How Stephen Miller is defining Trump’s second term

0:00Right now, someone is asking AI a question about your industry. They're looking for the perfect recommendation or an accurate solution, and they're ready to act on it. When AI gives an answer, is your brand a part of it or not? Most companies have no idea which. GIST changes that. We show you where you're visible, where you're not, and give you the tools to do something about it. It's time to make AI work for your brand with GIST. Learn more at gist.ai.

0:33There are a lot of public figures in the Trump administration, but among the former Fox News hosts and personal attorneys of Washington, Stephen Miller stands apart. We will achieve victory for our children, for our families, for our civilization, and for every patriot who stands with us. Miller is arguably among the most powerful people in the White House, And he's waged a campaign of retribution against the president's perceived enemies while pushing for a hardline policy agenda. Stephen Miller is now more powerful than ever. And we want to know how that happened.

1:16This is Swamp Notes, the weekly podcast from the Financial Times, where we talk about all the things happening in U.S. politics, finance and the economy. I'm Mark Filippino. And this week we're asking, does Stephen Miller define the second Trump administration? Here with me to discuss is Edward Luce. He's the FT's U.S. national editor and co-authors the FT's Swamp Notes newsletter. Hey, Ed. Great to be with you. Good to have you, Ed. And we've also got Guy Chazan, the FT's U.S. national correspondent. Hi, Guy. Hi. Guy, we wanted to do this episode because of a profile you recently wrote about Stephen Miller.

1:49I want to know, why did you decide to write that? Well, I think it was just because we'd identified Stephen Miller as really one of the most influential people in this administration. And he really seemed to be the architect of many of the Trump administration's policies, especially the most controversial ones. I mean, a lot of the really sort of stuff where the administration was pushing the envelope seemed to have his fingerprints all over them. And that seemed interesting. And the more you delved into it, the more influential he seemed to be. And quickly it became obvious that he really is almost like the prime minister.

2:26I mean, he really is that powerful. That's such a good way to describe him as a prime minister. And I had never really thought about it like that. Do you guys remember the first time you heard about Stephen Miller? Ed, when did he kind of enter your realm? Oh, the previous time around. I mean, Stephen Miller has been around for a long time. Although he's only 40, he's been with Trump from very early on. He was working on the Hill for a Republican senator and came under the sort of mentorship, if you like, of Steve Bannon. And Bannon sort of spotted what he saw as a talent, a true believer, an uncompromising, very hard-headed operator and, you know, got him into the White House.

3:10And pretty quickly, I mean, Miller became a sort of warm-up act for Trump at rallies. So he's been doing that for years. I mean, Miller is an unapologetic ethno-nationalist and has been, you know, since he was at high school in Santa Monica, you know, he's an unlikely background to be, you know, from a fairly sort of liberal Jewish LA family, most of whom are completely flummoxed by the way this guy has turned out. But he's been like this since he was a teenager. Guy, you called Stephen Miller equatable to a prime minister. How does he wield that power for people who aren't familiar? Well, this is basically an official who is dedicated to really exploiting the full panoply of presidential power, using every single lever at the disposal of the president.

4:07And we saw that very early on. I mean, I spoke to a lot of people who worked with him in the first Trump term, and they said that they found his modus operandi extraordinary and really unprecedented. It was certainly unlike anyone they'd ever worked with before. He was just someone who didn't follow the normal policy process of putting ideas out, proposals out for consultation with stakeholders and making sure that they were legally and morally and ethically watertight. He wasn't interested in that. He said, this is what the president wants. And he was just prepared to ride roughshod over anybody else's objections.

4:46And he got a lot of pushback in the first Trump term. There were a lot of legal challenges. There was a lot of resistance from the federal bureaucracy. But that is not happening this time around. And is that the biggest difference between Miller in Trump's first term and Trump's second term? And if it's not, what is? Miller's never changed. What's changed, as Guy, I think, quite rightly pointed out, is that you don't have people like General John Kelly as chief of staff. You don't have what we call the adults in the room. The adults are no longer there. So Miller was stretching every possible law and, frankly inventing precedents that didn't exist to try and crash through guardrails in the first term and was by and large stopped, blocked and muffled by the various professionals Trump had in his White House.

