Neofascist Trump Appointee Bannon: “Anger is a Good thing” “if you’re Fighting to Take this Country Back”

By Juan Cole | (Informed Comment) | – –

Donald Trump named Neofascist Stephen Bannon as his White House strategist, a co-equal with incoming White House chief of staff and former RNC head Reince Priebus. Bannon has espoused large numbers of crackpot conspiracy theories and has talked about how good anger is in the effort to “take back our country” (i.e. to assert white supremacy). He has alleged that Hillary Clinton was entangled in a conspiracy with the Muslim Brotherhood, which in turn he appears to think is plotting to pollute the purity of his precious bodily fluids.

Here are some scary quotes by or about Bannon:

STEPHEN BANNON: “By the way, I think anger is a good thing. If you`re fighting — this country is in a crisis. If you`re fighting to save this country, if you`re fighting to take this country back, it`s not going to be sunshine patriots. It`s going to be people who want to fight.

BETSY WOODRUFF, The Daily Beast: “Our reporting has shown that Peter Brimelow, who is one of the most influential leaders in the white supremacist movement, he told my colleague Gideon Resnick that he actually met with Bannon last month and those two men complimented each other on their work. Brimelow also he also said that he sees Breitbart as a competitor. He sees his project, running a white supremacist website, as competing with Breitbart for kind of the same marketshare.”

One of the propaganda talking points for defenders of Bannon and of Neofascism generally is that he doesn’t agree with everything that appears in the the web magazine he runs, Breitbart.com, a translation into English from the original German of the Völkischer Beobachter . For instance, there was the article that called conservative William Kristol a “renegade Jew.” But Bannon told Lou Dobbs in 2012 that he was enthusiastic about the content of his magazine:

“Lou Dobbs Tonight

November 20, 2012 Tuesday

Joining us now executive chairman of Breitbart News Steve Bannon. It’s good to have you with us Steve.

STEVE BANNON, EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN, BREITBART NEWS: Thanks for having me back, Lou.

DOBBS: First of all how is Breitbart.com and all your sites — how are they doing?

BANNON: I think they are doing excellent. We’ve launched a new site right before Andrew passed away that with — you know the technology and new content I think one fire up almost 10 million unique and close to 80,000 page views per month. So we put a hundred new pieces of content up every day and the team at Breitbart and Joe Pollack and (inaudible) these guys are on fire.

So Bannon didn’t reluctantly publish the most often false and heavily neo-fascist articles to which objections are now being raised. He said the people commissioning and writing this tripe were “on fire.” He approved of the hatred of minorities and the lunatic conspiracy theories appearing there. Of course he did. He was the executive chairman.

In the same interview, Bannon revealed that he has some sort of odd conspiracy theory about the Fed and low (white) birthrates: “BANNON: Lou look at — the birth rate in 2011 is the lowest birth rate the country has had in recorded history. Corporations are sitting almost on a $1 trillion of cash and they’re not reinvesting in America. The signals are out there by people’s decision that they don’t have faith in the political class. And particularly people like Chairman Bernanke to right this economy.”

The US is growing population-wise because it brings in 1 million immigrants each year. It is only the native-born (“white”) birth rate that is basically at replacement rates. Bannon is only interested in one segment of this demography. That campaign ad that Trump brought out just before the election attacking prominent Jewish figures at the Federal Reserve almost certainly was the work of Bannon and his clique.

Here is Bannon being interviewed by Lou Dobbs in 2012 on his hit job “documentary” about the Occupy Wall Street movement (September 20, 2012 Thursday LOU DOBBS TONIGHT 7:00 PM EST):

“STEPHEN BANNON, DIRECTOR, “OCCUPY UNMASKED”: Code Pink, Medea Benjamin, Jodie Evans — the Code Pink crowd — Lisa Fithian, the Anarchist, SCIU, this is a witches brew of groups. This is not college kids and hippies. This is very serious players they are looking to destroy the American government and destroy the American capital system. And they are very upfront about their goals and objectives.

And we — we’ve unmasked here in combination with Anonymous, a very dark sinister group. . .

BANNON: This is the difference, look at how they changed the conversation from deficit and debt in the summer of 2011 to income and equality and the one percent versus — and class warfare. That is a very effective weapon that politicians used.”

I think we know what he meant by calling Code Pink “witches.” And trying to link it to Anonymous? This isn’t political discourse, this is raving.

