MAGA Influencers Should Have Some Self-Respect
Here's a question. What if you took the least appealing aspects of traditional broadcast journalism—the self-absorption, the ponderous delivery, the grandstanding—and sucked out any sense of conflict and challenge?
Now we have an answer. For three days this week, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has invited MAGA-friendly influencers to ask her questions during a dedicated press briefing. The results should be deeply embarrassing for everyone involved. We all enjoy getting together with like-minded people to kvetch about petty grievances in our professional lives—that's what keeps bars open—but most of us would have the sense not to do so in the White House, in front of cameras. The first rule of the new-media briefing is that your question should include either personal thanks to her for inviting you, or a pro forma denunciation of the legacy media. The second rule of the new-media briefing is that your question should be, in the five words that conference organizers most dread, 'more of a statement, really.'
Yesterday, Jack Posobiec, perhaps best-known for promoting the Pizzagate conspiracy theory, asked a minute-long question about how violent the far left was, and received a two-minute-long answer from Leavitt about how violent the far left was. Viewers also heard from Dom Lucre (who describes himself to his 1.5 million X followers as a 'breaker of narratives') asking if the White House would investigate 'Barack Hussein Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton' for election-integrity offenses.
'It's refreshing to actually hear a question on election integrity, because the legacy media would never ask such a question,' Leavitt replied, ignoring the fact that the media asked quite a lot of questions about her boss's well-documented efforts to pressure officials in Georgia to declare him the winner there in 2020. 'They're so out of touch with where the American people are on this issue.'
The briefing lasted 25 minutes, although the barrage of safe questions and safe answers made it feel much longer. The obvious knock is that this is not journalism but entertainment. The trouble is that it's not even particularly entertaining. Donald Trump, who understands that jeopardy and drama equal ratings, would never be involved in something so dull.
The new-media briefing is part of the Trump administration's attempt to formalize the network of friendly commentators and influencers who have prospered on X, YouTube, Rumble, podcasts, and ultra-conservative television channels. The plan appears to be to secure the loyalty of these attention-hungry narcissists by setting them against one another, in a kind of sycophancy Hunger Games, as they compete for access through ever greater acts of devotion and flattery. Remember when Fox News was the biggest Trump cheerleader in town? Those days are gone. One of the 'questions' this week was the suggestion that the White House should sue Fox for putting out an opinion poll that showed the Dear Leader in a less than flattering light. The guy who asked it was the independent influencer Eric Bolling, who left Fox in 2017 over workplace-harassment allegations (which he denied).
[Read: Why MAGA likes Andrew Tate]
The dedicated briefing is an extension of the White House's existing efforts to soften up the press pool by adding more friendly faces. Starting in January, the Trump White House gave new-media outlets a spot at the main briefing, where they are routinely called upon for the first question. On April 22, that spot went to the podcaster Tim Pool. There are three things you need to know about Pool: The first is that he never, ever takes off his beanie. The second is that he started out as a left-wing activist-slash-journalist, covering Occupy Wall Street. The third is that he was among a group of conservative commentators who, the Justice Department asserted last year, unwittingly received large sums from Russian agents eager to stoke American culture-war controversies. (Pool put out a statement at the time saying that he and his colleagues were 'victims.' More recently, he has contested the Justice Department's allegations.)
Pool's question to Leavitt was just culture-war content in a different form. 'Many of the news organizations that are represented in this room have marched in lockstep on false narratives such as the 'very fine people' hoax, the Covington smear, and now what's being called the 'Maryland man' hoax, where an MS-13 gang member—adjudicated by two different judges, I believe—is just simply being referred to as a 'Maryland man' over and over again,' Pool said, wearing what looked like a hoodie with lapels.
He was talking about Trump's explanation of the white-supremacist violence in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017, and an incident two years later where students from Covington Catholic High School in Kentucky were wrongly accused of racism based on an out-of-context viral video. The most recent incident is the Trump administration's decision to deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a man living in Maryland, who it claims is a gang member.
As well as relitigating press coverage of these incidents, Pool wanted Leavitt to issue a wider condemnation of the traditional media. 'In an effort from the White House to expand access to new companies, you've created this new-media seat,' Pool went on, adding that 'you've had numerous outlets disparage the companies that you've had sit here, as well as the reporters. I'm wondering if you could comment on that unprofessional behavior as well as elaborate if there's any plans to expand access to new companies.'
