Connect with us

Opinions

Is Steve Bannon done?

Published

on

Is Steve Bannon done

I haven’t been the biggest fan of Steve Bannon’s since I started seeing his true colors a couple of years ago. It’s not his ideology; I agree with him more often than not, though his alt-right leanings have been a concern. I didn’t care for the way he goes about getting his agenda done. It’s as important for him to win his way as it is for him to win at all. One needs at least a little narcissism to be successful in politics, but Bannon tends to take it to the extreme. It’s been his greatest strength, yet ultimately it will be the thing that will take him down.

Has that already happened? Has he been “taken down” by recent revelations that he threw out insults about the President’s son and accusations at the President himself?

If anyone else close to President Trump said the things that Bannon, said, there would be no way for them to bounce back. With Bannon, it’s too early to tell if he’s done. Just as he did during the campaign and attempted to do in the early days of the administration, Bannon masterfully uses bad news to act as a springboard from which to bounce back up higher than he was before. This is why he has so much affection for leaks to the media. He used them during the campaign to distract the press from other issues. For example, every time buzz ramped up about candidate Trump needing to release his tax returns, some other more interesting controversy sprung up. Attacks on Ted Cruz’s father, releasing the “John Barron” tapes, and leaking lewd photos of Melania Trump all happened when cries were at their loudest for Trump to release his tax returns. As a result of all three moves, the tax question faded from discussion.

He attempted to do the same thing while with the administration, but with little apparent success. This is almost certainly why he was fired. White House leaks slowed down dramatically after he left.

I’m not suggesting he intended the quotes in Michael Wolff’s new book, Fire and Fury, to create the stir that it has caused. When he made the remarks, he was in a much better position to weather the repercussions, so he let his ego take his mouth too far. Nevertheless, he DID intend for his words to go public and demonstrate his boldness. Now, he has to backtrack. Here’s why:

His agenda through Trump… for now

Steve Bannon wants to be something bigger than he is. Whether that means President of the United States or a force behind the scenes is unknown, but his ambition is not to lead Breitbart. He wants to be the king, the kingmaker, and/or the king’s puppet-master.

For now, the path to achieve his goals is to support President Trump. Despite the President declaring yesterday that Bannon had “lost his mind,” don’t expect his former chief strategist to hit back in any way against the President. Bannon’s plan has always been to isolate the President from everyone else, even those in his family. He feels (or at least felt at one point) he can put a wedge between the President and those closest to him by playing to Trump’s ego. It’s worked from time to time, but Bannon underestimated the President’s attachment to other advisers, particularly those in his family.

What’s the point of it all? Does he just love and admire the President so much he wants him all to himself? No. The President has been and always will be nothing but a tool for Bannon. He has an agenda he wants pushed forward and the best person to open the doors the widest for Bannon to ram his agenda through is Donald Trump.

Getting him into the White House wasn’t the end game. It was the first major move.

Getting evicted from the White House didn’t derail Bannon. It made him change his strategy, but that strategy still includes President Trump. If the rift that was created by the book continues much longer, we may see Bannon referencing Trump’s agenda rather than the President himself, but for now he’s going to continue supporting the President and the President alone. He will paint him as a man who shares Bannon’s vision. Over time, he will claim more and more ownership of that agenda until a triggering event happens.

What’s the trigger?

At some point in the near future, President Trump will do something that allegedly goes against the “Make America Great Again” agenda. I suspected it would be signing DACA amnesty into law, but blowback from his quotes in the book may force Bannon to delay until the next anti-agenda move the President makes.

Bannon’s plan comes in three stages. First, he has to support the President which he is doing now. Then, he has to support the agenda and start distancing himself from the President, claiming the President’s advisers are pushing him in the wrong direction. The last stage will be a complete reversal and all out war. He will say he made a mistake with President Trump, that he wasn’t the man he thought he was, and that the agenda needs a new leader. He will be that leader.

Will it work?

Had the Roy Moore allegations never come out, I would say that Bannon’s plan was likely to work. He had a narrative built perfectly around the notion that he was the true champion for making America great again. This is why he said what he did for Wolff’s book. At the time of the interview, he was looking to be in much better position than he is now.