Then there is this from Mother Jones:

“For nearly a year before Trump hired Bannon to run his campaign, Bannon hosted a daily radio show where many of his guests instigated fear and loathing of Muslims in America. According to research by Mother Jones and the Nation Institute’s Investigative Fund, Bannon conducted dozens of interviews on his SiriusXM show, Breitbart News Daily, with leading anti-Muslim extremists. The collective interviews, steeped in unfounded claims and conspiracy theories, paint a dark and paranoid picture of America’s 3.3 million Muslims and the world’s second-largest faith.

“One of Bannon’s guests on the show, the high-profile Trump surrogate Roger Stone, warned of a future America “where hordes of Islamic madmen are raping, killing, pillaging, defecating in public fountains, harassing private citizens, elderly people—that’s what’s coming.”

“Bannon often bookended these interviews with full-throated praise for his guests, describing them as “top experts” and urging his listeners to click on their websites and support them. Bannon also occasionally offered his own comments demonizing Muslim Americans, such as when he referred to a moderate Muslim advocacy group as a “front group” and “a bunch of lies,” and when he warned about the threat of “Shariah courts” taking over Texas.”

Even Joe McCarthy would have thought Bannon a bit too suspicious, and Trump has put him into the White House. I suspect he’ll have the authority to have government agencies spy on Americans in contravention of the First and Fourth Amendment. And we could well see Stalinesque show trials of his critics. Some have been looking for evidence that Trump was just kidding when he hit Neofascist high notes, this appointment puts paid to that hope.

—–

Related video:

Wochit Politics: “Is Trump’s New Campaign CEO Obsessed With Muslim Conspiracy Theories?”

46 Responses

  1. Dear Professor Cole

    WE note with interest the proposed appointment of Mr John Bolton (he Moustache of War) as Secretary of State

    He outlines his priorities here

    Consider the five gravest challenges confronting America in the next four years, starting with the most imminent.

    First, and almost certainly the highest national-security priority for voters last Tuesday, are the closely related threats of radical Islamic terrorism and the Middle East’s spreading chaos. Obama’s unwillingness even to acknowledge radical Islam’s ideological basis, let alone his failure to counteract its multiple dangerous manifestations, has left us increasingly vulnerable to terrorist attack. And in the Middle East itself, despite long-overdue territorial gains against ISIS, governments have been disintegrating or gravely weakened, thus providing safe havens where ISIS and other terrorists can again take root.

    If Trump does not quickly reverse Obama’s strategy, regional chaos will only grow, and the terrorist threat here and in Europe will increase. Destroying ISIS should certainly be a priority, but not Obama’s approach, which actually strengthens Iran’s hand at the expense of America’s traditional allies in the region, Israel and Arab states alike.

    Second, nuclear proliferation, primarily by Iran and North Korea, is continuing and even accelerating. Obama’s cherished nuclear deal with Tehran has not contained Iran’s nuclear program, has not stopped its cooperation with Pyongyang, and has not changed its offensive behavior across the Middle East. Iran obtained the nuclear deal’s financial benefits at the outset, agreeing only to make cosmetic, easily reversible modifications to its nuclear infrastructure. Almost certainly, the ayatollahs have been cheating since before the ink was dry on the deal.

    As for North Korea, even Obama’s own director of national intelligence, James Clapper, acknowledged last month the hollowness of nearly 25 years of negotiation with Pyongyang, saying, “I think the notion of getting the North Koreans to denuclearize is probably a lost cause.”

    Failure to contain nuclear, chemical and biological proliferation today has even more dangerous longer-term consequences, namely even greater proliferation. Moreover, the prospect that terrorists could receive weapons of mass destruction risks the perfect storm of more 9/11s but with far more tragic consequences. Moving vigorously to eliminate the rising proliferation tidal wave will either be the hallmark of Trump’s presidency — or possibly its epitaph.

    link to triblive.com

    I wonder when American psychiatrists stopped diagnosing paranoia?

  2. I take issue with the comment in your last paragraph professor, where you say this man will most likely spy on Americans in contravention of the first and fourth amendment. I thought Edward Snowden had already showed that the American government is already spying on the American people and doing so in a massive way. The American government already boasts that all emails and phone call are logged and stored in meta data quantities. I fear this man can’t do much to contravene the first and fourth amendment that his predecessors haven’t already done. Indeed, their gigantic spying programme has all but made the these amendments obsolete .

