and politics, which appeared to reach an intense level this year. Kamala Harris managed to gather an elite group of A-list celebrities for her campaign – from Robert De Niro to Taylor Swift, Bad Bunny to Springsteen. However, their involvement didn’t seem to affect the outcome. So, what can we take away from this? Are people no longer interested in the opinions of celebrities?
As a gamer, I can’t help but notice the minimal influence Hollywood seems to have had on this recent election. Frankly, it appears their impact is dwindling, particularly in politics. After the chaos settles down, there might be some self-reflection, but let’s face it, introspection isn’t exactly Hollywood’s strong suit. Instead, they’ll probably pout for a while before moving on.
What’s your take on this scenario: With podcasts and other alternative media playing a significant role in recent elections, there have been rumors that Murdoch might acquire various right-wing platforms to unite them under the Fox umbrella. Could we see other media companies following suit with a similar strategy?
Indeed, I concur with your sentiments. While Murdoch remains relevant in some sense due to his historical influence, his advanced age (93 years) and mental incapacity for a significant portion of the time, coupled with his ongoing legal disputes with his children who have differing visions for the company, make him less of a guiding force. Instead, other media conglomerates and their key investors are closely watching this significant transformation in consumer behavior and preferences. Post-election, it’s likely that many of them had a moment of realization: “Donald Trump is now president; we need to adjust, adapt, and make amends.
Is it your opinion that this might influence coding practices? Back in 2016, there were numerous series focusing on the heartland, steelworkers, and veterans – these being Hollywood’s portrayal of everyday folks.
Indeed, they’ll certainly give it a shot to decipher that. Just like in the past, Hollywood will strive to capture the current cultural mood, or zeitgeist. However, nailing it can be tricky as they only manage it occasionally. One could say they get it right about 20% of the time through sheer luck.
“Reflecting on an article you penned for THR following Trump’s election, I recall your observation about the peculiar predicament he found himself in – simultaneously captivated and at odds with the media. You highlighted that, beneath his tough talk, he maintained connections within the media and Hollywood elite. It’s easy to overlook the fact that he once aspired to be a mogul in Hollywood himself.”
Indeed, it’s quite characteristic of him, this style. You know, he’s got a knack for making loud statements, lashing out at the media, calling them “fake news” or “the enemy of the people.” But here’s the thing, behind the noise, Trump actually welcomes anyone who runs the media, anyone with an audience. It’s been his pattern from the start. And if you’ve got money? Well, that’s another story he can’t resist. For Trump, attention and wealth are the two currencies that drive him most.
However, what drives him significantly is the pursuit of power. It’s clear that the mainstream media today holds less influence compared to just four years back.
Essentially, what I’m trying to say is that he isn’t aware of certain things because he operates in a realm where traditional guidelines persist. His political actions are heavily influenced by media. From the start of his current campaign and even his entire career, his strategic approach has been: whoever controls the news cycle, wins. The key is to control it, regardless of whether the attention is positive or negative.
What’s your perspective on how things unfold in this situation? Following Trump’s victory in 2016, there was a wave of shock and dismay that eventually transformed into active resistance – a determined effort to challenge authority by speaking truth. This time, however, it seems like a profound sense of despair has taken over. How do you imagine the media will emerge from this?
I have a skeptical viewpoint: Regardless of their public claims, the media may find this election beneficial for them, especially compared to if Kamala had won. In this case, Trump could be advantageous, at least temporarily. He’s primarily about attracting attention, and he always generates high interest. As a result, the media has a chance to prolong its existence – thanks to Donald Trump.
Initially, media outlets such as The Washington Post, MSNBC, and The New York Times thrived due to their role as watchdogs over Trump. Journalists believed that by revealing his true character, the public would turn away from him. However, it’s now clear that this assumption was incorrect.
It seems like it’s not just about Donald Trump, but rather the fascination of witnessing a dramatic event unfold – a sense of tension or discord. What fuels the media? What grabs attention and boosts sales? Essentially, the same thing that propels Donald Trump – conflict, conflict, conflict. The more conflict, the more viewers or readers there will be. In essence, it’s straightforward.
Will the media likely change their approach to covering this second administration, given recent discussions about their disconnect with the public? I’ve noticed a number of opinion pieces in the last couple of days questioning how this disconnection occurred. Do you believe these reflections indicate significant changes in the future or are they merely post-election criticisms?
Unfortunately, it seems like we’re merely repeating the same old stories. The media often struggles to contemplate new ideas unless there’s an immediate gain involved.
Following Trump’s initial election win, you previously discussed influential figures within Hollywood such as Ari Emanuel, Bob Iger, or Jeff Zucker who served as informal connections to the White House. Is it still possible for individuals in Hollywood to make direct contact with him? Have any new names emerged on this list?
Indeed, it seems Zucker’s current status is uncertain, but there are undoubtedly numerous individuals in Hollywood who have connections to Trump or those close to him. Figures such as Ari, Zaslav, and others in similar positions will capitalize on these ties. However, the true powerbrokers and significant shift from the previous administration will likely stem from tech influencers, who are expected to wield more influence within this term of his presidency.
As a dedicated gamer, I can’t help but ponder about the recent strategic move made by tech moguls who wagered a staggering fortune on Trump, reaping significant returns. Now, I find myself wondering what this might mean for visionaries like Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, or even Bobby Kennedy in this new political landscape. What roles could they potentially assume within the White House, and how will their influence shape the tech sector and beyond? It’s an intriguing puzzle to unravel!
There are several possible scenarios regarding Elon Musk’s intentions. It’s unclear what exactly he aims to achieve, other than speaking with world leaders. We can only speculate about his ultimate goals. Given the unique opportunity he has and his grand social and economic aspirations, it seems his plan might extend over a longer period.
