reSee.it - Related Post Feed
reSee.it AI Summary
Biden blames Elon for misinformation, but let's not forget the US Government and media's role in spreading major lies. Twitter exposed government lies on topics like Covid origins, Hunter Biden's laptop, Ukraine's war, and Russian influence in US elections. The Biden administration denies the truth, while acknowledging the difficulty of verifying online information.
@MarioNawfal - Mario Nawfal
BIDEN BLAMES ELON/𝕏 FOR MISINFORMATION The audacity to make such a claim, when the U.S Government and the media were behind some of this decade’s biggest lies. Remember the Twitter Files? Gov Lies Exposed by X: - Covid did not leak from a lab in Wuhan - Hunter Biden’s laptop does not exist - Ukraine is easily winning the war - Russia influenced U.S elections And guess who exposed those lies? Twitter/𝕏, after @elonmusk takeover The Biden administration is living in denial "They, they, they, they, they go online, they go, and you have no notion whether it's true or not” - Biden
Video Transcript AI Summary
Elon Musk's influence on Twitter and the loosening of guardrails against misinformation is seen as a contributing factor to the spread of false information. The speaker highlights the significant changes brought about by technology throughout history, from the Gutenberg printing press to the present day. With the internet being the primary source of news for many, the speaker emphasizes the lack of certainty regarding the truthfulness of online information.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What about what Elon Musk has done to Twitter, lowering guardrails against misinformation? Does that contribute to it? Yeah, it does. Look, one of the things as I said to you, when I thought I wasn't gonna run, I was gonna write a book about the changes taking place. And most of this directed over the years with these fundamental changes in society by changing technology.
Gutenberg printing and the printing press changed the way Europeans could talk to one another, all the way to today. Where where do people get their news? They they could they, you know, they go on the Internet. They they they they go online. They go.
And you have no notion whether it's true or not.
reSee.it AI Summary
The author questions if he has any shame left, as he accuses him of concealing his son's Ukraine dealings, manipulating job data, distorting inflation figures, and downplaying the national debt. The author suggests sharing a video with Biden to counter his alleged misinformation.
@shaikmasood40 - Effendi
Has he forgotten the multitude of lies he has fed the nation over the past 30 years? From concealing his son's business dealings in Ukraine to manipulating job data, from distorting inflation figures to downplaying the national debt. Does he have any sense of shame left when he points fingers at Musk for spreading misinformation? If not, send this video to Biden. 𝕏 is not like mainstream media, he’s all lies will be exposed
Video Transcript AI Summary
Joseph Biden faced controversy when it was discovered that he used phrases from British Labor Party leader Neil Kinnock without giving credit. He also failed to attribute quotes from Robert Kennedy, John Kennedy, and Hubert Humphrey. Biden admitted to committing unintentional plagiarism in law school, quoting someone else's work without proper citation. Critics argue that if Biden's words and visions belong to others, it is false advertising. Biden's reputation has been damaged, and he is seen as someone who imitates rather than communicates effectively. Questions have also arisen about his academic achievements, with discrepancies in his claims about his law school ranking and degrees. Biden's chances of recovery seem slim unless he performs well in the Iowa caucus.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Kennedy Joseph Biden today faces a controversy 3 weeks ago at a debate at the Iowa state fair. He used phrases identical to those delivered by British Labor Party leader Neil Kinnock.
Speaker 1: Biden seems to be claiming Kinnock's vision and wife as his own. Why is it that my wife Sitting out there in the audience is the 1st in her family to ever go to college.
Speaker 2: Why is Gladys the 1st woman in her family In a 1000 generations to be able to get the university.
Speaker 3: My ancestors who worked in
Speaker 1: the coal mines in northeast Pennsylvania don't come up after 12 hours and play football.
Speaker 2: 8 I was on the ground and then come up
Speaker 1: and play football. It's because they didn't have a platform upon which to stand. There was no Platform upon which they could stand. The notion that every thought or notion or idea you have to go back and find and attribute to someone, I think, is quite frankly, ludicrous.
Speaker 4: The problem here is that senator Biden told his audience he'd just been thinking about these things and he failed to give any credit at all To his famous British speechwriter.
Speaker 1: You know, I was thinking on the way over here. Now that's a little too much because as you point out, What's behind the words? What's there?
Speaker 5: And a lot of people that wrap
Speaker 1: on Biden has always been at the chest of surface.
Speaker 3: I should have said to paraphrase Neil Kinnick,
Speaker 1: It's the only time I didn't in all the times I've ever used it.
Speaker 6: But CBS News found a tape of a second instance.
Speaker 1: It reappeared in the New York Times with a new charge that Biden had appropriated a famous litany from the late Robert Kennedy about what the gross national product cannot measure. Cannot measure the health of our children. The health of our children. The quality of our education. The quality of their education.
Speaker 3: The joy of their play.
Speaker 1: For the joy of their play.
Speaker 4: Biden gave Kennedy no credit. He's also quoted or paraphrased John Kennedy, Hubert Humphrey, And British Labor Party leader, Neil Kinnock, all without credit.
Speaker 6: Joseph Biden admitted today that he committed plagiarism when he was in law school. He said was a mistake, but that it was unintentional.
Speaker 4: He quoted 5 pages of someone else's work without proper citation.
Speaker 1: I've done some dumb things, Now do dumb things again. He was given an f. Ladies and gentlemen, I've been dumb.
Speaker 4: To the political community in Washington, it all seems of a piece. Plagiarism at law school, plagiarism on the stump.
Speaker 1: The great communicator. Strike that. The great imitator.
Speaker 5: You don't steal verbatim, or when you do as he did 99% of the time, you give credit.
Speaker 4: Biden's critics say he sells himself as a man whose words and visions can inspire a new generation in politics. But if the thoughts, phrases, and visions really belong to others, it's a form of false Advertising.
Speaker 5: Is it a wise idea though, to take something that personal anyway from another politician and try and appropriate it to your own campaign?
Speaker 1: I think it was a stupid thing to, appropriate, material that was really very personal. That was someone else's.
Speaker 6: Most people didn't know who he was. You know, Joe Biden, and now they're gonna to say, oh yeah, he's the guy who plagiarized politically. That's devastating. These clips are devastating. He looks like a Joe Biden wind up doll with somebody else's words coming
Speaker 4: out. If they are going to do things that are stupid as well as immoral. Then they're probably too dumb now. The job of president.
Speaker 5: The voters are going to have to decide whether he was dishonest or dumb.
Speaker 7: Senator Joseph Biden may have more Splaining to do.
Speaker 5: The new questions stem from taped remarks to Biden during an April campaign appearance in New Hampshire.
Speaker 3: I went to law school on a full academic scholarship. The only one in my in my class, to have a full academic scholarship, went back to law school, and in fact, it up in the top half of my class. I was the outstanding student in the political science department at the end of my year. I graduated with 3 degrees from undergraduate school in 165 credits only need 123 credits. Biden now concedes he
Speaker 8: did not graduate in the top half of his law school class, that he does not have 3 degrees from college, And that he was not named outstanding political science student in college.
Speaker 7: Newsweek says Biden actually went to school on a half scholarship ended up near the bottom of his class. And one only 1 degree, not 3.
Speaker 1: Joe Biden ranked 76th in the class of 85 at the university of Syracuse law school. I mean, this guy comes off this whole thing as a flyweight. Now Biden says Newsweek is right. His memory had failed on
Speaker 3: and I'd be delighted to sit down and compare my IQ to yours. If you'd like Joe Biden was victimized by the truth.
Speaker 6: Bye bye Biden. He may not know it yet, but I think this is very difficult to be very difficult for him to recover.
Speaker 1: Is Joe Biden Yes or no. Bob terminal condition terminal.
Speaker 6: Yes. Unless he comes in 3rd in Iowa.