    • Germany had a Gestapo long before 1933. What it chose to do with its data, however, changed radically under its new masters.

  3. Please read Chapt. 5; “King of Munich”, in Volker Urrich’s recent political biography: ‘Hitler, Ascent’. Not much more to be said.

  4. The Trump appointees are going to make the GW Bush cabinet look like the faculty at Harvard.

    • Steve Bannon received his MBA from Harvard Business School with honors and was an investment banker with Goldman Sachs.

      He brings a needed anti-establishment balance to the future Trump administration to complement the “establishment” Reince Priebus. His appointment has signaled to the Israel Lobby that the future Trump administration will not be a pro-Israel rubber stamp for the Likud Party.

      Trump argued the Obama “birther” issue and many right-wing extremist theories the last few years. The Bannon selection cannot be a surprise to many seasoned political observers.

      • Birtherism is not “anti-Establishment.” White Supremacy is as establishment as America gets. As Original Intent as Founding Fathers who owned slaves.

      • being pro-Israel (like me) and being pro-Likud (not me) are two very different things.

  5. Who tells the left media what to do everyday? They seem extremely coordinated. Today is attack Bannon.

    • And every day is Bannon attack progressive activists; potus-elect is appointing skinheads in sheep’s coif.

    • Maybe it has to do with the fact that he was picked by Trump for his White House staff?

      Nah, must be a conspiracy.

    • How far back into our racist past do you want America to go to be “fair”? 1960? 1910? 1860? Say when. And let’s ask Bannon too.

      • In 1972, cross-district busing of public school students in Metro Detroit was ordered by U.S. District Judge Robert DeMascio as a remedy of forced racial integration to address de facto segregation of white and blacks in that area.

        That year the Democratic nominee for President, George McGovern endorsed the remedy of cross-district busing as a cure for segregated school districts.

        The decision of Judge DeMascio was overturned by higher courts and McGovern was defeated by Richard Nixon. The political and judicial attitudes, via the 1978 U.S. Supreme Court in Bakke vs USC Board of Regents decision banning racial quotas in the college admissions process, signaled a gradual erosion, of affirmative action in public education.

        Currently, factors in the admissions process are legally allowable at public U.S. colleges, per recent Supreme Court decision, however a new Trump appointee could shift the balance on the high court.

        We need to go back to an era where no special treatment is accorded students due to race. Such considerations are repugnant to our values as Americans.

        • But the actual vast and growing inequality by race – as opposed to the late 1960s when Black wages reached 90% the level of Whites and our nation actually began making progress – is not repugnant to you.

          How racially unequal would America have to get – again – in order for you to find THAT repugnant? How long an “apprenticeship” in “acting White” must 100 million and soon a majority of Americans must endure – an apprenticeship overseen by people who have a vested interest in it NEVER ending – before the right to revolution applies, damn it?

          Why has White racism become more intense, and more politically dangerous, in the 28 years SINCE the Bakke decision? Is it because in our society, in the absence of Affirmative Action, the natural polarization of wealth back into the hands of the very propertied class that manufactured America’s racist culture (see “The Invention of the White Race”, Theodore Allen) is allowing that class to fall back on its successful strategy of selling casteism as a substitute for decent wages?

          You cannot separate racism from capitalist injustices in this country; the latter manufactured the former intentionally.

        • @super390:

          The Asian-American and Jewish-American communities have traditionally been opposed to affirmative action as it has tended to victimize their children during the admissions process to professional schools of U.S. universities.

          These admissions processes are a zero-sum game by excluding more-qualified applicants in competition with
          blacks and other selected minorities given preference points due to their respective racial or ethnic identities.

          I attended a private law school where the admissions process was completely based on individual merit without regard to any racial preferences; the five members of my graduating class who went on to hold judiciary seats were minorities – two Hispanics, two black females, and an Arab-American naturalized citizen – who had been admitted to law school solely on merit.

          James Meredith, who integrated the University of Mississippi, later worked in the office of Sen. Jesse Helms and was an ardent Republican opposed to affirmative action; he felt the concept of affirmative action implied that blacks were inferior to whites – and said his proudest moment was seeing his son earning his PhD without the benefit of any racial preference during his education.