[Read: The global populist right has a MAGA problem]
Well, that's one in the eye of the traditional media, isn't it? Too often, legacy outlets focus on fripperies such as But the Supreme Court has ordered you to do this, so why haven't you done it? or Why is there a tariff on an uninhabited island? or Come on, that's clearly Photoshop. Instead they ought to address the biggest issue of the day: Tim Pool's feelings of grievance. (And I say this as someone who agrees with Pool that many traditional media outlets got Covington wrong.)
Leavitt happily accepted Pool's premise, saying that she welcomed 'diverse viewpoints' and 'unbiased journalists.' Then she claimed that The Atlantic had incorrectly reported Abrego Garcia's story. The administration would rather argue over the words used to describe Abrego Garcia, who undoubtedly is both a man and a Maryland resident, than admit that its grounds for deporting him were initially sketchy and later appeared manipulated. The MAGA-friendly influencers are happy to collude with the White House because it flatters them, portraying them as the only independent-minded bringers of truth.
As it turned out, Pool's sucking up was just an appetizer. The first full-scale influencer briefing, on Monday, showed just how cozy things can get when normies and libs aren't even allowed into the room. 'Tens of millions of Americans are now turning to social media and independent media outlets to consume their news, and we are embracing that change, not ignoring it,' Leavitt said in a seven-minute opening speech. The first influencer to ask a question, Arynne Wexler—'just a nonlib girl in a crazylib world'—kicked things off by noting that 'my Uber drivers finally speak English again, so thank you for that.'
Later on came Winston Marshall, who used to play the banjo in Mumford & Sons until he was forced out for praising a book by the right-wing author Andy Ngo. He is also the son of Paul Marshall, the owner of the British publications UnHerd and The Spectator. Instead of working for either outlet, however, Winston has an interview podcast, on which he speaks with the same people who appear on all the other interview podcasts. Recent guests include Tim Pool.
At the White House, Marshall wanted to talk about the state of free speech in Britain, a topic upon which Vice President J. D. Vance recently delivered a short homily to European leaders. 'As we speak, there are people in prison for quite literally reposting memes,' Marshall told the press secretary. 'We have extensive prison sentences for tweets, social-media posts, and general free-speech issues.'
[Nick Miroff: An 'administrative error' sends a Maryland father to a Salvadoran prison]
This is a legitimate point—in Britain we have far fewer speech protections than America, and the police here have arrested citizens for their social-media posts. But the alleged topic at hand was merely a setup for Marshall's zinger: 'Would the Trump administration consider political asylum for British citizens in such a situation?'
Leavitt laughed. 'I have not heard that proposed to the president nor have I spoken to him about that idea, but I certainly can, and talk to our national-security team and see if it's something the administration would entertain,' she replied. Let me decode that: Thank you for your absolute nonquestion, which you and I both understand was asked purely to be clipped and posted on social media. The reaction over here in Britain to Marshall's showboating was rather less warm. 'Why stop with free speech martyrs?' one friend texted me. 'I think we should encourage all banjo players to seek asylum in the States.'
Former Trump press secretary turned influencer Sean Spicer then moaned about the president giving an interview to The Atlantic—subtext: why not meeee—before DC Draino, a Florida-based commentator whose real name is Rogan O'Handley, asked about further updates on the government's files about the financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. O'Handley was one of the influencers summoned to the White House in February to be given a ceremonial ring binder of evidence against Epstein—who died in jail while awaiting trial for sex-trafficking charges in 2019. (The influencers got played: The flight logs inside the binders were already public.)
Then came the America First Policy Institute ambassador Kambree Nelson, who asked Leavitt about what she should cover as a reporter. 'So, what direction do you advise me to go into?' she said. 'Like, the White House files that y'all send out every single day?' (This was at least a better question than the one Nelson once asked on X, about whether the moon had disappeared because she hadn't seen it for a week. 'Why is everyone silent about this?' she added.) Leavitt suggested that Nelson might usefully concern herself with the fact that the president does 'so many phenomenal things every day that will never be mentioned on cable news at night.'
[Jeffrey Goldberg: Read ]The Atlantic's interview with Donald Trump
Other observations from the first day included: 'It's so refreshing to have a press secretary after the last few years who's both intelligent and articulate' and 'Great job this morning, and as always; you're really crushing it.' Anytime someone crept close to a real question—asking when the promised border wall would be completed, or when Trump's pledge of eliminating federal income tax would be enacted—Leavitt simply brushed it aside. 'This is something the secretary of commerce and the secretary of Treasury are both equally as excited about, as is the president,' Leavitt replied to the second inquiry. In other words, it'll happen on about the seventh of never.
