Some pro-Israel conservative students are voicing concern over the College Republicans of America’s new political director, citing his ties to neo-Nazi influencer Nick Fuentes as evidence of the party’s increasingly “alarming” shift toward extremism. 

Kai Schwemmer was tapped last week as political director of the campus group, which has grown to more than 200 active chapters across U.S. universities since it was established in 2023 as an offshoot of the College Republican National Committee.  

Schwemmer, known on social media as Kai Klips, has a channel on Fuentes’ invitation-only streaming platform Cozy, which he launched with far-right conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. Schwemmer appeared in a 2021 video promoting Fuentes’ “White Boy Summer” tour and was featured as a “special guest” at Fuentes’ 2022 APFAC III conference, the progressive advocacy organization People for the American Way reported. 

Schwemmer has also been outspoken about his affiliation with Fuentes’ “America First” political movement. Though Fuentes’ “America First” podcast was initially inspired by the speeches and platform of President Donald Trump, he later adapted the term for his own purposes, after distancing himself from the mainstream GOP, to attract young conservatives. 

Schwemmer, who lamented on X that “the white population is globally declining and … the acceleration of mass immigration is one major part of this,” was also one of several America First activists to be featured in the 2022 pro-Fuentes documentary “The Most Canceled Man In America.” In the film, he credits Fuentes’ rhetoric with bringing him into the America First movement and radicalizing him on the issue of immigration. 

Fuentes refers to his supporters as “Groypers” or the “Groyper Army,” “who see their bigoted views as necessary to preserve white, European American identity and culture,” according to the Anti-Defamation League. 

In a December interview on Reawaken USA, Schwemmer falsely claimed that the top executives of Boeing and Raytheon are Jewish, grouping them among “Zionists in America who no matter what are supportive of — whether it’s just military or monetarily — they’re going to U.S. involvement and U.S. support for Israel.”

College Republicans of America did not respond to a request for comment from Jewish Insider asking about the appointment of Schwemmer or how the selection process works.  

Still, Schwemmer maintains that he is a more moderate voice in the America First movement. 

Schwemmer said he tries to avoid the most extreme rhetoric used by others in his movement because, “I have political aspirations.”

“It’s alarming but not surprising,” College Republicans of America would select a Fuentes ally as its leader, Felipe Avila, a senior studying nursing at Catholic University of America, who identifies as conservative, told JI. 

Avila, who is Catholic and Hispanic, was briefly a member of his campus chapter of College Republicans until about two years ago. Following the Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attacks in Israel and ensuing war in Gaza, “I saw them become more isolationist with their approach on campus,” he recalled. “Support for Israel became such a debated issue.”  

Avila, who went on to start a campus chapter of Students Supporting Israel last year, said College Republicans are “always refusing to work or partner with SSI.”

A former intern for Republican Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) and member of Turning Point USA on campus, the conservative student organization founded by Charlie Kirk, Avila said, “[Many] people involved with College Republicans probably share Schwemmer’s views, especially on the Israel or [the] Jewish people issue, but they’re not as outspoken.”

With Schwemmer’s appointment, however, Avila is concerned that “now expressing openly antisemitic views won’t be as taboo as it was five or 10 years ago.” 

“If you’ve been on the local level you’ve seen the shift. Being as involved as I am with conservative politics, I’ve noticed it. We’re not just seeing it within College Republicans but in conservative discourse in general. I would describe it almost as a civil war where we’re seeing a dissident group with radical anti-Christian views that is almost trying to hijack the conservative movement,” said Avila. 

He described the antisemitic shift within Gen Z and millennial conservatives as “a pernicious disease that’s taken root within the conservative movement and we see that with this new appointment.”

“I think it will be a lot more encouraging for people to embrace these views… It’s simply a banner for frustrated young conservative men to hold these antisemitic, misogynistic views,” he said.

Ariel Akbashev, a junior at Queens College studying philosophy who identifies as conservative but has never been involved with College Republicans, said the appointment of Schwemmer, who he called a “big conspiracist” is “what I envisioned the Republican and conservative movement to lean towards.”    

“We’re seeing people like Nick Fuentes, Candace Owens, Tucker Carlson and now Schwemmer have huge platforms, getting views and because of that the youth is heavily impacted,” Akbashev, president of EMET, an on-campus Jewish student association and treasurer of Turning Point USA, an unregistered campus group, told JI. 

Five years ago, a group like College Republicans would have worked with a pro-Israel campus group, said Avila. “Now, they’re very isolationist or hesitant to be seen working with us.”

As an ideological battle plays out in the Republican Party over whether America should adopt an engaged approach to global affairs or take a more restrained one, a new National Security Strategy authored by the Trump administration offers a clear-cut answer — presenting America as deeply engaged, so long as the policies adopted by Washington are deemed to put “America First” by President Donald Trump. 

