I've re-read it a few times, and I still think it's pretty clear the whole sentence is about Pete. I led with "smart-sounding take", which clearly references Pete, and then asked the question how Trump talking about this is supposed to achieve a net gain, which seems to me to be clearly about why does Pete think this, not why does Trump do this. After all, I didn't say "why does Trump think talking about". If I had, then I would be in total agreement with you. Instead, the entire sentence is about the smart-sounding take, not two completely different ideas separated by a sloppily-placed comma. The "but how does Trump talking about" part does the work of linking them together. Nevertheless, you're the person I'm supposed to have understand what I'm writing, so I'll consider striving to be less conversational in my writing and more exact in the service of hewing closer to crystal clarity.