Does that mean he’s done? No, but he has a lot more maneuvering to do before he can truly start claiming the power he believes he deserves.

Steve Bannon will either go down in history as a master strategist who pulled a series of trick plays that won him the game, or he won’t go down in history at all. His trajectory is currently pointed towards the latter, but it’s still going to be important to watch him. Whether he rises or falls, he’s going to take a lot of people with him.

Christian, husband, father. EIC, NOQ Report. Co-Founder, the Federalist Party. Just a normal guy who will no longer sit around while the country heads in the wrong direction.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Hoofer

    January 4, 2018 at 7:34 pm

    Where were all these mind readers a year ago?

    “Steve Bannon wants to be something bigger than he is. Whether that means President of the United States or a force behind the scenes is unknown, but his ambition is not to lead Breitbart. He wants to be the king, the kingmaker, and/or the king’s puppet-master.” – writes Rucker

    A multitude of dumps on Bannon -now- as if the sheep’s clothing was just yanked off the wolf – I’m really stunned, when did Bannon take a seat on your couch for a shrink session? Truth be told, most of us, if not all but a tiny fraction, have FORGOTTEN Bannon, and don’t give a rat’s rear end what the unshaven-homeless-looking-dude says, or thinks. Guess who’s NOT buying the Bannon book – Conservatives. Guess who *might* buy his book – Liberals. If that’s not noteworthy, getting Liberals to buy a Conservative book – he’s a smart businessman.

    Other than that, it’s about as interesting as which razor Bannon prefers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Democrats

The #SchumerShutdown will deliver 2018 GOP victories if they stick to their guns

Published

on

The SchumerShutdown will deliver 2018 GOP victories if they stick to their guns

The current scenario makes it likely there will be a government shutdown. I’ll edit this if it ends up being averted, but if it is, it will be because the Republicans buckled to Chuck Schumer’s demands in whole or in part. Either way, this article is relevant.

In one set of scenarios, Republicans will be given all the ammunition they need to coast to major victories in the 2018 midterm elections. Instead of simply retaining their majorities, as is the hope for most in the GOP, they may actually end up making gains. The President called for such an event today:

It should be noted that I am not a Republican who is simply cheering them on. I’m a Federalist, so my analysis is not guided by hope or propaganda. Both parties promote big government policies. The only difference is which topics they focus upon, which means the ebb and flow of control by the two-party system will incessantly grow DC’s overreach… but that’s all for another article.

Assuming there’s a shutdown, both sides will continue to point fingers at the other in hopes of making their version of the narrative stick. The reality should be crystal clear to anyone other than the liberally indoctrinated or mainstream media: this is 100% on the Democrats. We’re talking about a spending bill. The fact that they’re holding it up to score points with Dreamers and their supporters is despicable.

Let’s look at the two types of people affected the most by this. The first are obviously those working for the government. They will not be getting paid. Some will have to work despite not getting paid for it. The effects of the Democrats’ actions will impact them immediately. These are American citizens.

The second people “affected” by this would be the Dreamers. They will almost certainly have some form of amnesty before March 5 when the DACA executive order officially runs out. If Schumer’s Shutdown is averted without a DACA protection element, what will happen to these people? Exactly what would happen to them with a DACA protection element included. Their lives will not be affected by the outcome of the continuing resolution, but even if there were small differences, those wouldn’t be felt until March. These are not American citizens.

The Democrats are posturing for one reason and one reason only: They want the credit for saving Dreamers. As it stands, they will not get that credit if a bipartisan bill is signed by the President in February or March. Today, they have the opportunity to stamp a big letter “D” on the DACA fight and they’re willing to harm American citizens to do it.

I am opposed to a government shutdown because Americans will get hurt by it. We need to curtail spending dramatically, but shutting down the government is not the “wakeup call” many conservatives are promoting it as. Address budgets, reform entitlements, and cut the billions in wasteful spending that gets pumped out of our wallets and into the ether, but keep the government running in the meantime.

