Sure, he hated the Pharisees. They were Roman lackeys. But, seriously, to survive they needed to strip as much as they could of anti-Roman sentiment from the oral history. Which they did.
The problem is that Josephus has been pretty throughly discredited as a source for anything on Jesus (the dude from the gospels) the stuff in his writings, according to most experts, was added later. In fact, as it stands now, there appear to be no non gospel writings from the period that confirm Jesus ever existed, let alone what his political and social leanings were.
So we can really only use the biblical texts to discuss the biblical Jesus (which has its own set of contradictions). Within that context, Jesus was purely a spiritual leader. At one point the Jews wanted to make him king, but he escaped. The biblical Jesus was not a political revolutionary.
I just did a check and I am absolutely not seeing that, Rat. If it was something most experts were saying, about a million articles would be popping and and I've not seen so much as one.
Regardless, there are other contemporary texts to discuss the social and political context of the era though, among them the Dead Sea Scrolls. Like I said, they back up the social and political context, and you can't discount them at the very least in that regard.