Speaker 1: More time dying. I say dead will
reSee.it AI Summary
The conversation highlights doubts about the media's credibility regarding Ukraine's counteroffensive. @DavidSacks questions the media's misleading information, and @elonmusk wonders why the public was consistently deceived, possibly with government involvement. @TheChiefNerd suggests that the media relied on talking points from intelligence agencies.
@DavidSacks - David Sacks
Another remarkable confessional by the MSM in which we learn that everything we were told over the last 5 months about Ukraine making progress in its Counteroffensive was a lie.
@elonmusk - Elon Musk
@DavidSacks The question that I have is why did the media lie to the public so regularly and consistently, aided and abetted by many arms of our government?
@TheChiefNerd - Chief Nerd
@elonmusk @DavidSacks They were just reading the talking points from the intel agencies.
@_BlakeHabyan - Blake
@TuckerCarlson What are your thoughts?
@KimDotcom - Kim Dotcom
Tucker Carlson is in Moscow to interview Vladimir Putin. Uncensored on X. The US deep state and the Biden administration must be in panic mode because Putin (the most censored man in the West) will expose their propaganda and lies. https://t.co/OXq9j8O3GX
@LukaszukAB - Thomas A. Lukaszuk
.@ABDanielleSmith since you and Tucker Carlson simultaneously pushed identical narrative on Covid, Russia’s #Ukraine invasion, LGBTQ & paren rights, and now he flies from your visit to Moscow to meet Putin, comment may be in order? #ableg #cdnpoli https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/10/10/why-russia-embraces-tucker-carlson-a82715
Why Russia Embraces Tucker Carlson - The Moscow Times
Opinion | When Russian state media scrambled to build a narrative to justify Moscow’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, they received what must have felt like a gift.
themoscowtimes.com
@TaraBull808 - TaraBull
Ex-Congressman Adam Kinzinger says Tucker Carlson is a traitor. Bill Kristol says Tucker shouldn't be allowed to return to the U.S. They praised Barbara Walters, so why are they so afraid of this interview with Putin? https://t.co/ggSExqlGdg
@TaraBull808 - TaraBull
Tucker Carlson is currently in Moscow, Russia to interview Vladamir Putin and the media is in panic mode. They're losing control of the narrative. https://t.co/AgnezZ8Xx3
@TaraBull808 - TaraBull
The U.S. government spied on Tucker Carlson to stop him from interviewing Vladamir Putin. https://t.co/6VTQpJhBUf
Video Transcript AI Summary
I was surprised to learn that someone had hacked into my Signal account. It turns out it was the NSA, as they admitted it when they contacted me. They knew about my plans to visit Putin, which I hadn't shared with anyone, not even my family. When I asked how they knew, they explained that they had accessed my text messages with the person I was communicating with. I was shocked by this invasion of privacy.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Say broke into my signal account, which I didn't know they could do. How do how do you know the NSA broke into your signal? Because they admitted it. I got a call from somebody in Washington. It's like, are you planning a trip to go see Putin?
And I was like, how would you know that? I haven't told any I mean, anybody. Not my brother, not my wife, nobody. How would you know that? Because NSA pulled your text with this other person you were texting.
How did you know?
reSee.it AI Summary
Tucker Carlson accuses the Biden administration of illegally spying on him and claims that he is interviewing Putin due to media lies. He believes that English-speaking countries are unaware of the truth because of corrupt media outlets. Carlson also alleges that the administration leaked his text messages to hinder a previous Putin interview. Despite potential interference, he emphasizes that their trip to Moscow is self-funded and driven by a desire to protect the United States' prosperity and freedom. Carlson encourages people to seek uncontrolled information and think independently.
@CollinRugg - Collin Rugg
JUST IN: Tucker Carlson says the Biden administration illegally spied on him and says he is interviewing Putin because the media is lying to the American people about what's really going on. 🔥🔥🔥 "[English speaking countries] think that nothing has really changed and they think that because no one has told them the truth. Their media outlets are corrupt." "Three years ago, the Biden administration illegally spied on our text messages and then leaked the contents to their servants in the news media." "They did this in order to stop a Putin interview that we were planning last month. We're pretty certain they did exactly the same thing once again, but this time we came to Moscow anyway." "We are not here because we love Vladimir Putin. We are here because we love the United States and we want it to remain prosperous and free. We paid for this trip ourselves." "They're afraid of information they can't control, but you have no reason to be afraid of it... You should know as much as you can and then think like a free citizen and not a slave. You can decide for yourself." Legendary.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker highlights the lack of awareness in English-speaking countries about significant global developments, contrasting it with the awareness in Asia and the Middle East. They criticize the corrupt and biased media outlets in these countries, particularly in the US, for promoting government propaganda instead of journalism. The speaker emphasizes the importance of understanding the conflict in Ukraine and criticizes the lack of interviews with Vladimir Putin. They assert the right to freedom of speech and accuse the Biden administration of spying and leaking information to prevent a planned Putin interview. The speaker assures that their trip to Moscow was self-funded and encourages viewers to watch the unedited interview on their website. They anticipate censorship from Western governments but urge viewers to make their own informed decisions.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: They are history altering developments. They will define the lives of our grandchildren. Most of the world understands this perfectly well. They can see it. Ask anyone in Asia or the Middle East what the future looks like.
And yet, the populations of the English speaking countries seem mostly unaware. They think that is nothing has really changed, and they think that because no one has told them the truth. Their media outlets are corrupt. They lie to their readers and viewers, and they do that mostly by omission. For example, since the day the war in Ukraine began, American media outlets have spoken to scores of people from Ukraine, and they have done scores of interviews with Ukrainian president Zelensky.
We ourselves have put in a request for interview with Zelensky, and we hope he accepts. But, the interviews he's already done in the United States are not traditional interviews. They are fawning pep Sessions, specifically designed to amplify Zelensky's demand that the US enter more deeply into a war in Eastern Europe and pay for it. That is not journalism. It is government propaganda.
Propaganda of the ugliest kind. The kind that kills people. At the same time, our politicians and media outlets have been doing this, promoting a foreign leader like he's a new consumer brand, Not a single Western journalist has bothered to interview the president of the other country involved in this conflict, Vladimir Putin. Most Americans have no idea why Putin invaded Ukraine, or what his goals are now. They've never heard his voice.
That's wrong. Americans have a right to know all they can about a war they're implicated in, and we have the right to tell them about it, because we are Americans too. Freedom of speech is our birthright. We were born with the right to say what we believe. That right cannot be taken away no matter who is in the White House, but they're trying anyway.
Almost 3 years ago, the Biden administration illegally spied on our text messages and then leaked the contents to their servants in the news media. They did this in order to stop a Putin interview that we were planning. Last month, we're pretty certain they did exactly the same thing once again, but this time, we came to Moscow anyway. We are not here because we love Vladimir Putin. We are here because we love the United States, but we wanted to remain prosperous and free.
We paid for this trip ourselves. We took no money from any government or group, nor are we charging people to see the interview. It is not behind a paywall. Anyone can watch the entire thing shot live to tape and unedited on our website, tucker carlson.com. Elon Musk, his great credit, has promised not to suppress or block this interview once we post it on his platform x, and we're grateful for that.
Western governments, by contrast, will certainly do their best to censor this video on other less principle platforms because That's what they do. They were afraid of information they can't control, but you have no reason to be afraid of it. We are not encouraging you to agree with what Putin may say in this interview, but we are urging you to watch it. You should know as much as you can, and then Like a free citizen and not a slave, you can decide for yourself. Thanks.
reSee.it AI Summary
Can you comment on colleagues calling Tucker Carlson a "traitor" for interviewing Putin?