        • Affirmative action was started to break down barriers to blacks and other minorities and women that blocked deserving students from higher education and/or the best education they could get. The African-Amwricans I knew in the late ’60s/early /70s who got into Ivy League schools under AA did not feel stigmatized and went on to successful lives and careers. This was the era in which Colin Powell began to break down barriers to his education and career. AA helped superiors and mentors were forced to look for and notice his talents. That is likely the same period your five friends came of age. It was later that AA got a reputation for awarding mediocrity, notably through the Bakke Case in the late 70s/80s. Why would you say that even now AA a zero-sum game? Highly qualified white students are rejected by elite schools all the time. One of two people with the same grade point average and test scores may be rejected for non-academic reasons – a resume short on personal initiative, the ‘bad’ luck of the draw or whatever. I know a Princeston graduate who was rejected by her first choice, Yale. Someone else, who was white with lower scores, may have secured an admission that eluded her.

  6. I’m not sure what a “chief strategist” does. I suppose the idea is that he will share power with Priebus, although how they will split the Chief of Staff job up is anybody’s guess. The signal to the alt.right base is clear, however. They will have a voice in the oval office and input into almost every decision Trump will make. I hope Trump, Priebus and Bannon have some appreciation of the constitutional limits of the President’s power. Thinking back, I can’t help wondering how Watergate would have turned out if Nixon had had a majority in Congress.

    • The idea was that the Priebus news would overshadow the Bannon appointment. The fake out didn’t work very well.

      But one thing is certain, one of them is just a figure head. And it ain’t Priebus.

    • “Chief Strategist”, would mean the Vision Guy. Or more aptly, given his recent history with the Trump campaign, the guy who serves to translate it into actionable tactics.

      To anticipate what that will entail for the country going forward, look to these people’s past behavior and the strength of their commitment and focus.

      We all need to back up, take a deep contemplative breath, and then look very coldly at the reality of things. It could be possible that everything Trump has said and done to-date has merely been to manage and channel the anger of the right in order to get elected. It could be that his intention is to rebuild an inclusive society in the best interests of all, following a conservative America-First agenda (versus a more liberal and idealistic one). That would be to misread Trump, and the commitment, focus and vision of those he is empowering.

      Even people who do not label themselves as ‘progressives’ assume a more or less liberal or conservative path forward. Anyone can look back over history and see how things have progressed and improved to this point (more or less, with the inevitably ebb and flow of the economic tides). This is hardly a given, however, and it would be an especially naive expectation in this case.

      Trump will have the opportunity to repack the courts in a far more ‘conservative’ mold, more than is needed for his agenda, given the absolute power he will soon consolidate over the legislative and executive branches. We can expect him to choose the youngest, most ideologically pure and driven supplicants that Bannon et al can dredge up for several SCOTUS replacements. To expect him to water-down his choices to reflect the face of America or to maintain some philosophical balance is delusional: he wants to remake America in a way that CANNOT be changed. So, ask yourself what he will do: this is not a guy with a modest, inclusive vision. If anyone thinks his general vision is anything other than what he has consistently presented they are delusional. To pursue anything else, for him, would be pointless.

      Look to the facts (which I don’t know for sure), about shifts in the state legislators which could give Trump an opportunity to remake the Constitution itself.

      But, whats really needed to confirm the realities here is to look closely at these early hires. The political appointees will take a few months after inauguration to find their offices, then weed & re-staff them, before doing anything dramatic. So, there should be a little time when you can read the writing on the wall by looking at the behavioral history of this gang. But it should be very evident, and is clear from these early picks. Don’t kid yourself, a next shoe will drop and it’s going to drop hard.

    • I think anyone counting on the constitution to limit Trump’s power is living in a high school civics class dreamworld. Insitutional limits are only as strong as the people manning the institutions. Do you think legal treaty obligations will prevent Trump from withdrawing from the Paris climate change agreement? Who will enforce those obligations? Do you think the statutory basis for the EPA will keep it from being dismantled? You’re not dealing with people who give a flying fig about the constitution. You’re dealing with people who want their way.

    • Reagan brought many ideologists into the White House, and elevated think tanks like the Heritage Foundation from the fringes to a status they’ve never surrendered. What damage he did through policy may have been kept in check on purpose to normalize his priesthood so they could keep dragging the country to the Right for decades.

      And that in turn made Trump possible. Time for the next lunge back into darkness.

