Reporting on an invitation-only retreat in Rome describes how white nationalist figures viewed shrinking local news coverage as an opening for political organizing in rural communities. The account raises fresh questions about who can scrutinize local power when community journalism disappears.
White nationalist leaders held a secret, invitation-only meeting in Rome, Italy where, according to reporting by Nashville journalist Phil Williams for the Confront the Hate Substack, they discussed an alleged takeover strategy targeting rural America. The reported plan centered on exploiting the decline of local news and community journalism to organize with less scrutiny.
The gathering, held at the Rome headquarters of an Italian neo-fascist group, was reportedly hosted by white nationalist publisher Counter-Currents and drew roughly 50 people. Its significance lies less in the overseas setting than in the domestic target: rural counties where thin local reporting can leave elections, public offices and organized political activity with fewer watchdogs.
Rome meeting put rural areas first
Raw Story’s account, based on Williams’ reporting and footage that became available online, says propagandist Kevin DeAnna presented the erosion of local journalism as an advantage for white nationalist organizing.
DeAnna reportedly argued that fewer local reporters meant fewer people closely monitoring municipal and county government. The report characterizes the discussion as an effort to identify places where a small, disciplined political operation might have an outsized effect.
Calling this a “takeover plot” should be understood as a description of the reported strategy and rhetoric, not evidence that any county has been taken over or that a specific operation has succeeded. The available account describes a meeting and alleged ambitions, while leaving major details about implementation unresolved.
Local journalism was cast as an obstacle
The most revealing part of the reported discussion was the treatment of community news as a barrier to extremist activity. Local reporters often cover school boards, county commissions, sheriff’s offices, campaign filings, public records and the people behind local groups—work that can make covert organizing harder.
When those reporters are gone, residents can lose routine information about who is seeking office, funding advocacy campaigns or influencing public institutions. A statewide or national outlet may cover a major scandal, but it is less likely to attend every county meeting or identify a new local network before it gains traction.
That does not mean every community without a newspaper is defenseless. Local radio, nonprofit outlets, civic groups, public-records advocates and engaged residents can all provide oversight. Still, the reported Rome remarks highlight why the loss of a dedicated local newsroom has consequences beyond simply having fewer stories to read.
County sheriff races were a focus
According to the report, DeAnna urged attendees to focus on county sheriff contests, arguing that rural voters could offer a strong political return on limited resources. The reported pitch treated sheriffs as especially valuable because they hold real law-enforcement authority and can become influential local political figures.
He also invoked the “constitutional sheriffs” idea, a theory that asserts county sheriffs can override state or federal law. Legal scholars and courts do not recognize that claim as a valid limit on federal or state authority; sheriffs, like other officials, remain subject to the Constitution and applicable law.
The appeal of county-level races is not unique to any one ideology. They can have low turnout, limited media coverage and relatively modest campaign costs. Those features make close attention to candidates, funding, public statements and governing records important in any community.
Fundraising and legal pressure surfaced
The retreat reportedly also included fundraising pitches. Jared Taylor, who runs the American Renaissance website, suggested finding a wealthy sympathetic donor to support the movement, according to the account.
Attorney and former neo-Nazi David Zsutty was reported to have promoted lawsuits designed to drain ideological opponents financially, regardless of the merits of the cases. The account does not establish that such a litigation campaign was funded, filed or carried out.
Those details matter because political movements need more than rhetoric to build durable influence. They need money, local organizers, sympathetic candidates, legal support and sustained participation. The Rome discussion appears to have addressed several of those building blocks, but the public reporting leaves the scope of any resulting network unclear.
News deserts create a civic blind spot
Northwestern University’s Medill School has identified 213 U.S. “news deserts,” areas without a local news outlet, according to the report. The broader local-news crisis has been driven by advertising losses, newsroom closures and deep cuts in reporting staff.
A news desert is not automatically a political vacuum, and it should not be treated as proof that extremist activity will flourish. Rural communities have diverse residents, institutions and political views. But the absence of reliable local coverage can make it easier for misinformation, opaque financing and narrowly organized factions to operate without quick public challenge.
The point raised by the Rome meeting is therefore bigger than one organization or one retreat. Community journalism is part of local democratic infrastructure: it documents who holds power, what they are doing and whether their claims withstand scrutiny.
What remains unknown after the retreat
Several core questions remain unanswered. The available report says it is unclear who financed the Rome gathering. It also does not identify a confirmed timetable, a named list of targeted counties or evidence that the group’s proposed strategy has been executed.
There is also a difference between extremist figures discussing a desired strategy and their ability to turn it into electoral power. Organizing plans can fail because of public exposure, internal division, voter rejection, legal constraints or attentive local institutions.
Still, the reported comments offer a clear warning about what is at stake when community reporting fades. The loss of local journalism is not only an economic problem for an industry; it can weaken a community’s early-warning system for those seeking influence in the dark.
Leave a Reply