@csharpner - American
@KeirSimmons can you comment on your colleagues trying to call your other colleague, @TuckerCarlson a "traitor" for interviewing Putin? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6pJd6O_NT0
@csharpner - American
@KeirSimmons @TuckerCarlson @charlierose can you comment on your colleagues trying to call your other colleague, @TuckerCarlson a "traitor" for interviewing Putin? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6l69tRETnlo
@csharpner - American
@KeirSimmons @TuckerCarlson @charlierose @_HadleyGamble @HADLEYGAMBLE can you comment on your colleagues trying to call your other colleague, @TuckerCarlson a "traitor" for interviewing Putin? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLzejY5zV5U
@csharpner - American
@KeirSimmons @TuckerCarlson @charlierose @_HadleyGamble @HADLEYGAMBLE @NBCNews can you comment on your colleagues trying to call your other colleague, @TuckerCarlson a "traitor" for interviewing Putin? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzJSP99a4T4
@csharpner - American
@KeirSimmons @TuckerCarlson @charlierose @_HadleyGamble @HADLEYGAMBLE @NBCNews @RogerJStoneJr can you comment on the left wing reporters calling @TuckerCarlson a "traitor" for interviewing Putin? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDP7ik2wBzs
reSee.it AI Summary
Tucker Carlson has been accused of spreading numerous lies and misinformation over the years. Examples include falsely claiming to be the only journalist trying to interview Putin, blaming windmills for the Texas electrical grid collapse, spreading false conspiracy theories, and promoting debunked claims about COVID-19 and the vaccine. There are also allegations of his close ties to Hunter Biden, his association with a racist writer, and his defamation of individuals like Ray Epps. Additionally, leaked text messages suggest that Carlson privately acknowledged there was not enough fraud to change the outcome of the 2020 election, despite promoting the opposite view on air. Carlson's focus on shaping right-wing narratives and his disregard for facts have been criticized.
@dartagnank - Xanderman 🇺🇲 🇧🇷
#TuckerCarlson #RésuméofLies #PutinAsset #Receipts These are some of the more egregious lies from Tucker over the years. And I might as well start off with the most recent example when Tucker pretends he is being a courageous person for trying to interview Putin, insisting no one else had the guts to try it. In fact, real journalists all around the world have been trying to get an interview with Putin. This remark was so dishonest that even the Kremlin had to fact check him. What does it say about your credibility when your BS is too much even for the Kremlin😆 - tinyurl.com/mss6vb97 Fun Fact: Tucker Carlson was Hunter Biden's next door neighbor and close friend for years. Something he never really disclosed to any of his listeners while at FOX. At one point Tucker and his wife begged Hunter to use some of his "Biden influence" to help get their son into Georgetown. - tinyurl.com/vw8vavur (But even with Hunter's letter, their kid was too stupid for Georgetown and he didn't get in. - tinyurl.com/yc2y8wka ) When the Texas electrical grid collapsed during a winter freeze, Carlson immediately blamed windmills. He falsely claimed the state had "become totally reliant on windmills." This was quickly debunked and Tucker could have easily avoided embarrassment on this matter had he simply looked into it. But as it is with most fake news pundits, he heard something on social media and ran with it as "breaking news." Tucker Carlson spread false homophobic conspiracy regarding the attack on Paul Pelosi -tinyurl.com/3tfffmpj Tucker Carlson lies about John Hopkins "admitting that lockdowns didn't actually work." -tinyurl.com/29rmt92p Tucker Carlson deceptively edited a Twitter clip to make false claims about racial preferences in COVID-19 treatment -tinyurl.com/52xmz58m Tucker Carlson spread a well debunked claim about covid-19 deaths -tinyurl.com/3r8ezxbp During the pandemic Tucker was using dubious data from VAERS, an unverified database for "vaccine incident reports" that anyone can submit to, to claim the COVID-19 vaccine campaign is the deadliest vaccination campaign in US history. FOX and Russian media have an incestuous affair as the Russians promote Tucker Carlson as a truth teller while he attacks Ukraine and defends Russia. -tinyurl.com/5aknvnc6 Tucker Carlson's texts with Alex Jones reveal he knew the severity of the virus and tried to warn Trump about taking it seriously, but when Trump chose not to, Tucker decided to follow Trump's lead and downplay it as well. -tinyurl.com/y4sw5hkp Tucker Carlson's close friend who was responsible for writing most of the material for his shows, was exposed after racist social media posts and he immediately resigned. The fact that a Neo-Nazi was writing the content for Tucker Carlson's nightly shows isn't really surprising given the constant "White Man's Plight" themes that dominated his segments -tinyurl.com/34n2djbx Tucker Carlson frequently reported to his audiences that Ray Epps was an undercover Fed who helped stage the Jan 6th attack to make MAGA folks look bad. Ray Epps is actually a Conservative Trump voter and was a fan of Tucker Carlson! He is now in hiding because of the death threats against him after Carlson defamed him. He is also demanding a retraction from FOX's repeated lies about him. -tinyurl.com/ez7arp5n During the 2020 election, Tucker Carlson falsely claimed three people voted in Georgia even though they were dead. CNN quickly debunked this when it interviewed one of the voters he alluded to. Tucker was forced to go on air and apologize, although he only apologized for lying about one of the three, insisting the other two were actually dead. CNN then subsequently found out that those two voters were also alive, and Tucker never did his minimal research to see if perhaps there were multiple voters in the same district with the some exact name. Carlson initially spent several nights dedicated to these false claims, but he dedicated only 8 seconds apologizing for getting it wrong about one. He never acknowledged being wrong about the other two, giving his audience the impression that while he was wrong about one example, his overall argument about dead voters remained strong. A legal filing from the Dominion lawsuit unveiled text messages from Tucker Carlson that produced the stunning revelation that Carlson never believed there was voter fraud that threw the election to Biden. And yet, he still promoted those view anyway. Carlson wrote privately that Trump needed to concede the election, agreeing that "there wasn't enough fraud to change the outcome" of the 2020 election. Then on November 21, Carlson said that it was "shockingly reckless" to claim that Dominion rigged the election When FOX News journalist Jacqui Heinrich tweeted that "top election infrastructure officials" had found there to be "no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised," Tucker Carlson was livid that she was doing her job by reporting facts that undermined the FOX narrative of election fraud. So he immediately requested that Sean Hannity have her terminated for doing her job: "Please get her fired. Seriously...What the fuck? I'm actually shocked....It needs to stop immediately, like tonight. It's measurably hurting the company. The stock price is down. Not a joke." Tucker Carlson was never interested in reporting facts, he was only interested in shaping Right Wing narratives that benefit his ideology. And he also made it clear that lying and deceiving his audience was necessary for his personal wealth to increase. Prior to his termination at FOX, Carlson falsely claimed U.S. troops were actually fighting in Ukraine. "As we speak American soldiers are fighting Russian soldiers." This lie was quickly corrected Jacqui Heinrich, one of the few real journalists working at FOX, and the same woman Tucker wanted fired for reporting the facts. Former FOX reporter Carl Cameron explains why Tucker Carlson lies about vaccines -tinyurl.com/muten9va
reSee.it AI Summary
The state propaganda media is fearful of Tucker's interview with Putin, as evident in their voices. They are afraid of losing control of the narrative. This is the same media that criticized Tucker for interviewing Putin. These journalists were involved in peddling Russian disinformation and sowing chaos in our elections.
@kylenabecker - Kyle Becker
The state propaganda media is terrified of Tucker's interview with Vladimir Putin. You can hear it in their voices. They are truly afraid of losing control of the narrative. https://t.co/O88aNLijP0
Video Transcript AI Summary
Tucker Carlson, a right-wing media figure, is in Moscow to interview Vladimir Putin. Critics argue that Carlson is not a journalist and instead spreads misinformation on behalf of the Kremlin. They believe his work is biased and not aligned with the facts. Some compare his interview with Putin to watching a scandalous show. Furthermore, there is concern that the Republican Party, including Donald Trump, is doing Putin's bidding. Although some see this as Republicans supporting Putin, others believe they are actually supporting Trump, who in turn supports Putin.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Am I
Speaker 1: allowed to say his name?