  7. Given Bannon’s background, I’m quite certain that he will be in charge of the “Office of Dirty Tricks.” A blogger or journalist who is labeled a “hater of President Trump,” is likely to become the victim of such dirty tricks as having drugs planted in his car or on his person.

    • That would make him essentially Trump’s Pat Buchanan. Which is very logical given Pat’s foundational role in White-resentment paleoconservatism.

  8. A couple of things. A billionaire named Mercer is the one pulling the strings. He was a main funder of Breitbart and he was a supporter of Kellyanne Conway. link to mediamatters.org So, the idea that Trump was ever going to be for the working man was obviously false from the start. Secondly, According to Alex Jones, Trump called him and thanked him for his support only a couple of days after the election, telling Jones that he called him before talking to kings or prime ministers. For those who don’t know, Jones makes Bannon look like a moderate. He is a certified conspiracy nut job. Trump’s reported favorite for the EPA is a climate change denier and Sarah Palin is supposedly in line for Dept. of the Interior. He wants to overturn Roe v. Wade and now says that he wants to deport more than that 2 or 3 million he first said. I saw Lesley Stahl last night on TV and she was saying how conciliatory Trump was for her 60 Minutes interview and related how he said he wanted to be the President for all the people. And then she expressed surprise that he picked Steve Bannon. She was conned, just like half of the voters. When will people realize that he is an extreme right wing con man, for whom lying comes as naturally as breathing?

    • Trump is certainly a con man. That is his essence.

      But he has no core beliefs.
      He is not “right-wing.” His beliefs and foundational principles are flexible. The “right wing” shtick was to get elected; who knows what’s next ?
      (with apologies to kevin Hart)

  9. So, Bannon and his kind are not only against non-white minorities but they want the wealthy white rich men to run the U.S.? So they are against almost every white man in the U.S. too? I don’t understand why poor/middle class white men would support a group that wants to put them down and keep them down below the rich.

    • Surprise, surprise.

      Most rank & file Whites never believed in markets; they believed in inequality and caste. That means a return to the days when a White man accepted the crappy wages his local Big Daddy gave him in exchange for being guaranteed a greater recognition as human than any person of color. Of which beatings, lynchings, laws, and culture are just aspects.

  10. First, thanks for a very powerful expose’ in Bannon, the best I’ve read so far.

    Second, as with all demagogues, there is always a tiny kernel of truth tucked into their arguments. So is the case with Trump and Bannon:

    “Corporations are sitting almost on a $1 trillion of cash and they’re not reinvesting in America.”

    And who can argue with that? And that’s the key – they always make sure to include a seemingly progressive populist message that they can point to and say, “See, here’s where we agree with…,” in this case, a Bernie Sanders.

    And this is how this very dangerous process of normalization begins, as we’re now witnessing. For some inexplicable reason, Obama insists on doing his best von Hindenburg, using every opportunity he can to chide us all into giving “Trump a chance!” (as John and George roll over in their graves.)

    Recall also that Hitler pushed through an infrastructure works program as well, which, along with the massive increase in military spending, increased Germany’s deficit at the time.

    (Well, Juan, I guess you’ve convinced me that the fascist comparisons are apropos after all.)

    Finally, I know this sounds completely counter-intuitive, but it may turn out that the only candidate that could beat Trump in 2020 is a fiscally conservative deficit hawk, NOT a progressive populist like Warren or Bernie. That’s if Trump follows the same sort of massive deficit spending course that Hitler did.

    Another of the insane bits of irony we’ve witnessed of late, eh?

    .

  11. I must confess to having evil thoughts.

    A part of me is saying,

    “Hey, you know what? Good. Let this horrid little man, this racist, homophobic anti-Semite become one of the most powerful people in the next government. Let him lead us astray. Screw the minorities. Screw the poor. Screw the Jews. Screw the liberals. Screw the people who need Medicare, Medicaid or any other social welfare net that’s prevented them from falling into poverty. Screw them all!”

    Because once those policies take effect, it will leave such an atomic bomb’s worth of pain and horror on the national landscape that Americans will never again do anything as stupid as they did Nov. 8.

    Then I catch my breath, calm down and realize that that would be a horror. Bannon is simply poison. He cannot be allowed to remain in high office. My God, this is beyond the pale. Are we living in a nightmare????

