Maggie Haberman

Obviously, anything is possible, but most people in the administration do not think that Mike Waltz is going to be able to continue on for a very long time. Mm-hmm.

Obviously, anything is possible, but most people in the administration do not think that Mike Waltz is going to be able to continue on for a very long time. Mm-hmm.

Yeah, but it's a narrow one because the attorney general signaled Thursday morning that where people really ought to be focusing their attention on is Joe Biden and on Hillary Clinton, and this is not going to be a focus for the Department of Justice.

Yeah, but it's a narrow one because the attorney general signaled Thursday morning that where people really ought to be focusing their attention on is Joe Biden and on Hillary Clinton, and this is not going to be a focus for the Department of Justice.

The closest that we've heard anyone come to that, Michael, is the Secretary of State, who said that somebody made a mistake. That, I think, is going to be the extent of what you hear, even if somebody else echoes that line from the White House. The thing Donald Trump hates more than Jeffrey Goldberg is apologizing.

The closest that we've heard anyone come to that, Michael, is the Secretary of State, who said that somebody made a mistake. That, I think, is going to be the extent of what you hear, even if somebody else echoes that line from the White House. The thing Donald Trump hates more than Jeffrey Goldberg is apologizing.

And so it's not really something you hear him do too often, especially without blaming someone else in the process. It's just not what they do. Every time he's facing a controversy. He doubles down on his original position. And that is what you're seeing here. And he tries to sustain that as long as he can. Now, I don't know how much longer he can sustain what he is doing.

And so it's not really something you hear him do too often, especially without blaming someone else in the process. It's just not what they do. Every time he's facing a controversy. He doubles down on his original position. And that is what you're seeing here. And he tries to sustain that as long as he can. Now, I don't know how much longer he can sustain what he is doing.

I think that's part of what we're talking about here. But it's just not in their DNA. And even if Mike Waltz does not survive this, you are not really going to hear the administration say, we are so sorry. You heard some version of this was a mistake and it won't happen again. That in and of itself is surprising for this White House.

I think that's part of what we're talking about here. But it's just not in their DNA. And even if Mike Waltz does not survive this, you are not really going to hear the administration say, we are so sorry. You heard some version of this was a mistake and it won't happen again. That in and of itself is surprising for this White House.

I think that will be a successful strategy from people who are already predisposed to believe that this president is right at all times. This story has penetrated the public consciousness in a way that no other story has in this administration so far, and it is going to leave questions for people about sloppiness and about recklessness and about truthfulness.

I think that will be a successful strategy from people who are already predisposed to believe that this president is right at all times. This story has penetrated the public consciousness in a way that no other story has in this administration so far, and it is going to leave questions for people about sloppiness and about recklessness and about truthfulness.

And all of those can have longer-term effects, even if this one, this controversy disappears relatively quickly.

And all of those can have longer-term effects, even if this one, this controversy disappears relatively quickly.

So I think there are a few reasons for that. He believes in tariffs, not just as an economic tool, but as a good in and of themselves, as a revenue raiser, as a market corrector. He has been talking about tariffs since the 1980s. He has had this mantra about applying tariffs on countries, quote unquote, ripping us off forever. So that's one. The other is he does see them as a tool.

So I think there are a few reasons for that. He believes in tariffs, not just as an economic tool, but as a good in and of themselves, as a revenue raiser, as a market corrector. He has been talking about tariffs since the 1980s. He has had this mantra about applying tariffs on countries, quote unquote, ripping us off forever. So that's one. The other is he does see them as a tool.

He also thinks that they are a way to impact other countries' behavior, and not just economically, but across a bunch of sectors. Fentanyl in Mexico. Correct. But he's also mindful, and we had a lot of conversations with people about this, of not looking like a paper tiger. He does not want to be perceived as an empty suit on this.

He also thinks that they are a way to impact other countries' behavior, and not just economically, but across a bunch of sectors. Fentanyl in Mexico. Correct. But he's also mindful, and we had a lot of conversations with people about this, of not looking like a paper tiger. He does not want to be perceived as an empty suit on this.

He knows leaders in Europe and elsewhere are watching what he does on this, and so he does not want to look weak.

He knows leaders in Europe and elsewhere are watching what he does on this, and so he does not want to look weak.