Tuesday brought more softballs. 'Congratulations on 100 incredible days,' the internet personality Debra Lea began, before asking what policies Trump would pursue to keep his approval ratings 'historically high' and to win the midterms. (His approval ratings are lower than Biden's were at the 100-day mark.) The answer was 'tax cuts.'
Later, Link Lauren—a man who not only has his names the wrong way around, but also appears to have styled himself after Draco Malfoy—asked Leavitt a question that even North Koreans might have found a bit much. 'You're a very high-profile young mother who seems to juggle and balance it all beautifully,' Lauren said. 'What advice do you have to young parents out there who are starting their careers, having kids, building families, and trying to find that balance so desperately?'
'Well, it's a great question,' Leavitt replied.
Now, I've got nothing against the new media—some of my best friends are Substackers. If you have a podcast, I will go on it to promote my forthcoming book. But what's hilarious is how quickly these influencers, who complain so much about the hated mainstream media, have immediately copied all of their rivals' worst habits when given even the merest taste of access and power. Then again, maybe even they know that the briefings are cringeworthy. As the media reporter Paul Farhi noted, the White House has claimed that it had 10,000 applications from new media, but the second and third briefings had empty seats. I suspect that the MAGA crowd wants to be in the main briefing, where they can lord it over the traditional reporters—not in the kiddie pool. Still, plenty of people find the chance to take a selfie in the Rose Garden irresistible.
Almost everything about the Trump presidency can be understood as a quid pro quo. In the case of the influencers, they are offered access to all the awesome scenery of the White House—the perfect backdrop for any viral video—and the heady sense of being insiders. In return, all they have to do is ask questions that would make a Soviet propagandist blush.
Article originally published at The Atlantic

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sometimes a Parade Is Just a Parade
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. President Donald Trump has gotten his way and will oversee a military parade in Washington, D.C., this summer on the Army's birthday, which also happens to be his own. Plans call for nearly 7,000 troops to march through the streets as 50 helicopters buzz overhead and tanks chew up the pavement. One option has the president presiding from a viewing stand on Constitution Avenue as the Army's parachute team lands to present him with an American flag. The prospect of all this martial pomp, scheduled for June 14, has elicited criticism from many quarters. Some of it is fair—this president does not shy away from celebrating himself or flexing executive power, and the parade could be seen as an example of both—but some of it is misguided. Trump has a genius for showmanship, and showcasing the American military can be, and should be, a patriotic celebration. The president wanted just such a tribute during his first term, after seeing France's impressive Bastille Day celebrations. Then–Secretary of Defense James Mattis reportedly refused, effectively threatening to resign by telling the president to ask his next secretary of defense. Three secretaries of defense later, Trump has gotten enthusiastic agreement from current Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Criticism of the display begins with its price tag, estimated as high as $45 million. The projected outlay comes at a time of draconian budget cuts elsewhere: 'Cutting cancer research while wasting money on this? Shameful,' Republicans Against Trump posted on X. 'Peanuts compared to the value of doing it,' Trump replied when asked about the expense. 'We have the greatest missiles in the world. We have the greatest submarines in the world. We have the greatest army tanks in the world. We have the greatest weapons in the world. And we're going to celebrate it.' [Read: The case for a big, beautiful military parade] Other prominent critics of the Trump administration have expressed concern that the parade's real purpose is to use the military to intimidate the president's critics. The historian Heather Cox Richardson wrote on her Substack, 'Trump's aspirations to authoritarianism are showing today in the announcement that there will be a military parade on Trump's 79th birthday.' Ron Filipkowski, the editor in chief of the progressive media company MeidasTouch, posted, 'The Fuhrer wants a Nuremberg style parade on his birthday.' Experts on civil-military relations in the United States also expressed consternation. 'Having tanks rolling down streets of the capital doesn't look like something consistent with the tradition of a professional, highly capable military,' the scholar Risa Brooks told The New York Times. 'It looks instead like a military that is politicized and turning inwardly, focusing on domestic-oriented adversaries instead of external ones.' Even the military leadership has been chary. During Trump's first term, then–Joint Chiefs of Staff Vice Chairman Paul Selva reflected that military parades are 'what dictators do.' But these critics may well be projecting more general concerns about Trump onto a parade. Not everything the Trump administration does is destructive to democracy—and the French example suggests that dictatorships are not the only governments to hold military displays. The U.S. itself has been known to mount victory parades after successful military campaigns. In today's climate, a military parade could offer an opportunity to counter misperceptions about the armed forces. It could bring Americans closer to service members and juice military recruitment—all of which is sorely needed. The American military is shrinking, not due to a policy determination