    • I can excuse a lot of people voting for George W. Bush in 2000 even though I thought that was a mistake. But there was no excuse for re-electing him in 2004 when it was obvious the Iraq War was based on lies and was a total disaster. Then Bush brought us the worst economy since the Great Depression, so that we were staring into the abyss. After Obama brings us back, leaves office with a 52% approval rating, with low unemployment and no inflation plus the longest period of job growth in US history, those same electors voted for the man who promised to undo everything that Obama did and follow almost all of Bush’s economic policies. In short, as bad as things may get under Trump, you cannot count on the American public to make a smart and logical choice. As to your other point about living a nightmare, the only time in domestic political history that I think approaches this as far as presenting danger to the Republic was the Civil War, which was a totally different matter. I cannot think of any analog in US history which compares to the election of this man.

      • Though I’m the first to associate Trump with the racial evils of the past, I think the current crisis is closer to America in 1932, facing the right way out of far greater suffering than Whites now experience. There were many evil alternatives to Roosevelt, both on the ballot and in the sphere of media demagoguery. We were lucky that the timing worked out that none of the latter could make the jump from radio to the White House before FDR.

        This time, not lucky.

        • However, Trump may well set up the 1860-level crisis a few years from now, as his followers try to hold on to the part of the country they dominate once he’s in the grave and the nation is fragmented even further.

        • Was it not FDR that authorized internment camps for Japanese-Americans that were approved by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Korematsu decision?

          It was only Pres. Harry Truman in 1948 that integrated the U.S. Armed Forces by executive order.

          FDR was no champion of the rights of minorities.

        • My response to Mr. Koroi:

          What would have been the racial policies of any of the alternative leaders exploiting the Depression? Father Coughlin? The DuPont conspiracy?

          Truman was himself a product of a racist political machine. The only reason he integrated the armed forces in 1948 is that the Democratic Party was also struggling to integrate itself; and that was solely and entirely the result of the Roosevelt era. Truman operated as a New Dealer in the shadow of the New Deal legacy. No Democrat before 1932 would have dared suggest the idea. FDR put the party on the road that by 1964 had the Southern racists switching parties – so stop perpetrating the “Democrats ARE the racists” revisionism used by Republicans to distract from their plans to disenfranchise minorities nationwide.

      • Gary,

        One correction to your post: Obama’s not leaving with a 52% approval rate. He’s leaving with a 57% approval rate. (link to gallup.com) How Trump believes he has a mandate to under policies that the majority likes is beyond me.

      • Mr. Page – “you cannot count on the American public to make a smart and logical choice.” Especially the more than 97 million of them who did not exercise their right in this U.S. presidential election. Their spoiled, faux-indignant lack of participation may have injured our country beyond repair.

        How did Americans GET SO STUPID??

        Good tip on Mercer, tnx.

  12. Ian Tuttle at the conservative National Review does as a good job criticizing Bannon. Regardless of whether Bannon is racist, he defacto endorses the alt-right, which embraces an ethno-nationalism that has it’s counterparts in the worst of the European far right. The alt-right rejects the eternally radical principal that all men are created equal with certain unalienable rights. Having such a worm in the White House is a grave danger to conservatives and liberals alike.

  13. Professor Cole – Thank you for the well-earned dust up at Herr Bannon. There is nothing more dangerous than a “knowing madman” in a position of power, trust and authority.

  14. In reference to the title of this informative article, I long ago decided that Gardner’s 2nd Law is the truth of the matter and that anger is in fact a very bad thing and not at all good. That Law states that “Anger is one of the very worst traits of Homo Sapiens. One should never do or say anything while he or she is angry, because otherwise they will find themselves indulging in acts so stupid and uncalled-for that, if the perpetrators have even just a glimmer of conscience, later they will deeply regret what they’ve done. That will happen every time.”

    I have had a lot of time to see how often that holds true, in myself and in others, and I haven’t seen much of anything that would refute that Law. Deny it, yes, and that’s only to be expected. But never to refute it.

    And so, what sort of a future can this country have, since we are faced with an administration riding in roughshod over all common decency, especially as that relates to women and minorities, and bearing at the sharpest point of its hell-bent prow a “strategist” who just loves rage and anger and has absolutely nothing else to offer but the destruction of all worthwhile things, such as the freedom to vote without fear of being harassed, or giving everyone equal opportunity regardless of their melanin count?

  15. Bannon should simplify his statement to “Anger is a good thing if you’re the right White.”

Comments are closed.