5:35Now his title in this second Trump administration is deputy chief of staff, but that's kind of meaningless. He is the most powerful domestic actor in Trump's White House because he gives practical expression to Trump's sort of deepest will to power. Miller is behind the recent executive orders, you know, prioritizing targeting domestic terrorism, for example. If there is an analogy of somebody who really knows where the bodies lie and how to get things done and how to cut corners, It's an incomplete analogy, but the best I can think of would be Dick Cheney as vice president in Bush Jr.'s administration, particularly in his first term.

6:20But this is way beyond even the sort of stretching of the law that Cheney's team carried out. One question that I have is why Miller doesn't get more criticism thrown at him. I feel like Donald Trump is the focus of most of the opposition. Miller definitely doesn't get the same kind of heat that Trump does. And I'm wondering why that is and if it's by design. I think it might be just that he is still seen as a man sort of in the shadows. He doesn't have a great sort of public profile. He pops up occasionally on Fox News, sometimes on CNN, defending the administration's policies. Can you just unequivocally state that the immigration policy...

7:06I just said it's a dumb question. Okay. No, and it's a dumb question. So no, this policy is not designed to... I thought when I said it was a dumb question, it meant no. And as Ed said, he was a sort of warm-up act for Trump during the campaign, But he's not a public politician in the way that others in the Trump orbit are. And I think that means that he's just not really identifiable to many people. I mean, you know, you ask the average American who he is, and I think many might struggle to identify him. Yet that sort of masks an immense degree of power and influence. Do you think that's by design?

7:46I mean, we mentioned the comparison to former Vice President Dick Cheney, who obviously had a very visible profile. Is it by design that Stephen Miller is kind of out of the limelight? I'm not sure he is out of the limelight. He goes on TV a lot. So I'm not sure I share the premise of that question. I think really what we're talking here is the, to some degree, ineptitude of the Democratic Party in failing to brand him as, you know, the sort of chief shock troop, if you like, of an out of control lawless White House. That's, you know, what an opposition party, I think, ought to be doing in this context.

8:27And Stephen Miller is probably the key face of it, you know, other than Donald Trump. So he's not shy of going on TV. He's not shy of speaking at big rallies. He's not in the shadows at all. Right. And speaking of making public appearances, I want to talk about some of them. One in particular stands out to me. You have no idea the dragon you have awakened. It was a speech at Charlie Kirk's memorial back in September. You have no idea how determined we will be to save this civilization, to save the West, to save this republic. Look, tell me about the speech Miller gave that day and why it stood out to you, Guy.

9:06It stood out because it was really chilling. I mean, it was one of the most chilling speeches by an American official that I certainly have ever heard. It was the way that he demonized his political adversaries. I hadn't really heard that kind of rhetoric here, certainly from someone so highly placed in a presidential administration. I mean, just to quote some of the things he said when he was talking about Maga's enemies, you are nothing, you are wickedness. You are jealousy, you are envy, you are hatred. You are nothing. You can build nothing. You can produce nothing. You can create nothing.

9:50It was pretty creepy, I have to say. I mean, obviously, there was a lot of righteous anger in the wake of Charlie Kirk's assassination. But it seemed to me like he was preparing the ground for a kind of crackdown on the domestic adversaries of the MAGA movement. I mean, I think a lot of people on the left are braced for further crackdowns. Rhetoric like that does seem to be preparing the ground for it. Well, yeah, that was my next question. How much of this Ed guy is actually actionable and how much of it is just talk? How much of it is action and how much of it is just talk? Well, talk becomes action.

10:29You know, I mean, a lot of the things that we see happening now in terms of federalizing the National Guard, in terms of lawfare against people on Trump's enemies list, all of these things were sort of talked about and now they're happening. If we've learned anything about Trump and his key henchmen, notably Stephen Miller in Trump 2.0, it is that we should take the talk seriously. The one silver lining, I think, that still pertains is that Trump hasn't yet reached a point and hopefully never will where he openly, overtly disobeys a court order. And Stephen Miller has notoriously talked about judges, particularly lower court and appellate court judges, as being legal insurrectionists, which is very incendiary language.