about the size of the force needed, but because the services cannot recruit enough Americans to defend the country. In 2022, 77 percent of American youth did not qualify for military service, for reasons that included physical or mental-health problems, misconduct, inaptitude, being overweight, abuse of drugs or alcohol, or being a dependent. Just 9 percent of Americans ages of 16 to 24 (a prime recruitment window) are even interested in signing up. In 2023, only the Marine Corps and Space Force met their recruiting goals; the Army and Navy recruited less than 70 percent of their goals and fell 41,000 recruits short of sustaining their current force. Recruiting picked up dramatically in 2024 but remains cause for concern. One possible reason for this is that most Americans have little exposure to men and women in uniform. Less than 0.5 percent of Americans are currently serving in the military—and many who do so live, shop, and worship on cordoned military bases. Misperceptions about military service are therefore rife. One is that the U.S. military primarily recruits from minority groups and the poor. In fact, 17 percent of the poorest quintile of Americans serve, as do 12 percent of the richest quintile. The rest of the military is from middle-income families. Those who live near military bases and come from military families are disproportionately represented. The Army's polling indicates that concerns about being injured, killed, or suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder are major impediments to recruitment. Women worry that they will be sexually harassed or assaulted (the known figures on this in the U.S. military are 6.2 percent of women and 0.7 percent of men). Additionally, a Wall Street Journal–NORC poll found that far fewer American adults considered patriotism important in 2023 (23 percent) than did in 1998 (70 percent)—another possible reason that enthusiasm for joining up has dampened. [Read: The all-volunteer force is in crisis] A celebratory parade could be helpful here, and it does not have to set the country on edge. Americans seem comfortable with thanking military men and women for their service, having them pre-board airplanes, applauding them at sporting events, and admiring military-aircraft flybys. None of those practices is suspected of corroding America's democracy or militarizing its society. Surely the nation can bear up under a military parade once every decade or two, especially if the parade serves to reconnect veterans of recent wars, who often—rightly—grumble that the country tends to disown its wars as matters of concern to only those who serve in them. The risk, of course, is that Trump will use the occasion not to celebrate the troops but to corrode their professionalism by proclaiming them his military and his generals. This is, after all, the president who claimed that Dan Caine, his nominee to become chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wore a MAGA hat and attested his willingness to kill for Trump, all of which Caine denies. This is also a president known to mix politics with honoring the military, as he did in Michigan, at Arlington National Cemetery, at West Point's commencement, and in a Memorial Day post on Truth Social calling his opponents 'scum.' Even so, the commander in chief has a right to engage with the military that Americans elected him to lead. The responsibility of the military—and of the country—is to look past the president's hollow solipsism and embrace the men and women who defend the United States. Being from a military family or living near a military base has been shown to predispose people toward military service. This suggests that the more exposure people have to the military, the likelier they are to serve in it. A big celebration of the country's armed forces—with static displays on the National Mall afterward, and opportunities for soldiers to mix with civilians—could familiarize civilians with their armed forces and, in doing so, draw talented young Americans to serve. A version of this essay originally appeared on AEIdeas from the American Enterprise Institute. Article originally published at The Atlantic
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Musk's Allegation Against Trump Is Deleted From Social Media
President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference with Elon Musk in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C, on May 30, 2025. Credit - Allison Robbert—Getty Images Amid President Donald Trump and Elon Musk's bitter online war of words, key posts have been deleted from social media. The most divisive post from Musk alleged that Trump is listed in the files related to the late financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, and that this is why they have not been fully released to the public. Musk made the allegation on Thursday, in a post shared on his social media platform, X (formerly Twitter). But as of early Saturday morning, Musk's Epstein-related post was no longer showing, with X users instead receiving a notice that reads: "Sorry, that post has been deleted." And it's not the only post of Musk's that has been deleted. Another inflammatory post from Thursday, which saw Musk respond 'yes,' endorsing a message that said 'Trump should be impeached' and that Vance 'should replace him,' is also no longer viewable on X. The deleted posts suggest that the explosive feud between Trump and his one-time ally could be thawing. Read More: Where Things Stand With the Epstein Files Following Musk's Allegation Against Trump Musk's original posts came as Trump also lobbed insults and threatened to take away government funding and contracts related to billionaire Musk's Space X company. Although things appear, for now, to be simmering down, Trump has made it clear he does not have plans to reconcile with Musk. When asked on Friday night by reporters if he intends to speak with Musk—who until recently lead the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—the President gave a clear response. 