Trump has no qualms about using unusual strategies to achieve his national security aims (what the 29-page document refers to as his “unconventional diplomacy”), but the strategy paints a picture of a president who is intently focused on his global legacy and on shoring up his image as “the president of peace.” 

“For a country whose interests are as numerous and diverse as ours, rigid adherence to non-interventionism is not possible,” the strategy states. “Yet this predisposition should set a high bar for what constitutes a justified intervention.”

The document takes aim at prior American commanders-in-chief, saying such documents authored by past administrations became “bloated and unfocused” by focusing on the entire world. “Not every country, region, issue, or cause — however worthy — can be the focus of American strategy. The purpose of foreign policy is the protection of core national interests; that is the sole focus of this strategy,” the document asserts.

The president abhors the use of traditional foreign policy language to try to categorize his approach, the strategy makes clear: “President Trump’s foreign policy is pragmatic without being ‘pragmatist,’ realistic without being ‘realist,’ principled without being ‘idealistic,’ muscular without being ‘hawkish’ and restrained without being ‘dovish.’ It is not grounded in traditional, political ideology. It is motivated above all by what works for America — or, in two words, ‘America First,’” according to the document. 

Yet what is clear from the strategy is that Trump remains captivated by the world’s challenges and believes he can help remedy them. In a letter introducing the strategy, Trump writes that he has achieved a historically “dramatic … turnaround” on matters of foreign affairs. 

Border security is a key focus — he touts his restoration of “the sovereign borders of the United States” and the deployment of the military “to stop the invasion of our country” — alongside culture war issues, with Trump saying the U.S. has rid the military of “radical gender ideology and woke lunacy.” He names the global conflicts he has played a role in helping to resolve, including “ending the war in Gaza with all living hostages returned to their family” and “obliterat[ing] Iran’s nuclear enrichment capacity” when America bombed Iran’s nuclear sites in June.

Trump’s key goal in the Middle East appears to be to keep Iran in check, though Iran is only mentioned three times in the report. In the first national security strategy of Trump’s first term, in 2017, Iran was mentioned 17 times. 

“We want to prevent an adversarial power from dominating the Middle East, its oil and gas supplies and the chokepoints through which they pass while avoiding the ‘forever wars’ that bogged us down in that region at great cost,” the strategy states, without naming a particular adversarial power. 

America historically prioritized the Middle East because of its dominant role in supplying energy, its position as “a prime theater of superpower competition” and seemingly needless conflict, the strategy states. The Trump administration argues the energy question takes less priority, with America now a net energy exporter; and that superpower competition has faded, with America in “the most enviable position, reinforced by President Trump’s successful revitalization of our alliances in the Gulf, with other Arab partners and with Israel.”

Conflict, the strategy asserts, “remains the Middle East’s most troublesome dynamic.” But it argues that Iran, “the region’s chief destabilizing force,” was “greatly weakened” by Israel’s actions after the Oct. 7 attacks two years ago and by U.S. involvement in the June war. 

Trump visited Saudi Arabia in May, the first major international trip of his second term, and he recently welcomed Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to Washington. Both of these meetings were focused on investment and building economic ties between the U.S. and Gulf nations. The national security strategy makes clear that this is a core goal for Trump.

“The region will increasingly become a source and destination of international investment, and in industries well beyond oil and gas,” the strategy states. “We can also work with Middle East partners to advance other economic interests, from securing supply chains to bolstering opportunities to develop friendly and open markets in other parts of the world such as Africa.” 

The Trump administration praised partners in the Middle East for combating radicalism, but also said the U.S. will no longer try to goad Gulf nations into democracy.

Continuing to fight radicalism in the region “will require dropping America’s misguided experiment with hectoring these nations — especially the Gulf monarchies — into abandoning their traditions and historic forms of government,” the strategy states. That pledge marks a significant shift from the Biden administration’s approach, which called for strengthening democracy around the world. The word “democracy” appears just three times in Trump’s national security strategy, and not as a goal of American foreign policy. 

The White House said expanding the Abraham Accords will remain a policy priority. Other “core interests” include maintaining the security of Gulf energy supplies, ensuring that terrorism cannot be allowed to grow and reach the U.S. and “that Israel must remain secure.”

“But the days in which the Middle East dominated American foreign policy in both long-term planning and day-to-day execution are thankfully over,” the strategy asserts, “not because the Middle East no longer matters, but because it is no longer the constant irritant, and potential source of imminent catastrophe, that it once was. It is rather emerging as a place of partnership, friendship, and investment — a trend that should be welcomed and encouraged.”