To do this, the Republicans may buckle. By the time you’re reading this, they may have done so already. However, their path to victory in 2018 will be paved by first keeping DACA out of the CR and then fixing DACA before March 5. If they do this, they can point to the fact the President and Republican leaders promised a fix and delivered, but the Democrats shut down the government in an effort to claim credit. That message is true and can resonate if they blast it out there loud enough during election season. That means they can’t buckle now and they must deliver later.

I’m not a proponent for “fixing” DACA, but since it’s almost certainly going to happen, this is the path the GOP must take in order to keep their majorities.

This whole shutdown debacle is a parade of conflicting buffoonery. Democrats are marching down the street clothed in false righteousness. Republicans are following behind them wearing the clown outfits of incompetence. America may deserve a government shutdown for keeping the two-party system intact for so long.

Update – The Democrats do not have the people on their side and even CNN is forced to report it:

CNN poll: DACA not worth a shutdown, except to Democrats

http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/19/politics/cnn-poll-shutdown-trump-immigration-daca/index.htmlWashington (CNN)With hours to go before a midnight deadline for Congress to fund the government or shut it down, most Americans say avoiding a shutdown is more important than passing a bill to maintain the program allowing people brought to the US illegally as children to stay, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.

Continue Reading

Healthcare

Fake medical news

Published

on

Fake medical news

CNN won four – count ’em – four Fake News Awards. It’s unfortunate that Dr. Sanjay Gupta’s commentary on the President’s so-called heart disease wasn’t available when the awards were being selected. Then they would have won five. And on the way, they created a new category of Fake News: Fake Medical News.

Let’s get one thing clear here. This isn’t the distance diagnosis of Trump’s “mental illness” that Dr. Bandy Lee, a formerly licensed psychiatrist made. That sort of diagnosis requires that evidence be manufactured. No, this is the process of taking existing evidence and twisting it into something that it isn’t. Of course, that’s standard fare for the Left, so we really shouldn’t be surprised.

Trump Health

The first is the trend of the President’s Agatston Coronary Calcium Score. This is the data. And it’s factually correct. So far, no problem. But right below the data is a false statement.
This graphic, which CNN put up twice during their interview segment with Dr. Gupta has several clear statements. We can’t go Democrat and twist them, so we have to take them at face value. After all, that’s exactly what CNN wants us to do.

“A score of 100+ = High Risk of Heart Attack or Heart Disease Within 3-5 Years”

During the interview, Dr. Gupta admitted that this score is about average for 71 year old men in the US. If the caption was true, then the average 71 year old man in the US is at “high risk” for a heart attack in the next three to five years, and that’s, to quote Rush Limbaugh, “Barbra Streisand!” Yes, they have the “get out of jail free” line “or Heart Disease,” but it doesn’t change the way CNN used the data. They wanted us to believe that the President is on death’s door due to heart disease.

Yes, Dr Gupta flatly declared “The President HAS heart disease.” Had he actually spent time reviewing how cardiac tests are properly used, he wouldn’t have been able to say that. So after consultation with the former Chief of Cardiology at a major metropolitan medical center, we can now properly understand this data.

President Trump is 71 years old. You expect calcium in his coronary arteries at this age. But we don’t know where that calcium is, and that makes a difference. If it’s all in one spot that means something very different from a little here and a little there. Further, CNN flatly lied in their graphic. The proper outlook should have been “moderate risk,” not “high risk.” And with just the Agatston score, you can’t determine the presence or absence of heart disease. It’s only a screening test, and even if your score is over 2,000 – Trump’s is only 133 –  there’s still a 13% chance that you don’t have any coronary disease.

Dr. Gupta could have discovered this information with a simple internet search. It’s all out there. So Gupta’s statement that “Trump has cardiac disease” is coming from either an idiot or a liar… You pick.

At age 71, there’s no reason to even look at a calcium score. All the calcium score tells you is that you need a functional test. What’s that? A stress test! And you may want to add an echocardiogram. But at age 71, those would be routine, so there’s no point in looking at a calcium score. At age 65 I had both, just like the President, and we didn’t bother with an Agatston score. And just like the President, mine are NORMAL. What does this mean?