'No I don't have plans… I'm not even thinking about it,' Trump said on Air Force One. 'I'm not really interested in that, I'm really interested in the country, and solving problems.' However, when asked if he plans to take back the symbolic White House key that he gifted to Musk, Trump said that he has no intention of doing that."I don't take things back, I gave him a key, he tried very hard,' the President told reporters, praising the efforts of DOGE. Read More: J.D. Vance Speaks Out After He's Dragged Into Explosive Row Between Trump and Musk Trump also appeared to defend Musk against the New York Times' reported allegations that the Tesla CEO regularly consumed ketamine, ecstasy, and psychedelic mushrooms when traveling with Trump on the campaign trail in 2024. 'I don't want to comment on his drug use. I don't know what his status is,' Trump said, when asked by reporters if he had concerns. 'I read an article in the New York Times. I thought it was, frankly, it sounded very unfair to me.' Trump's Air Force One remarks, issued late on Friday, came hours after he told ABC News that Musk had 'lost his mind.' Contact us at letters@
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Musk deletes Epstein tweet after Trump rift
Elon Musk has deleted a tweet in which he alleged that Donald Trump was 'in the Epstein files'. The social media post was written on Thursday during a fierce war of words between the tech billionaire and the US president, after a dispute over Mr Trump's flagship spending Bill marked an abrupt end to their close alliance. As the disagreement escalated, Mr Musk also suggested that his former boss should be removed from office. 'The Epstein files' is a phrase colloquially used to describe intelligence the US authorities hold on Jeffrey Epstein, the paedophile financier who died in 2019. However, by Saturday morning, Mr Musk had deleted his post on X, in a sign the row could be winding down. Mr Trump also appeared to suggest he was moving on from the spat, telling reporters during a flight to New Jersey: 'Honestly I've been so busy working on China, working on Russia, working on Iran... I'm not thinking about Elon Musk. I just wish him well.' The row began when Mr Musk – who last week stepped down as head of the Department of Government Efficiency – criticised the president's upcoming Bill as a 'disgusting abomination' and claimed it would increase the national debt. Mr Trump retaliated by saying the billionaire was upset because one of his allies had not been chosen for a role in the new Nasa administration. The president also suggested Mr Musk was annoyed because the White House's 'big beautiful Bill' would end tax breaks for electric vehicles worth billions of dollars to his car company Tesla. 'He knew it better than almost anybody, and he never had a problem until right after he left,' Mr Trump said. The president later said, during an Oval Office meeting with Friedrich Merz, the German chancellor, that Mr Musk had 'Trump derangement syndrome'. The Republican later added that he was 'very disappointed' in the entrepreneur. However, Mr Musk was quick to hit back, alleging that the president had only won last year's election because of his support. 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election. Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate... Such ingratitude,' he wrote on X. The world's richest man then published his post about the president and the Epstein files – but provided no evidence to back up his claim. Mr Trump and Epstein ran in the same social circles in New York and were pictured partying together on various occasions in the 1980s and 1990s. Epstein killed himself in 2019 in a Manhattan jail cell while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. In February, Pam Bondi, the US attorney general, pledged to release the Epstein files. However, the 'phase one' documents that were released to a hand-picked group of conservative influencers contained information that was largely already in the public domain. As the row escalated, Mr Musk said he would decommission his Dragon spacecraft, which is used by Nasa to deliver and collect astronauts from the International Space Station. Mr Trump in turn threatened to cancel all the Tesla and SpaceX owner's government contracts. 'The easiest way to save money in our budget, billions and billions of dollars, is to terminate Elon's governmental subsidies and contracts,' he said. The president also reportedly considered selling or giving away the red Tesla car he purchased earlier this year. Tesla shares tanked as the rift intensified, amid investor fears that Mr Trump might hinder the roll-out of self-driving cars in the US, hitting the company's growth potential. Shares closed down 14.3 per cent on Thursday and lost about £111 billion, although the firm staged a partial recovery on Friday. An administration official claimed Mr Musk was 'clearly having an episode', while Steve Bannon, Mr Trump's former adviser, encouraged the president to initiate a formal investigation into Mr Musk's immigration status and have him 'deported from the country immediately'. As well as deleting the Epstein post, Mr Musk also appeared to walk back on his threat to decommission the Dragon spacecraft. When an X user suggested Mr Musk and Mr Trump 'take a step back for a couple days', the Tesla chief executive wrote: 'Good advice. Ok, we won't decommission Dragon.' However, the billionaire has continued to keep a poll pinned to the top of his X profile which invites users of the social media platform to vote on whether it is time for a new political party in the US. Mr Musk wrote on Friday night: 'The people have spoken. A new political party is needed in America to represent the 80 per cent in the middle! This is fate.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.