Speaker 2: Yes. Yes. I'm just
Speaker 1: His name is Tucker Carlson, and he is the only American journalist who has been able to interview Putin since the invasion in 2022. Tucker Carlson is not a journalist, not even close. He kind of just walks right into Moscow And presents himself on a silver silver platter to the Kremlin, doing the Kremlin's job of misinforming, disinforming the American population.
Speaker 3: His explanation of why he's doing it, that he's a journalist and he needs to inform people, he can call himself whatever he wants. I think, his work is demonstrable as not being just about giving people information. He has a point of view and often it's It's not aligned with the facts.
Speaker 0: Putin talks to an American friend. The Russian president turning to right wing conspiracy theorist Tucker Carlson. And it comes as Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson, a leading voice of the right wing disinformation campaign is in Moscow. Ironically, he is there in the name of keeping Americans informed, sitting down for an interview with Vladimir Putin.
Speaker 3: Tucker Carlson is neither a journalist, nor a reporter, but he has played one on TV.
Speaker 4: Tucker Carlson still doesn't have a job. He's in Moscow house hunting, I hope. But, no, actually, Tucker is there to interview Vladimir Putin, which is so overtly ridiculous. Tucker Carlson interviewing Vladimir Putin, may not be, mean much to you, but for Trump, this is like watching OnlyFans. This is insane.
I
Speaker 3: You've seen sharp relief A Republican party that is now doing Vladimir Putin's bidding. Donald Trump always did. Yeah. And somebody that we know, that we used to know, going over, doing Vladimir Putin's bidding.
Speaker 2: It was striking again yesterday To see Republicans across the board, and maybe some of them are doing Vladimir Putin's bidding, but really they're doing Donald Trump's bidding, which is Vladimir Putin's bidding.
@kylenabecker - Kyle Becker
Same vibes: https://t.co/JLAtIUL6vI
@kylenabecker - Kyle Becker
These are the same "journalists" aka "useful idiots" who did Putin's bidding by peddling Russian disinformation in the Clinton Dossier and sowing chaos in our elections https://t.co/B6ZdZ2iCxt
@CitizenFreePres - Citizen Free Press
Tucker Carlson on X Ep. 74 just dropped: "The Ukrainian government canceled elections and killed an American journalist. Congress is about send them another $60 billion. J.D. Vance is trying to stop it." https://t.co/Wb2sRYuiwZ
Video Transcript AI Summary
Ukraine cannot win its war against Russia, even with extensive Western support. The ongoing conflict is leading to significant loss of life and economic degradation. Recently, the U.S. Senate proposed sending another $60 billion to Ukraine, despite its corrupt government and ongoing issues. There is a critical procedural vote that could potentially kill this legislation, and efforts are being made to sway Republican senators against it. This funding not only supports Ukraine in 2024 but also ties future presidential decisions, limiting diplomatic options. Many senators seem to believe prolonging the war serves Ukraine's interests, but this perspective overlooks the devastating impact on the Ukrainian population and distracts from pressing domestic issues.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: It became very clear to anyone paying attention several months ago that Ukraine cannot win its war against Russia. The Ukrainian military will not be able, even with western backing 100 of 1,000,000,000 of dollars of it, to expel the Russian military from parts of Eastern Ukraine. Ukraine doesn't have the industrial capacity, neither does NATO or the United States, and it doesn't have the people. Russia has a 100,000,000 more in population than Ukraine does. And that means that further support from the West for the Ukrainian military only means more dead Ukrainians and a further degraded Western economy in the US and in Germany, particularly.
So it's not simply a fool's errand. It's self destruction. It's insane. It's cruel. It's abetting the killing of an entire generation of Ukrainians.
This is very obvious. No honest person at this point will deny it. And yet somehow the United States Senate, which is always several years behind reality and its perception just a few weeks ago decided to send another $60,000,000,000 to the Ukrainian government, which is both corrupt and authoritarian. They've canceled elections. They banned an entire Christian denomination, and then they killed an American journalist for noting any of this.
And yet, the United States Senate proposed under Mitch McConnell a plan to send another $60,000,000,000 to Ukraine. Well, imagine the surprise. Well, all rational people around the world to wake up this morning and discover this could actually happen. And so with that in mind, we thought it'd be worth talking to one of the very few Republican senators who's bothered to make the counter case, and that would be JD Vance of Ohio who joins us now from the United States. Senator, thanks so much for coming on.
If you wouldn't mind telling us where this legislation is right now, what you expect to happen, and what you think should happen.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Tucker. So there are 2 big things that will happen here. So tonight, we will clear a major procedural vote or we won't. So this is really the best opportunity tonight to kill this legislation. Encourage everybody to do everything that they can, contact everyone they can to ensure that we actually do kill the legislation.
It is very close. The Democrats have banded together with 17 Republicans. We only need 8 of those Republicans to flip their vote to kill this thing, and I think that we'll get at least 1, who will in fact flip their votes. So that that that's where it sits in the Senate. The second thing and frankly, the best opportunity we have to kill this is in the house, and that's part of what I'm trying to do is notify people about how bad this legislation is, so that after it clears the Senate, if it does, then it goes to the House and the House has a real opportunity to at least make it better, but hopefully kill it.
And I I wanna say just just a couple of things here, Tucker, that are extremely important to know about this legislation. Number 1, is that it sends $61,000,000,000 to Ukraine to fund, as you said, a hopeless war in Eastern Europe that will decimate the Ukrainian population even more than it's already been decimated. So it's a terrible terrible piece of legislation on the policy. The second thing I wanna say, Tucker, though, is that it doesn't just fund Ukraine in 2024, and this is the most important point. It actually funds Ukraine in 25 and 26.
Now, what's the problem with that? Say, for example, that we have a new president in 2025, that president would be handcuffed by the promises that we are making in law to Ukraine today. If you go back to to 2019, Tucker, to sort of give you a sense of why this matters. In 2019, the US House impeached then President Donald Trump on the theory that they had appropriated money to Ukraine and Donald Trump refused to send it to Ukraine. So if Trump is elected President again and become President on January of 2025, he will conduct diplomacy and if that diplomacy does not include sending additional 1,000,000,000 to Ukraine, there is a theoretical argument, a predicate, if you will, for impeaching Donald Trump because they have tried to tie his hands.
And the final point I'll make on this, Tucker, is that the Washington Post has already has already said, based on leaks from inside the intel community, the purpose of this legislation is to tie a future President Trump's hands. We're not just sending 1,000,000,000 to Ukraine in 2024, we're trying to make it impossible for the next president to conduct diplomacy on his terms. It's anti democratic and it will lead to endless war in the all over the world.
Speaker 0: So the political calculation behind this seems incredibly dark, so does the humanitarian effect. I noticed that no one on Capitol Hill seems interested in finding out how many have died in this war. Reliable estimates in the area, these are not partisan, are that about 400,000 Ukrainians have died. That's about as many Americans has died in the entire second World War over the entire duration, and it's, of course, a much smaller country. So how do senators, Republican senators, get away with saying we're doing this on behalf of Ukrainian people, on behalf of democracy when it's destroying an entire generation and it's not a democracy?
Like, what's the thinking here?
Speaker 1: Well, Tucker, they bought into the propaganda that what is in the best interest of Ukraine is to prolong this war. And so Zelensky comes to Washington. You know, he's tougher than a lot of them are, and I think they get, you know, a a little bit of excitement from that. And Zelensky tells them a story that his war is in the best interest of the whole of Ukraine. Now never mind that there are people within Ukraine protesting the draft, never mind that the average age of a soldier there is pushing 45 years old, and never mind that the 650,000 wealthiest Ukrainians left the country at the beginning of the war, they didn't stay and fight.