A normal stress test in a 71 year old male means that the President has a very low risk of any sort of cardiac event for at least the next two years. But Gupta got all excited about risk factor modification. Let’s get real. If his lifestyle has worked for Donald Trump for 71 years and he’s at low risk, what does he really need to change? There’s very little chance that he will ever develop coronary disease.

What things are they recommending? Diet and exercise. Give me a break. Yes, the President could lose a few pounds. That would improve his golf game and make him look better when he’s standing next to Melania. But the calorie restriction high carb diet they’ll prescribe will make things worse, not better. There’s a better way, and Dr. Jason Fung and Nina Teicholz have proved it.[i] Exercise is good for some things, but it won’t help his weight. And the only thing wrong with Donald Trump’s cheeseburgers is the bun. He should get rid of it.

One other part of the problem is that they are pushing statins on him. Statins can lower cholesterol, but it turns out that doing that can easily affect your thinking, since cholesterol is a YUUGE part of the cell membranes in the brain. We also should recall that all those studies that appear to say that lowering cholesterol is good for you seem to ignore all the bad things that the drugs do. In short, if the President just gave up carbs, he’d lose weight and wouldn’t have any need for statins.

So what’s really going on here? We have a neurosurgeon who works for a network that wants to destroy the President giving a message that matches the Left’s party line. He couldn’t be bothered to do his homework and discover that the President’s doctor is right. Trump’s heart is in great shape. And while we’re at it, let’s look at that other thing – the echocardiogram.

Echocardiography lets us get a view of how the heart muscle and valves work. Trump’s echo was – drum roll please – normal. That means that his heart valves are fine. But there’s something more important here. If you have blocked arteries in your heart, areas of heart muscle won’t get enough blood flow and won’t contract properly. They’re called “segmental wall motion abnormalities,” and you’ll see them on the echo. If you don’t have those, you don’t have blocked arteries. That’s called “normal.”

But we’re not done. The Left is grasping at straws. A number of docs are arguing in print that high cholesterol will kill him. As I said before, it’s time to re-read all those old studies. And for the rest of us, read “The Big Fat Surprise.” The actual data simply does not support those claims. A researcher named Ancel Keys simply lied about a host of studies and managed to get his views established as the gospel truth. Only now we are starting to learn why Eskimos and the Masai were able to live for millennia on very high fat diets with zero heart disease, zero cancer, zero high blood pressure, zero obesity, or any of our other modern health problems.

But Dr. Gupta is not the only liar on the Left. Trump takes finasteride to prevent hair loss. Numerous commentators are dropping hints that its documented side effects of sexual dysfunction and depression may be in play. They have no data, but are happy to drop hints about a possible “sudden onset of mental illness.”[ii]

Let’s wrap this up. Donald Trump is in excellent health. Frankly, the only diet change he should make is to dump the buns from his cheeseburgers. And he should dump the statins with them. As Dr. Malcolm Kendrick notes, “Statins might alter what is written on your death certificate, but they are extremely unlikely to change the date.”[iii] We might even suggest that he drop the Finasteride and switch to Rogaine.

Dr. Sanjay Gupta should go back to neurosurgery, a field where he is respected. But don’t count on that happening. CNN likes his way of presenting lies about Trump’s health. So all we can really do is to laugh at them on inauguration day in 2024 when President Trump watches Mike Pence take the Oath of Office.


Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Will the real Mitt Romney please stand up?

Published

on

The Real Mitt Romney

Utah is abuzz with rumors and anxiety over the possibility of a Senate run from former governor of Massachusetts and Holladay, Utah’s own (according to his recent Twitter edit), Mitt Romney. Romney has yet to declare candidacy, but according to a poll on Thursday from radio host Rod Arquette, the 2012 GOP presidential nominee’s favorability among Utahns approximates 60%.

His intentions remain a mystery, but should he toss his hat into the ring, Utahns would face a far more compelling question: which Mitt Romney will we see?

That could depend entirely on his audience.

Utah is a strange place politically. The more I participate in local politics, the more I realize that most Utahns care little, if at all, about policy. Their main concern is personality — and I can prove it.

