News - Analyst Lists Key Evidence Trump Isn’t Running for the White House

A Democratic strategist expresses concerns about who is really calling the shots at the White House and outlines reasons it might not be Donald Trump. She highlights several public moments suggesting the president might not be fully in command. On The Daily Beast Podcast, Symone Sanders-Townsend pointed to a viral Oval Office moment in which Trump appeared to nod off. She argues that this awkward moment points to a deeper problem. 'When I saw that, it raised questions about the structure of this White House. Who is actually in charge?' Sanders-Townsend said, adding, 'This can't be the first time the president has fallen asleep. How do I know? Because no one seemed to care.' During a White House event on November 6 aimed at reducing prices for weight‑loss drugs, cameras captured Trump with his eyes closed for an extended period, sitting still with heavy eyelids as officials spoke beside him. The moment only broke when a man behind Trump collapsed, briefly causing a commotion before the event resumed. The White House insisted Trump was not sleeping, though several outlets noted signs of exhaustion. For Sanders-Townsend, sleepy optics are only one piece of the puzzle. She cited instances where aides appeared to re-explain the executive orders shown to Trump. 'Is this the first time you’re hearing about this? Did the president approve this beforehand? Who’s signing off on the details of what’s going on in this White House?' she asked on the podcast. Her analysis centers on structure, not individuals. She suggests the team around Trump may be doing more than their jobs, with aides potentially stepping into decision‑making roles. A circulated post features questions about pardons and memory of a signed pardon, prompting commentary about who is truly in control (and to what extent Trump is perceiving or remembering signatures). Then there’s Stephen Miller, the deputy chief of staff, who has frequently used first‑person language to describe federal actions, raising concerns for Sanders-Townsend. 'When I worked at the White House, we didn’t say 'I' or 'we'; we said 'the president' and 'the vice president,'' she noted, and she asked directly, 'Are you making the decisions, Stephen Miller, about these strike force teams? How much does the president know about what’s going on?' Recent reporting underpins why this phrasing is troubling. In an October interview, Miller spoke about sending federal law enforcement and the National Guard into a quiet Southern town and used first‑person language, saying, 'If I put federal law enforcement and the National Guard in a nice sleepy Southern town, will anyone riot?' Analysts say this wording hints at the influence staff may wield in Trump’s White House. The White House has pushed back against concerns about fitness and control, citing the president’s busy schedule. Yet the sequence of incidents creates a feedback loop; each event, from Oval Office fatigue to Miller’s remarks, reinforces the impression that aides are setting the agenda. The cumulative effect, Sanders-Townsend argues, warrants attention. 'These are all questions that should be asked,' she said, noting that Biden faced similar scrutiny over comparable slips when he was in office. 'If Biden had dozed off during an Oval Office event, it would have been the lead story for three weeks.' There is a difference between staff working within their roles and staff taking charge. Sanders-Townsend contends we may be heading toward the latter. Supporters of the president can cite denials and his long hours as defense, but tape‑captured evidence is hard to dismiss, and even harder to ignore is the language used by one of his top aides. That is why the question—'Who is truly in charge here?'—carries real weight long after the cameras stop rolling.