Wednesday's speech was "unsatisfactory," dissatisfied with "media coverage," and frustrated by the "consequences of the war"! Trump is considering a "massive cabinet overhaul."

The political costs of the Iran war have continued to accumulate, and the Trump administration is facing the most severe internal pressure test since the start of this term, with a new cabinet shake-up now brewing.

According to media reports on the 5th citing five people familiar with the matter, Trump is considering pushing for a wider-ranging cabinet reshuffle after removing Attorney General Boudie this week. Media sources cited by insiders say that National Intelligence Director Gabbard and Commerce Secretary Lutnick are both at potential risk of being dismissed. A White House spokesperson immediately publicly stated that Trump maintains “complete trust” in both.

The direct trigger for the cabinet reshuffle discussions is Trump’s April 1 national televised address. Several White House officials privately believe the speech was “ineffective”—it failed to provide an exit for the war and did not address voters’ economic anxieties. The latest Reuters poll shows Trump’s overall approval rating has fallen to 36%, the lowest level of this term, and six in ten respondents oppose the U.S.-Israel launch of this war.

The speech fell short of expectations, and discussions of a cabinet reshuffle suddenly heated up

Reports say Trump, along with his speechwriting team and key advisers, prepared for this Wednesday prime-time address together. Before that, aides had repeatedly urged him to speak directly to the American public about the U.S.’s role in the Iran war. However, the outcome of the speech disappointed the White House.

“This speech did not achieve the expected effect,” a White House official said. In the speech, Trump neither provided any exit path for this war, which began on February 28 and has lasted five weeks, nor directly addressed voters’ economic concerns, saying instead that the related pain was “temporary,” and he blamed responsibility on Tehran.

A senior White House official described the speech as an attempt to “project a sense of control over the direction and confidence in the war,” but the effect backfired, further reinforcing the view outside the White House that it needs to adjust its information strategy or personnel arrangements. “Isn’t a take-action-style reshuffle a good idea?” another White House official said.

According to media reports citing people familiar with the matter, Trump is currently extremely dissatisfied with media coverage of the Iran war and has clearly told his team that he wants more positive coverage, but he has not indicated any intention to adjust his own public relations strategy.

Gabbard and Lutnick under pressure, White House denies dismissal rumors

According to reports, after Boudie and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem were dismissed in succession, Gabbard and Lutnick were named by multiple people familiar with the matter as potential next candidates for dismissal.

As for Gabbard, a senior White House official said Trump has, in recent months, repeatedly expressed dissatisfaction with her; another person directly familiar with the matter said Trump has sought the views of allies regarding potential successors. It is worth noting that Gabbard is a well-known opponent of U.S. overseas military intervention for years. Last June, she released a video criticizing “war merchants among political elites”—at a time when it was right on the eve of Trump’s first round of military action against Iran, and this move left the White House deeply displeased.

Regarding Lutnick, multiple external allies of Trump have been privately pushing to have him replaced, with some of the pressure stemming from continued exposure of his relationship with Epstein. Publicly released documents earlier this year show that Lutnick had lunch with him in 2012 at Epstein’s private island in the Caribbean. Lutnick himself responded that he had “almost no contact” with Epstein, and that the lunch only happened because he was sailing past nearby at the time. In fact, according to reports, some of Trump’s allies had already pushed to have Lutnick removed as early as after last April’s chaotic rollout of global tariff policies.

White House spokesperson Davis Ingle said in a statement that Trump maintains “complete trust” in Gabbard and Lutnick, and that they have “jointly achieved historic victories for the American people.”

“Boudie won’t be the last,” timing of the reshuffle may be settled before the midterm elections

Despite the White House publicly denying it, media reports citing multiple people familiar with the matter say that the seriousness of the reshuffle discussions has noticeably increased in recent weeks. A senior White House source said Trump wants to complete major personnel changes within a window that still leaves enough time before the midterm elections in November. “You could say, based on what I’ve heard, that Boudie won’t be the last,” another White House official said.

However, Trump may ultimately choose to stand pat. Multiple people familiar with the matter said that, given how frequent personnel shake-ups in the first term dominated the news and gave outsiders the impression of White House confusion, Trump has clear concerns about changing the cabinet too often. A White House official said the expected changes would be “targeted replacements,” not a “large-scale dramatic reorganization.”

That said, some argue that standing pat at this time also carries political risk. Data show that the Iran war has driven up oil prices, dragged down Trump’s approval rating, and heightened Republicans’ concerns as they head toward the midterm elections. “Voters can tolerate rhetoric at the ideological level, but rising oil prices are a tangible, immediate feeling for them,” a White House official said.

Risk disclosure and disclaimer

        There are risks in the market; invest cautiously. This article does not constitute personal investment advice, and it does not take into account any individual users’ specific investment goals, financial conditions, or needs. Users should consider whether any opinions, viewpoints, or conclusions in this article are compatible with their specific circumstances. You are responsible for the risks of investing accordingly.