So the idea that this is unanimously supported by the Ukrainian population is, of course, preposterous and absurd. No one believes it. But but here's here's the really crazy and I and I think ultimately the very cynical thing that's going on, Tucker, is that everyone knows that this war will lead to the destruction of Ukraine. I've had conversations with democratic colleagues where they get this sort of dark look in their eyes and they say, effectively, that they wanna fight Russia to the last Ukrainian drop of blood. I I I think if you really ask these guys, they recognize that this is not in the best interest of Ukraine.
This is fundamentally in the interest of military contractors and people who think that America's most pressing challenge is to defeat the Russians. Of course, that's not a preoccupation that I share. I don't think Russia should have invaded, Tucker, but I also think that we gotta be much more focused on more pressing problems, like the demographic collapse of the United States, like the open borders, and like what's going on in East Asia. So it's a massive campaign, Tucker, to distract people from the real problems in the world and the real problems that exist in this country.
Speaker 0: And underlying it all, as you just said, is is an impulse that's that's indefensible and I think deeply immoral. So I I'm so grateful for you having the courage to talk about this in public, and I and I hope common sense in your position prevails. Senator, JD Vance of Ohio. Thank you. Free speech is bigger than any one person or any one organization.
Societies are defined by what they will not permit. Local blockchain is the total inversion of virtue.
@Breaking911 - Breaking911
Tucker Carlson is ‘un-American’ for interviewing Putin! Meanwhile, CBS News sits down with Hamas terrorists. https://t.co/zpEveJrOXt
Video Transcript AI Summary
A Hamas commander in the West Bank recruits young fighters, justifying violence as reclaiming their land from Israel. Despite casualties, he believes in armed struggle. An Israeli negotiator warns that attacking Hamas only strengthens them, suggesting peace and sharing the land as a solution. The cycle of violence will end when Israelis leave, but Palestinians also deserve freedom and rights for a new beginning.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We met a Hamas commander at an undisclosed location in the West Bank. Are you a wanted man?
Speaker 1: I am. Indeed.
Speaker 0: Calling himself Abu Abed, he joined 9 years ago when he was just 16. Almost half that time was spent in jail. Now he is a Hamas recruiter. Are you seeing more young people joining Hamas here in the West Bank since October 7?
Speaker 1: For sure, all the Palestinian people are standing by Hamas. I give the fighters guidance. When Israeli forces enter, I tell them what to do and how to open fire.
Speaker 0: On October 7th, women and children were murdered.
Speaker 1: We see death every single day. Israel lost what? 1000 or 2000 people killed? That's nothing.
Speaker 0: But it doesn't make it right to kill women and children.
Speaker 1: This is my land. My land. We repeatedly told Israel to get out peacefully, and they refused. So it's only normal that we take it back by force.
Speaker 0: He blindly repeats the blatant lie that no civilians were killed by Hamas on October 7th.
Speaker 1: We don't fight civilians. We have always fought against the army.
Speaker 0: Nor is there remorse for the more than twenty 8,000 Palestinians killed, nearly 2 thirds of them women and children in Israel's bombardment of Gaza. You had to have known that that would have been Israel's response, that Palestinians would suffer as a result. So is there any regret?
Speaker 1: We are not pleased with that, but this is the path of the armed struggle.
Speaker 0: Gershon Baskin is a veteran Israeli hostage negotiator. He knows Hamas well.
Speaker 2: The more that Israel hits Hamas, the stronger Hamas will grow.
Speaker 0: And as for Netanyahu's repeatedly stated aim of eliminating Hamas
Speaker 2: There is no elimination of Hamas. Israel can defeat Hamas militarily, but the only way you you defeat an idea and an ideology is by providing a better idea and a better ideology.
Speaker 0: Baskin points out that for decades, Palestinians have been living under the boot of Israeli occupation October 7th, but allowing Israelis to believe the state's October 7th, but allowing Israelis to believe the status quo could remain.
Speaker 2: He convinced the Israeli people and the world that Israel can occupy another people for 56 years and expect to have peace or lock 2,200,000 people in a territory like Gaza with 80% poverty and expect to have quiet. You can't have it all. We gotta share this place.
Speaker 0: So where does this all end? All this killing, all this suffering.
Speaker 1: The killing and the suffering ends when the Israelis walk out of our land. But if they decide to stay, we shall continue to fight. And if I die, somebody else will take my place.
Speaker 0: Basquin told us he finds it hard to believe Hamas will continue to run Gaza after the war, but asked the same question, where it all ends, when Palestinians are also seen as people with hopes and dreams.
Speaker 2: They're not different from other people. They deserve to live in freedom too. The same right to the same rights. That's the basis of a new beginning. The the same right to the same rights.
@glennbeck - Glenn Beck
When @TuckerCarlson interviewed Vladimir Putin, journalism suddenly became a CRIME in the eyes of other journalists. So, I sat down with Tucker to hear his side of the story. https://t.co/opRfWjMNlW
Video Transcript AI Summary
In this video, Tucker Carlson travels to Moscow to interview Russian President Vladimir Putin, defending the importance of open dialogue and journalists' ability to interview leaders from all sides. He criticizes the mismanagement of American cities, the decline in living standards, and the intentional destruction of the country by its leaders. Carlson highlights the need to prioritize American interests, restore order, and questions the effectiveness of NATO while expressing concerns about the erosion of American sovereignty. The speaker also discusses the power of communication, the need for change in the US, the influence of the media, the Ukraine conflict, and the dangers of the military. They express frustration with politicians and the ruling class, emphasizing the importance of focusing on fundamental issues. The speaker mentions their interview with Putin and their lack of concern for Navalny's death, advocating for independent thinking and prioritizing what truly matters for the country's well-being.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Tucker Carlson just did something that no other western journalist in the world has either been willing or able to do in a very long time. He traveled to Moscow to speak to Russian president Vladimir Putin. And right on track, cue the collective outrage. Tucker Carlson is dangerous. He's a Putin lover.
Will they ban him from coming home? Is the EU sanctioning him? The news was actually kind of hilarious, and it still is. Take any war in history. I don't care with whom or which leader and any journalist worth their salt.
They'd be chomping at the bit to interview the leaders on both sides, but not this one. Why? Why is journalism now a crime to journalists? There's been, something that the media has now forgotten. Maybe the governments have never known it, but it is that open and free dialogue is the foundation for free society.
It is also the foundation that peace can be built upon. Talk with everyone. You don't have to trust them, even like them, but talk to them, understand where they're coming from. It's all very basic. And if anyone currently is criticizing Tucker for interviewing a person who is the leader of the country, we're currently involved with a shadow war, well, maybe you should just ask Tucker, why did you do it?
Why did you go? What did you mean by the showing us the subway and every what did what did you mean by that? What have you learned? And what does it mean all going forward? That's what we're going to do.
We're gonna ask him right now for his first interview back from Russia directly. To Americans, please welcome Tucker Carlson. Before we get to Tucker, sometimes the solutions we seek to fix a problem are easy But when you're living with pain, it isn't the case. It isn't. It doesn't feel that way.
For years, I lived with horrible pain in my hands. I searched up and down for anything that would work. I couldn't do this. It was too painful for me. I I couldn't write with a pencil.
I like to write. I like to do art. I'm a painter. I thought that was all behind me, but the solution was Relief Factor, and I never thought it would work. If you have pain, I want you to try Relief Factor.
It fights pain by fighting inflammation. It's a 100% drug free. It's a supplement. You take it every day as directed. If it if it doesn't work in 3 weeks for you, it's probably not gonna work.
It worked for me. It also has a money back guarantee. What do you have to lose? 19.95. Get their 3 week quick start kit.