President Donald Trump on Wednesday rebuked Republican isolationists who have argued it’s not necessary to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, dismissing them as not being his true supporters.

“My supporters are for me. My supporters are America First and Make America Great Again,” Trump said from the Oval Office, in response to a question about the foreign policy debates between hawks and isolationists in the GOP base. “My supporters don’t want to see Iran have a nuclear weapon. … Very simple: If they think it’s OK for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, then they should oppose me.”

The president said he believes Iran would use a nuclear weapon if it had one.

“I don’t want to get involved either, but I’ve been saying for 20 years, maybe longer, that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon,” Trump said. “I’ve been saying it for a long time, and I think they were a few weeks away from having one.”

He highlighted apparent logical inconsistencies in isolationists’ position on the issue.

“The problem is they get themselves into a thing: They don’t want them to have nuclear, but then they say, ‘Well, we don’t want to fight,’” Trump said. “Well, you’re going to have to make a choice because it’s possible that you’re going to have to fight for them not to have nuclear.”

Trump softened some of his previous criticism of Tucker Carlson, a prominent voice in isolationist circles whom the president had rebuked earlier this week for railing against U.S. support for Israel. He said that Carlson had called him to apologize.

Trump said he’d pressed Carlson on whether he would accept a nuclear-armed Iran, and said that Carlson “sort of didn’t like that. I said, ‘Well, if it’s OK with you, then you and I do have a difference,’ but it’s really not OK with him.”

“Therefore, you may have to fight and maybe it’ll end, and maybe it’ll end very quickly, but there’s no way that you can allow — whether you have to fight or not — you can have Iran to have a nuclear weapon, because the entire world will blow up,” Trump continued.

Trump said he planned to hold a meeting in the Situation Room on Wednesday afternoon to discuss the situation in the Middle East, but said he would delay a decision on striking Iran as long as possible.

“I like to make the final decision one second before it’s due,” he said. “With war, things change. It can go from one extreme to the other. War is very bad. There was no reason for this to be a war.”

The president said that the United States is the only country with the capabilities to destroy the deeply buried Fordow nuclear facility, but reiterated that he had not yet made the decision to do so.

Trump said that the success of Israel’s operations on their first night of bombing raids last week had made him more willing to consider possible U.S. involvement and strikes.

He also sent somewhat mixed messages on whether he’s open to continued talks with Iran.

“I had a great deal for them. They should have made that deal. Sixty days we talked about it, and in the end they decided not to do it. And now they wish they did it, and they want to meet,” Trump said. “It’s a little late to meet, but they want to meet and they want to come to the White House … so we’ll see. I may do that. It’s a shame, it could have been done the easy way.”

He said that he’s seeking “total complete victory” over Iran, in which it cannot have nuclear weapons.

“Iran was very close to signing what would have been a very good agreement for them and maybe that could still happen, I guess,” he said, adding that Iranian negotiators’ interest in visiting the White House is “a big statement, but it’s very late.”

Trump also noted that it may be difficult for Iranian negotiators to actually leave the country to visit the White House for negotiations.

The latest comments appeared somewhat less aggressive than Trump’s warnings the previous day that the U.S. could assassinate Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Trump today was largely noncommittal on the issue of regime change in Iran saying, “Sure, anything could happen. That? That could happen.”

President Donald Trump dismissed Tucker Carlson at several points on Monday over Carlson’s comments opposing Trump’s support for Israeli strikes on Iran.

Trump, in recent days, has distanced himself from isolationist figures in the party who have condemned the strikes on Iran. Asked Monday at the G7 Summit in Canada about Carlson’s comments accusing Trump of being “complicit” in the war, Trump quipped, “I don’t know what Tucker Carlson is saying. Let him go get a television network and say it so that people listen.”

Trump later posted on his Truth Social platform, “Somebody please explain to kooky Tucker Carlson that, ‘Iran CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON!’”

Over the weekend, Trump had also criticized isolationists in his party,, declaring in an interview, “I think I’m the one that decides” what constitutes America First, adding, “For those people who say they want peace—you can’t have peace if Iran has a nuclear weapon.”

Carlson, who recently called for the U.S. to abandon Israel and to not provide any further funding or weapons, again criticized U.S. support for Israel in an appearance on former Trump advisor Steve Bannon’s show on Monday, and claimed that the administration was following direction from “foreign governments” aiming to enact “regime change” in Iran and who were dictating to the U.S. who its enemies should be.

While arguing that involvement in the conflict was not in the U.S.’ interests, neither Carlson nor Bannon mentioned or acknowledged Iran and its proxy forces’ role in the deaths of Americans across the Middle East in recent decades.