11:23It's implying that they are essentially, that they're siding with domestic insurrectionists to block the win of the people embodied by Donald Trump. And therefore, they are on the target list. You know, if you take that talk seriously, this is an extremely grave departure in anything I can recall ever in American rhetoric. Guys, one last question. Where do you see Stephen Miller taking the administration next? And is there anything that could diminish his influence? I think that the key test of this administration, and I think we can guess which side of the argument Stephen Miller would be on, is whether Trump complies with stays, injunctions, court orders that go against his wishes.

12:12And, you know, Miller and one name we haven't mentioned, which is Russ Vought, the White House budget director, who I would suggest is the other sort of co-prime minister in this administration and author of Project 2025. If you look at what Project 2025 outlines, it is how to create a situation where the president has untrammeled, uncontested executive power. And that will eventually mean there's going to be some kind of a showdown with the courts. That's where the frustration is in the MAGA movement, is that these unelected judges, so-called, are blocking the democratic mandate of President Trump, and they've got to be removed.

12:59Some of them have got to be prosecuted. And worse, a lot of judges are taking on security because of death threats. I think ultimately, when you strip the situation we're in to its bare essentials, is what it boils down to, Trump versus the courts. Guy, what about you? Where do you see Stephen Miller taking the administration next? And is there anything that could derail that? Well, we're just sort of watching wrapped in a way what's happening with American cities, the idea of deploying National Guard troops to Chicago, to Portland, Oregon. And I think there's been a real ramp up in the rhetoric on this.

13:38I mean, Miller himself was describing the situation in Chicago's domestic terrorism and seditious insurrection just a few days ago, which again is sort of building up this justification for deploying troops. I think this is such a unique situation. I mean, the whole idea of using soldiers for law enforcement in American cities, I think everybody is still trying to digest that. And that seems to be really one of the main fronts where Miller is pushing. And it's an extraordinary sort of risky maneuver in a way, but there seem to be also large parts of the American public that support this. And I think that's what they're banking on.

14:19I think that will be, in a way, a key test of his power and his approach to enacting policy is whether he succeeds in this campaign of deploying national guards to American cities, especially those that are blue cities that are governed by Democrats. I want to thank our guest, Edward Luce. He's the FT's U.S. National Editor and co-author of the Swamp Notes newsletter. Thanks, Ed. A real pleasure. Thanks, man. And Guy Chazan, the FT's U.S. National Correspondent. Thanks, Guy. Thank you.

15:00Okay, folks, no exit poll this week, but if you have questions about U.S. politics, send me a message. My email is, of course, in the show notes.

15:16This was Swamp Notes, the U.S. politics show from the Financial Times. If you want to sign up for the Swamp Notes newsletter, the link to that is also in the show notes. Our show was produced by Henry Larson and Ethan Plotkin. It was mixed by Sam Giovinco. We had help this week from Lauren Fedor. And as always, special thanks to Pierre Nicholson. I'm your host, Mark Filippino. Our acting co-head of audio is Topher Forges, original music by Hannes Brown. Check back next week for more U.S. political analysis from the Financial Times.

15:55Right now, someone is asking AI a question about your industry. They're looking for the perfect recommendation or an accurate solution, and they're ready to act on it. When AI gives an answer, is your brand a part of it or not? Most companies have no idea which. GIST changes that. We show you where you're visible, where you're not, and give you the tools to do something about it. It's time to make AI work for your brand with GIST. Learn more at gist.ai. I'm Huma Carthur, Chairman of Bain & Company's Global Private Equity Practice, and host of Dry Powder, a podcast where I sit down with some of private equities leading investors, such as TPG's Jim Coulter.

16:35Somehow the industry keeps growing. KKR's Pete Stavros. Driving operational change is really hard. And Vista's Robert Smith. As a market dampened, guess what? We were able to monetize 18 companies. And of course, I'll take you behind the scenes of Bain's latest research, including our newly released mid-year private equity report. Subscribe to Dry Powder today.