Comes with the Relief Factor feel better or your money back guarantee. So give it a try. Relieffactor.com or call 800, the number 4, relief. Our American values are completely under attack. Our financial system is frankly broken.
You need to move quickly and find the safest ways to invest so you can protect yourself and your family from whatever dark thing might lie in the shadows just ahead. That's why I recommend to you that you would protect your hard earned savings with an asset you can trust and that is gold or silver. I made my first gold purchase, I don't know, 20, 25 years ago, after I was listening to Rush Limbaugh talk about Lear Capital. He was they were sponsors of Russia show forever. Today, I look back at the person that sold me that gold at Lear Capital.
It not only has my money more than quadrupled, the person that sold it there is still there. Lear helped me protect and prepare for coming insanity. Do the same now, will you? Just just call them. $3,000,000,000 in trusted transactions, 1,000 of 5 star reviews and 24 hour risk free purchase guarantee.
Lear. Lear Capital. Go there now. They'll count, credit your account $250 towards your purchases because you watch or listen to me. Call 808-89-3070.
800-889-3070. 800-889-3070. Tucker, welcome. How are you?
Speaker 1: Hey, Glenn. I'm great. I get in late last night. I haven't had a haircut as you can see. Yeah.
So pardon my appearance, but I'm I'm, grateful that you asked me. Thanks.
Speaker 0: Well, I I first of all, I just I I just wanna know, I mean, is this going to be a talk show, or are we gonna have a serious conversation? Because I'd like to start with the the history of the Beck family starting at 800 BCE. So
Speaker 1: what did
Speaker 0: you make of Zach. What did you make of that?
Speaker 1: Well, I was enraged because I thought, you know, I didn't go into the interview feeling like I had to, you know, posture morally. You know? The I took a look at the last interview I did with journalist, and the entire interview was the reporter from some dumb news outlet being like, I'm a good person. You're a bad person.
Speaker 0: You know?
Speaker 1: And that I I'm not interested in proving I'm a good person. People can assess. God can assess. You know? I I I just wanted information.
But I was infuriating because I thought he was really pretty straightforward the obvious question, which is why did you do this? Why'd you send troops into Eastern Ukraine? And he goes on this long answer, and so I interrupted him a couple of times. I tried to. It got very snippy.
And then I realized, no. This is the answer. And, you know, he just thinks differently. I've never met him before.
Speaker 0: So wait. Wait. Wait. Wait. So I don't understand I don't understand the story because I had the same question you did at the very end.
So are you saying ancestral homelands should be given back to because that where does that end?
Speaker 1: Well, I don't believe in that anywhere. Yeah. Okay?
Speaker 0: Right. Neither do I.
Speaker 1: Giving my house back to the Passamaquoddy. Okay? I'm sorry. I feel sorry for people who are displaced, but I, you know, I there has to be a a statute of limitations. So I thought it was a silly argument to make.
I'm not sure he was making an argument, and moreover, I'm not sure I exactly what he was doing, so I shouldn't pretend that I do. There's a lot about that interview that I don't really understand. I don't think he was very effective if his goal was to win a western audience to his perspective. It didn't make me pro more pro Putin. No.
Not that I was. And by the way, I should just say at the outset, I've been accused of being pro Putin, and I'm not. But if I was, that's okay
Speaker 0: too. Right.
Speaker 1: I'm an adult man and an American citizen. I can like or dislike anyone I want. I can have any opinion I want. I'm not ashamed of it. And the idea that, like, a small number of people in DC get to decide what I believe
Speaker 0: I know.
Speaker 1: Is not something I accept. So You know? So I reserve right to like anybody. Right. Period.
Speaker 0: And I and I want I mean, you like me. It can't go downhill more than that. The, I wanna get to that here in a second. But first, you had a, a tough time. The first time you tried to interview interview Putin, the NSA was involved.
Speaker 1: Yeah. They they read my text messages and leaked them to the New York Times. How do you know? Guessing, but
Speaker 0: Okay. How do you know?
Speaker 1: Well, it could be because someone who worked there warned me through a very close very close friend of mine, and I won't bore you with the whole details, but I flipped to Washington and meet person and his request. I couldn't believe this. It scared me. I immediately called the US senator. I don't know very many US senators well, but there's one I thought seemed kind of trustworthy.
So I said, I just wanna get us on the record this has happened. And then members of congress went to NSA, and they admitted that they had read my email. And so it's I wasn't spat I went on TV and described the whole thing, and I thought there would be widespread out of it. I am. I thought people would be like outraged.
You can't No. You can't use a spy agency that we pay for whose job is to monitor our enemies, our rivals, in other countries. You can't use that against the American population, and no one seemed to care. But I cared I did. Because I grew up in the US government.
My dad ran a federal agency in Washington. So I sort of knew what the rules were, and I had a really strong sense of how much this had changed. Like, this was not allowed 30 years ago. It was an outrage. It's a crime, but no one seems to be bothered by it.
But I am bothered by it.
Speaker 0: So I am too. And I think every citizen should be, especially journalists. You know, when you have freedom of speech, freedom of press, there's 2 rights that are going away here, and, and nobody seemed to care. But how so then what happened the second time? How did you arrange this?
Speaker 1: Well, I, I just kept trying. You know? I kept, actually, I did it myself, with, you know, texting and I thought and I talked to a bunch of different people after that happened to me. I I really tried to learn more about privacy and how can you communicate, outside the view of state actors' governments. Mhmm.
And you can't if you're doing electronically. That is what I arrived at, and I think any knowledgeable person would admit that. There's no privacy, which itself is very distressing, but I just decided I would do it anyway. And I enlisted some non Russians I knew, who I thought might be able to vouch for me, etcetera. And it took a couple of years.
And ultimately, they said, yes, we will, do this. But if if news of this interview gets out, we're canceling the interview.
Speaker 0: Wow.
Speaker 1: So I started to get so this is the best part. I got calls. I got a call from a New York Times reporter, and then a friend of mine got a call from another New York Times reporter asking when I was interviewing Putin. And there's no way they could have known that. I didn't tell anybody.
You know, my wife, my producers, not even my kids, I didn't tell anybody. One of my children was highly annoyed to to learn I was in Moscow. Why didn't you tell me? I said, because I didn't wanna text it, you know. But no.
I they clearly did it again. They leaked it to the New York Times in an effort to scuttle the Internet. And I just again, I I hate to be, you know, mister stubborn principle guy, but that is a principle worth defending. I'm an American citizen. I have not committed a crime.
I can speak to anyone I want. I can have any opinion I want, and you're not allowed to use your creepy spy agencies against me because I'm your boss. This is a democracy. Aren't you always telling me that? But again, nobody cares, so I'm gonna stop the lecture on that.
But it it did motivate me to keep going. And but my real motivation was, like, I just wanna know what's happening there. We're in a war with Russia. We've never had a vote in congress on whether we should be in a war with Russia. No one's ever explained to me why we should be at war with Russia.
Why I'm supposed to hate Russians. Why am I supposed to hate Russians? We've got an awful lot of things going on here. The country is in very tough shape, especially right now. It's completely out of money.
We're bankrupt. And so it does seem like we should have more information before we send another $60,000,000,000 that we don't keep track of to Ukraine. I mean, that's just I have very straightforward motives, which I've explained many times, but nothing crazy or out of the ordinary, esoteric, or anything like that. Just like like, what is this? Let's find out more.
Speaker 0: Any feeling on why he chose you?
Speaker 1: Probably because I just kept trying. I mean, that was my sense. I just kept trying, and and I was one of the few and I should just say again, and I don't wanna be defensive because I'm I'm not defensive, but I'm I've never been a I don't have anything to do with Russia. I don't I had never been there before. Russian, you know, it's so nuts.