According to Conservative Review’s Liberty Scorecard, Utah’s federal representation boasts the largest spread within the same party: a 71% gap between Senator Mike Lee’s 100% rating and Senator Orrin Hatch’s dismal 29%. As for Utah’s remaining representatives, Chris Stewart comes in 2nd place with a 70% score, followed by Mia Love with 62% and Rob Bishop with 60%. Recently elected Representative John Curtis is too fresh to merit a rating, but his predecessor, Jason Chaffetz, amassed a score of 78%.

In other words, the same electorate is voting overwhelmingly for candidates with wildly differing philosophies. But the common thread is easy to find: niceness.

Utah may be a traditionally red state, but it’s also a caring state. And when the two come into apparent conflict, Utahn’s typically opt for the latter.

Mitt Romney’s image of clean-cut benevolence is deeply ingrained in the Beehive State’s collective psyche, which is why he can garner a comfortable majority in favorability without hinting at any policy whatsoever — besides his obvious disdain for President Trump.

In fact, Romney’s renewed prominence in Utah most notably stems from his 2016 speech at the University of Utah, during which he rightly condemned then-candidate Trump’s character and personal history. Trump’s lifelong moral despotism and his abrasive conduct on the campaign trail were deep causes of concern for stalwart Utahns, who accordingly panned Trump in the primary (13.82%) and reluctantly nudged him to victory in the general election (45.5%).

Now, a week following Trump’s “bleep-hole” comments about Haiti and African countries in favor of places like Norway and South Korea — comments Mia Love has already condemned — Mitt Romney is again perfectly poised to emerge as Trump’s foil.

But unfortunately, his chances in Utah have little to do with policy.

Now that we know our audience, we’re brought back to the initial question: which Mitt Romney will we see? Whether you like Romney as a person but dislike him as a politician, vice versa, both, or neither, his long-standing reputation as a flip-flopper is unarguably well deserved. From abortion and Reagan to guns and taxes, Romney’s history of political metamorphosis is scrutinously documented.

Not coincidentally, his progressive standpoints persisted throughout his governorship and Senate candidacy in left-leaning Massachusetts, while his conservative reformation occurred just in time for his presidential bids.

Of course, it’s possible that Romney was sincere in his numerous changes of heart — one thing people are entitled to is the evolution of their personal beliefs. But as this is politics, one should be very cautious in attributing motive, one way or another.

The problem is that while Romney painted himself as a Democrat Lite for Massachusetts and a red-blooded conservative for the RNC, there’s no telling what persona he might adopt for a Senate race in Utah beyond that of the “nice guy,” and in politics, words like “nice,” “caring,” and “compassionate” often mean social programs.

Ideological shifts aside, Romney is at best a pragmatist, not a constitutionalist, having proven his disregard for natural rights on matters of health care and abortion — Romneycare was as much a violation of rights on a state level as Obamacare is federally, and his “pro-life” position that states should have “the authority to decide whether they want to have abortion or not, state by state” exhibits ignorance of the sole purpose of the federal government: securing our unalienable rights, even in matters of state nullification.

Romney also experienced backlash from conservatives in August 2017 when he publicly defended Antifa, a domestic terrorist organization, following the horrifying neo-Nazi display in Charlottesville.

In short, Mitt Romney is not good for Utah, nor is he good for liberty. At best, he would establish an elevated moral compass in terms of personal lifestyle, but that’s no excuse to squander freedom.

Romney would most likely amount to no more than another Jeff Flake — a well-meaning, moderate, Mormon Senator, a good man with strong values, who blatantly misunderstands the role of government and the cause of individual liberty.

This has nothing to do with objective opposition to Donald Trump. I applauded Romney’s speech at the University of Utah, and I’ve had plenty to say about Trump’s shortcomings over the past two years.

But the cult of personality is just as dangerous in one direction as another, and if Romney has plans to run for office in Utah, he’s found the perfect base to latch onto a “nice guy,” whatever he stands (or falls) for.

Richie Angel is a Co-Editor in Chief of The New Guards. Follow him and The New Guards on Twitter, and check out The New Guards on Facebook.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.