Taibbi had a relevant article just yesterday titled Fire Steve Bannon
In particular, the insight into his call to the American Prospect is interesting. It's easier to buy Bannon's apparent candor in that call as actual candor if he was already out of a job. Taibbi argues that Bannon's condemnation of the Charlottesville protesters was genuine -- because nobody hates vulgar nazis more than a nazi who thinks he's high-class.
Well, no, that's not really accurate; most people do
in fact hate vulgar nazis more than Steve Bannon does. But I buy the premise that he does
hate them. I think he looks at them much the same way Karl Rove looked at "Jesus freaks": a target to pander to during elections, who become an embarrassing nuisance once the election is over. (The big difference being that Karl Rove didn't really share common cause with the Jesus freaks. Bannon absolutely shares common cause with the Illinois Nazis; he just finds them uncouth.)
Taibbi also argues that Bannon clearly had no role in Trump's clumsy Nazi support this past week, because if he had been, it wouldn't have been so fucking clumsy. Bannon's strength was making Trump's racism palatable to enough voters to get him across the finish line.
I can't bring myself to link to the Weekly Standard, but AV Club
quotes an interview he gave there:
I think they’re going to try to moderate him,” he said of “West Wing Democrats” and establishment Republicans. “I think he’ll sign a clean debt ceiling, I think you’ll see all this stuff. His natural tendency—and I think you saw it this week on Charlottesville—his actual default position is the position of his base, the position that got him elected. I think you’re going to see a lot of constraints on that. I think it’ll be much more conventional.”