But my first instinct when this happened was that the sanctions were gonna destroy the primacy of the US dollar around the world and stealing people's stuff, 1,000,000,000 of dollars of people's stuff because they were, quote, oligarchs.
Speaker 0: Correct.
Speaker 1: Without any vote on it at all, law enforcement proceeding, much less adjudication, much less real evidence that they had anything to do with the invasion of Ukraine, which a lot of these people didn't. You're a Russian oligarch, said American oligarchs. We're taking your stuff. I was like, whatever happened to the rules based order? You know, that's crazy behavior.
And it's immoral, obviously, no matter who you're doing it to. You can't punish people without a finding of guilt, without proof. And moreover, it's going to convince, in short order, the rest of the world that you can't trust the US dollar because it's become a political instrument. Instrument that we use to punish people who deviate ideologically or don't do what we want. And the second the rest of the world understands that they're gonna do everything they can to exit the US dollar to find another place to store their money.
And the second they do that, the United States is going to collapse because this is a society, an economy based on debt. And if that ever comes due, we're done. This is a poor country, and it's all super obvious. And I didn't know why no one was saying that. None of the geniuses in congress seemed to even think about this.
They're like, no. We're gonna punish Putin because I don't know why white Christian country, we hate him. I really don't know what what the motive is. It's business. Well,
Speaker 0: just okay.
Speaker 1: But the effect on us is scary.
Speaker 0: It's huge. Agree with that a 100%. Let me let me cast out where I stand on this issue, and then you tell me if it is close to your because I can't figure out where you are exactly, and I bet a lot of people feel the same way about me and others, because it's a complex issue. Putin is a bad guy. Cold blooded killer throws people off of roofs.
You know, he's he's a bad guy. K? Period. Dictator. But I don't like the Russian leaders either.
They are corrupt and dirty, and I don't think that, are Ukrainian, and I don't think the Ukrainian leadership, is in it for really anything but money, power, and I'm not sure where all that money is going to. But when you're spending more than you did, for the Marshall Plan in inflation adjusted dollars, something isn't right. And why are we just pushing this through? So I don't wanna support Putin. I don't wanna support the leadership of Ukraine, and I don't trust Biden and and the administration on what they're doing.
They have been in meddling in Russia and Ukraine forever. So I can't say I have a horse with any I I don't wanna put my name behind any of the 3 because I don't trust any of the 3. But I'm still proudly American. I just don't want to be involved in this because some this is a game that's being played where we don't have the information and what the real game is. How do you where do you fit in that?
Speaker 1: I think I'm pretty close to to where you are. I'm a little more agnostic on global leaders just because maybe I care less. I I having, you know, spent a lot of time out of the country, interviewed a bunch of them, I sort of assume every world leader all leaders, by definition, are up to no good on some level.
Speaker 0: Yeah.
Speaker 1: The only thing I care about is the United States, and that's it. And I think the only thing the US government should care about by definition is the United States. So to the extent an alliance is good for the United States and my children, then I'm in favor of it. And to the extent it's bad, then I'm opposed to it. I mean, that's I have a very clear lens there.
I have no emotional attachment to any other country. I just I frequently go to, say, Finland or Switzerland, England. I I have ancestors from all of those countries. I like those countries. I love them, actually.
But I don't I don't have an emotional attachment. I am American. That's it. And so the Russia, Ukraine, the domestic politics of either one of those countries, the I
Speaker 0: don't even know what that
Speaker 1: long standing conflict they've had. Exactly. It's of it's of less interest to me, almost very little interest to me, actually. What I care about is the United States. That's the first thing.
Second thing is the people around our country are destroying it, and they're doing it on purpose. And there's no doubt about that in my mind, and I've withheld judgment for a number of years now. But with Yeah. What they've done at the border, completely changing the population of the country, letting in millions and millions of people who have no connection to the United States, can't possibly help our economy, can't possibly unify our very fractured civic culture, and whose loyalty to and knowledge of the United States is completely in question. In fact, their identities are in question.
We don't know who they are. And they're coming through a country in the middle of a drug war. The whole thing is not by the way, bad management, or they're not doing their job. No. They're destroying the United States on purpose.
And so I begin with that. So the idea that those same people are going to somehow affect positive change in Eastern Europe, a region they know nothing about, and it's demonstrable. They don't know anything at all, is like insane to me. And the fact that Republican leaders who really are either, in many cases, just they just don't know, or they're controlled, that is true, are on board with this is just infuriating. So but but I approach this in a very non emotional way.
I'm emotional about my country, and I think all Americans most Americans feel the same way I do. So They care about what happens here because your kids live here.
Speaker 0: Right. And I feel the same way, but I look at what's happening around the world because at first, I just concentrated on us. And then after Build Back Better became the slogan for every president and prime minister in the entire western world, I realized, wait a minute. This isn't about Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump and this is we are being led in our own countries, each of us, that to believe that it's us versus the Nazis or us versus, you know, the Democrats. It's not.
It is the people in each free country in the west against I'm not sure yet what it is, but a really nasty blob up at the top, that has their own designs on the world and their own plans on the world. And, it just seems to me that I I haven't found a Winston Churchill anywhere in the world. Name one that you you see, currently in office.
Speaker 1: Well, there's no difference between most leaders in the west because no western country, including ours, has sovereignty. And sovereignty means you get to act in your own interest. You're a distinct country with, you know, borders in a democratic system where your population decides how it will be governed, sovereignty. And we don't have that and no other country does. So they act as a group.
And I and I do think, you know, always pay attention to the things you're not allowed to think or say. And NATO is is a huge part of this. NATO is, in addition to everything else, totally incompetent. Totally incompetent. I mean, NATO is a defense alliance aimed at Russia.
And it turns out that Russia has a 7 x military an artillery shell capacity, manufacturing capacity of all of NATO. So all the NATO countries together produce 1 7th the number of artillery shells annually that Russia, this country we were told was a gas station with nuclear weapons, totally incompetent country produces. So NATO wasn't even good at the military piece. But NATO is not a military alliance, of course. It's a political and cultural alliance.
And it's the tool with which, you know, whatever this multilateral alliance of unelected people uses to express its will. And it is an offense against our sovereignty. The US when I set up for the US military, I should fight for the United States on behalf of its territorial integrity and its interests. I shouldn't be fighting for Lithuania. Like, the whole thing is nuts.
And in Washington, criticizing NATO is considered, like, sinful or something. It's a religion. But, of course, what it really is is a scam. It's a it's a money laundering operation, and it's an attack on American sovereignty. And, like, nobody can say that.
You won't find one member of Congress who will say that NATO is terrible for the United States, but, of course, it is. It's obvious.
Speaker 0: So let me let me now go to some of the criticism of you that, you know, Jon Stewart just did a piece. I don't know if you've seen it on you, but Yeah. Yeah. I never watched
Speaker 1: the music.
Speaker 0: A lot of stuff. I know. So, you know, you went in. You said Moscow is clean. The the subways are wonderful.
Look at the chandeliers. Well, you I know you, Tucker. You're smart enough to know who built those to look like that and why. And Duranty went over
Speaker 1: I said it I said it in the piece. So Walter Durant, he denied the existence. He was a New York Times correspondent in Russia in the thirties. He denied, of course, the the Ukrainian famine, which was Stalin. That's exactly right.
And he denied the the show trials of 1937, 38, the the the terror, was was happening. So, those were lies. Okay? He told lies, and that's why his Pulitzer Prize was pulled from him posthumously. I told the truth in order to shame our leaders.
That subway station I showed was built by Stalin in 1939. Joseph Stalin, probably the worst person in human history. That was over 80 years ago, and it's still in perfect shape. Okay. That's the point.