Contrarily, Kennedy presents a unique situation. He’s found himself in a common predicament where Trump has publicly stated that he offered him a position. Regrettably for Kennedy, Trump extends such offers to many individuals. However, the role Trump has proposed for Kennedy seems to be non-existent – a healthcare position that doesn’t appear on any government organizational chart. This is a characteristic of Trump: He provides something without any cost to himself, yet it fails to serve any meaningful purpose. In my opinion, this could lead Kennedy into a confusing situation, much like I suspect poor Bobby might find himself in.
Elon, specifically, appears destined to exert an extraordinary influence over these developments – which can be somewhat unsettling as he seems just as ambitious and impulsive as Trump. However, he holds significant power, almost like a kingmaker in a sense. Many believe that he now has the power to carry out a wide range of ideological and economic transformations that surpass typical Trumpian ideology.
It’s quite plausible, but I also worry their harmonious partnership might unravel spectacularly. Sharing power between two dominant personalities, especially those who dislike sharing the limelight, is a challenging task. Trump, with his reported narcissism, may be impervious to influence, not even by the wealthiest individual on earth. In fact, he seems unwilling to listen to anyone. Consequently, even Elon Musk faces an uphill battle in dealing with him.
Given how quickly Hollywood and the media respond to changes, could it be possible that entertainment companies might choose to avoid controversial topics like culture wars or identity politics to appease the new administration in Washington D.C.?
It seems everyone will need to swiftly adjust their responses to the political and philosophical cues in this situation. Given that the Democrats didn’t persuade effectively – on the contrary, they presented a strong case – it might be beneficial to reconsider some of their tactics.
Has Melania [Trump’s wife] been relatively quiet during this election cycle? Are there chances she might become more noticeable compared to her previous involvement?
To summarize, it’s clear that she has been keeping her distance from her husband in recent years, as evidenced by the fact that she only made one campaign appearance at Madison Square Garden in the past couple of years and never attended any of his courtroom appearances. Additionally, she didn’t spend much time in the White House during the first administration and it seems likely that she will spend even less time there now. Given these facts, some might wonder just how genuine their marriage is. To put it another way, this doesn’t appear to be a typical middle-class marriage.
Just ask Laura Loomer! [laughter]
Indeed! Yet another scandal has come and gone. It’s puzzling why, in a nation that prides itself on being a middle-class society rooted in traditional values, such occurrences often seem to go unnoticed or unchallenged. Why isn’t there more outrage over these issues?
One might argue that there are numerous flaws with him. It’s puzzling how he maintains vitality in situations that would be fatal for most politicians.
There’s much debate surrounding this topic, and I believe there isn’t a definitive answer, but certain aspects are clear. In my opinion, Trump is often perceived as the “anti-establishment” candidate, and many are willing to overlook numerous questionable actions because they view him as genuine, unconventional, and fearless. Few other candidates can achieve this. Kamala Harris, for instance, might struggle with this, given her repeated assertions of being a middle-class individual, which seemed implausible considering her long-term status. To be clear, I’m not passing judgment, merely stating the obvious—Kamala Harris has not been a middle-class person for several decades. In contrast, Trump presents an unfiltered image—he openly declares, “I’m the most ambitious person in the world; I want everything I can get, everything I can take. I’m Donald Trump!” And people seem to find this relatable, at least in part because he doesn’t hide his ambition and desires.
Given that Trump didn’t seem to appreciate your recent books, do you still maintain connections within those circles? Have you had any communication with Trump after the release of “Fire and Fury”?
I won’t confirm whether we’ve had a conversation, but I do maintain connections with numerous individuals within his company, political circle, and even his family. This has been an ongoing relationship for over eight years now. It might seem unusual, but many of these people have developed into what I would call friends of mine.
It appears he consistently pursues journalists who’ve shown him the least affection or respect, almost as if he enjoys facing criticism.
“Remember, Trump is a salesperson. He can either persuade you to make a purchase or take advantage of you in the process. That’s just how salespeople work.
Before I even voted for him, it was clear that he was making bold declarations about revoking the licenses of influential networks such as ABC and CBS. Whether or not he has the legal authority to do so is questionable, but it’s apparent that he could create a challenging environment for them if he chooses to act on his words. I can’t help but wonder if media outlets will begin to self-censor in an effort to avoid potential repercussions from him. What are your thoughts?
It seems there could be an instance where something occurs, yet I’m skeptical that he’ll actually go through with it. This isn’t because he lacks motivation, but rather because implementing such actions requires effort, strategy, and consistency – areas in which he tends to struggle. Will he criticize and vilify the media? Most likely, as that’s something he enjoys doing. However, it’s important to note that the media can serve as a handy target for him.
Which individuals are likely to hold significant positions in this upcoming administration? I have reason to believe that established figures such as Jason Miller, Stephen Miller, and Kash Patel (who remained loyal during the insurrection) will play key roles. Additionally, there are newcomers like Susie Wiles, Chris LaCivita, and Elon who have already been mentioned. Are there any other influential figures that we should keep an eye on?
Indeed, there seems to be a blend of fresh faces and familiar ones in this group. Everyone appears to be trying to navigate their positions within it, as many are curious about who will emerge as the leader. As a result, numerous conversations today revolve around seeking guidance: “Who should I reach out to?” or “Can you introduce me to anyone?
And what’s your answer?
The answer is, I do. [Laughs]
Name three things that we should be prepared for in the next hundred days.
Chaos, chaos, chaos.
Sounds fun!
There’s a chance it could be exciting, potentially leading to a significant national issue. However, one thing is for sure – it won’t be dull.
Read More
Sorry. No data so far.
2024-11-12 17:56