Amidst the hysteria of the last 48 hours, we have seen a seismic shift in both the establishment, media, and the American citizenry (alt right included).
As news of Steve Bannon being removed from the National Security Counsel emerged, other stories of clashes within the ranks at the White House were thusly validated to a certain extent. Reports of policy conflicts between two key Trump advisors in Bannon, and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, have been emerging for quite some time now.
That all being said, Bannon’s departure from his National Security post, marks a pivotal and rather disturbing revelation as Trump’s rhetoric on foreign policy changed literally overnight with the missile strikes against Syria. This coincides with Kushner taking on a larger advisory role in the White House. This also demonstrates perhaps why Trump would go back on certain promises such as his continuing the US arming of Saudi Arabia against Yemen.
While Bannon was an opponent of the missile strikes, Kushner was largely in favor of them. And along with him, of course, his wife (Trump’s daughter) Ivanka also supported the strikes against Syria. News of Kushner being a globalist and a Zionist however, parallels a story line which clears the fog slightly, as to what exactly the clash within the White House details; Kushner being in favor of globalism, Israel, and NATO, while Bannon being more of a nationalist and a “America First” strategist.
News surfacing of Kushner being backed by globalist George Soros has been circulating for months, and it is valid; in 2014 George Soros gave Jared Kushner and his brother Joshua, a $259 million dollar line of credit, in order launch their startup “Cadre“.
This is all quite interesting when you take memorable moments where Soros commented on Trump during an interview with Bloomberg:
“I have described him as an impostor and a con man and a would-be dictator,”
Trump in turn, had called out Soros as a globalist with “no good intentions to the US” during some of his campaign speeches, as well as his televised debates. Soros has donated over $10 million to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign.
As we see the shaking of the House Of proverbial Cards in Trump’s America, we are at a defining moment with regards to the citizenry; as much as the media and the political swamp-creatures (McCain, Pelosi, Hillary…etc.) are showering Trump with love for his aggression against Syria, a shift in political inlfluence from Bannon’s “America First” philosophy towards Kushner’s globalism/zionist agenda is actually working to further hurt Trump, as well as that very same media/establishment…
For the first time in almost a year, the Trump train is beginning to see its tracks derailed, and its metals twisted as absolute staunch supporters of Trump take a stand against him, in what they see as a complete flip flop on foreign policy and American interest. Make no mistake that Bannon played an absolute pivotal role in getting Trump’s train to its’ last stop in DC. Part of that route was taking in the philosophy of non-interventionism, nationalism, and calling out the global banking cartels. Yet as we begin to see the conductor of said train in Bannon losing control, we also begin to see the entire trip derailing into a train wreck; as Bannon loses his power to Kushner, Trump’s strong unified base of support begins to depart his platform:
It seems that there is a silver lining in all of this after all. It does appear that the Alt Right as well as the citizens that pay attention, real attention, to real news as opposed to the “fake news” (which is a major blowback to the very media outlets that co-opted that term), are not being fooled by the establishment. It looks that there is a positive correlation between Bannon’s philosophy losing to Kushner’s, and Trump’s own support base turning their back against the presidency.
“On a board in his West Wing office, Bannon keeps a list of promises Trump made to populist voters. Kushner, whose portfolio has ballooned in recent weeks, seems much less interested in keeping those promises.”
To further illustrate this faint beam of distant light, there is some resonation between the Alt-Right/Trump-wing and libertarians, with regards to certain domestic issues and foreign policies. There has been numerous debates within the libertarian/anarcho base, whether an “alliance” with between them and right-leaning libertarians/right-wing folks would be a good idea.
At such critical times, it is certainly pivotal, and opportunistic, to welcome disenfranchised as well as frustrated factions into a philosophical camp. And although many libertarians and anarchists tend to forget that they themselves had taken various steps to finally reach their final destination of non-statist philosophies, there are folks that believe in the strategy of attrition.
When you see a hard-nosed Richard Spencer himself choosing to dump Republican president Donald Trump to Democratic congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, mostly based on foreign policy, it begs the question of how can the liberty movement, further bring frustrated supporters in, and helping them cross into the proverbial dark side.
Just as the liberty movement welcomed former Obama supporters, Bush supporters, and Bernie supporters, why not welcome frustrated Alt Right supporters? If for nothing, at least building a coalition that is unified on foreign policy, which is the most detrimental and most critical litmus test of a nation and her people.
Either way, wether you are for an alliance, whether you are against war, or whether you’re for America, there is some solace when you see a person stick to their principle:
Insert Kentucky state senator Rand Paul here. And although Rand is nothing like his father (former congressman and presidential candidate, Dr. Ron Paul, who is arguably the most important man in modern day history), a Rand in the White House might just be the next best option.
We are in the age of information/technology. And no matter how diabolical the globalist war machine is, in the history of the world it has never been able to continue thriving forever.
With the 2016 election and its unified signal that the mainstream media as well as the establishment has lost all trust of the citizenry, it is evident that a major umbilical chord that has been feeding life into the military creature of empire/death has been cut.
When a supposed white supremacist/nationalist alongside Alt Right followers starts sharing the work of Justin Raimondo (Anti-War), standing for peace, and hash-tagging “StandWithAssad”, you have to pose the question:
“How long before the liberty movement begins to see visible signs of their takeover, and what can we do to expedite it?” Will the Alt Right play a role in the 2020 election, should Rand Paul make another run? Will this be the proper timing? What would a Rand Paul led White House look like? As much as most anarchists oppose government (and rightfully so), do they find a presidency with the likes of Justin Amash and Thomas Massie unappealing?
Would “top White House advisor Ron Paul” not sound like a dream? Would having a Judge Andrew Napolitano as either Supreme Court Justice or Attorney General not be great? Would National Security advisor Tulsi Gabbard not be welcomed? Would committees led by Thomas Woods, Peter Schiff, and Jeffrey Tucker not be a monumental step in the right direction? Would Press Secretary Ben Swann not be a perfect shoe-in?
Author: Fadi Malkosh
Fadi Malkosh is the founder of Network Radio.