Look at what Moscow has and compare it to what we have. So but we have ask yourself, like, no. This is this is an indictment of our leaders. And I would recommend to every single one of your viewers and listeners, if you can, go spend a week in Moscow. Not not because you love Russia, but because you love your own country, and compare that city to the largest city in Europe, 13,000,000 people, compare it to the city that you live in or the city near you, which is in better shape?
So so, actually, it's an indictment. It's a radicalizing indictment of our rapidly declining standard of living and the horrible mismanagement of our leaders. Why don't we have a subway like that in any American Wait. Wait. Wait.
Wait. Wait.
Speaker 0: Give a
Speaker 1: single American city with no crime? Like, what is this?
Speaker 0: Right. Well, I mean, there's not a lot of crime in North Korea either. There's no there's no drug problem really in China because you could just take them off street and kill
Speaker 1: them. But but but but we didn't but we didn't have that here. And I'm only 54, and I remember it.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 1: It's not like you have a fascist Devon orderly society. We had one. So And on Memorial Day 2020, with the drug OD of George Floyd, everything changed. And what we got was the intentional destruction of American cities. Now I don't live in a city because I don't like them.
But what I missed because I don't live in one is that you can't have a great country unless you have a great city, period. Or a number of great cities. Cities define your country. That's not my choice. It's just a fact.
It's always been true. And so if every one of your cities is a cesspool, then your country is collapsing. But they don't need to be that way. Crime is the easiest thing to fix. You say, we're not we're just not putting up with this.
We've done it before. I covered it. I wrote a book on it in 1994. I watched New York City go from a very dangerous place to one of the safest cities in the world. And it didn't take mass executions.
No. It didn't even take mass incarceration. It just took paying attention to the details. If there's graffiti, wipe it off. If people are jumping over the turnstiles, arrest them.
It's called the broken windows. Doesn't happen.
Speaker 0: It's called the window theory Yes.
Speaker 1: By James q Wilson and George Kelling, one of the most famous pieces on criminology and really on social science ever written and true to the state. But, anyway, the point is we have a drug crisis, a fentanyl crisis, a homeless crisis, a crisis of mental illness, and a crime crisis, and a filth crisis, just the dirtiness of it. That's all on purpose. That's what I realized when I went to Moscow. And not just Moscow.
Abu Dhabi, which is not a fascist city at all, it's much more a more tolerant place than any place in the west actually. If you want your mind blown, spend a week in Abu Dhabi. It's true in Singapore, which is pretty authoritarian. It's true in Tokyo, which is kind of authoritarian.
Speaker 0: I'm wait. Wait. Wait. Wait. Wait.
I've been to I've been to Abu Dhabi. They'll cut your hands off for, you know, for theft. I can't talk about Yes. Christ in Abu Dhabi. So it does have some
Speaker 1: Oh, not true. Oh, not true. Abu Dhabi is a bigger Christmas celebration than almost any American city. Oh, no. Abu Dhabi I mean, I don't know when the last time you were there.
I was just there last week. And I've spent a lot and look, I'm not flacking for Abu Dhabi. Okay? I'm about Africa. The point is, this is the lie that they tell, and this is what I've realized after just spending a lot of time going to different places with an open mind, thinking about how the lessons of these cities might apply to the cities that I care about.
Like the city I was born in, San Francisco, the prettiest city in North America by far,
Speaker 0: by the
Speaker 1: big town.
Speaker 0: By far.
Speaker 1: Totally uninhabitable. My family's been there since 18/50. So I do feel like some kind of ownership, I don't have ownership, but I feel a connection to the city, and it has declined to a place that is 3rd world or worse than 3rd world, actually, because the people running it wanted that. It wasn't an accident. It's not a choice.
But liberalism and Nazism, and if you choose liberalism, then you're gonna have 50,000 people shooting drugs on your side walks or crapping in your doorway. That's not the choice. You can have a free society. We had one for 100 of years Yes. Where there's order and politeness and decency and self respect and concern for the individual.
If you allow people to OD on drugs in your park, what are you saying? I don't care about their lives. You are a cruel and vicious person if you allow that. And we are allowing. Our leaders are.
And going to Moscow, I'm like, how the hell do they get this? I mean, how did how did this is Russia. This is the country. And, again, I don't wanna live in Russia, and I'm not going to. But I should be able to live in a city like that, and I can't because our leaders, every big city mayor, most governors, the entire congress of the United States, the White House, they step over the bodies of drug addicts, of Fentanyl addicts, maybe the dead bodies, every day on their way to work, and they don't notice to go appropriate more money for a country they know nothing about and whose language they don't speak.
Like, this is peak insanity. And so, yes, of course, I knew I was gonna be compared to Walter Duranty. And by the way, if Bill Kristol accuses you of not loving America enough, Bill Kristol, no no concern for America whatsoever. Like, you just laugh it off. You're telling look, I have a lot of faults.
I eat too much. I'm kind of a jerk. I get all that. But I don't I don't think it's a really serious critique to say I don't love America enough. Really?
Who are the people saying that? They're the ones who've opened our borders, let fentanyl flow in here, kill over a 100000 Americans every year, and it doesn't bother them at all. And they're telling me I don't love America. I'm trying not to use the f word on your show, but that's how I feel because it's just so insane.
Speaker 0: So, Tucker, I'm not
Speaker 1: go to Moscow. You should go next week. It will radicalize you. You will not give up American citizenship. You'll come back to this country and say, we had cities like this.
And if even Moscow can do it, we should do it.
Speaker 0: So I I I think I agree with you a 100%. Where the sticking point is in America right now is there's a lot of people on the right and the left that are both saying, screw the constitution. We need a radicalized leader. When, you know, when you look at Orban, I think Orban is great for his country. That's not our system.
I think, you know, the, Moscow might be great, love to visit. That's not our system. So I think and I I believe you are you're you've already said this, but I wanna make sure it's very clear on the record. The only path forward for America is through the declaration of independence, the bill of rights, and the constitution. Correct?
Speaker 1: Of course. Yeah. And by the way, I I should just be very, very clear. If I was I'm like the one person on the planet. You don't need to guess about my motives.
I'll just say them. And if I was advocating for a different form of government or for for authoritarianism, for strong man, I would just say so. I I would have no shame in saying that because I really believe that it's within my rights to say what I think. If I I've been called a racist. If I was racist, I would just say it.
I would just say it. But I'm not. And I'm not advocating for that. I'm advocating to return to America of, say, 1993. How radical.
Is that really radical? No. I don't think it's very radical. In fact, I think we should be demanding it. And if there's one thing that I will fault Americans for, it's low expectations.
You should not put up with this. You should not allow them. The governor of Texas should not allow millions of people to cross his border. And I don't wanna hear, you know, the excuses. And I don't wanna hear the excuses for why it's okay to have tens of thousands of people dying on the street or sleeping on the sidewalk in tents handed to them by the Episcopal Church forever.
Like, that's not acceptable. It's not okay for my kids to use drugs at the breakfast table. I'm not gonna have a debate about it. No is the answer. I'm within my rights as a father to say that.
The US government is within its statutory rights as a government to say that. We don't need more laws. We have the laws. The they're not being enforced on purpose. And and to your point, why?
And, of course, the reason is because people will lose faith in liberal democracy.
Speaker 0: Right.
Speaker 1: And they will welcome a strong man. And that's exactly what this is about, is the left and not just the left. I would say that the quisling right, on Capitol Hill, for whom I just have boundless contempt, they're in on this as well.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: People are just gonna give up. They're not gonna vote. They're gonna steal the elections just as they stole the last one, which they did. Sorry. And they're gonna steal the next one.
And people are just gonna be like, you know what? I don't even care. I just totally give up. This is crazy. Just just get get the bums off my street.
Some guy just exposed himself to my daughter. My nephew just died of a fentanyl OD. Make it stop. Make it stop. You can have all the power you want.
That is absolutely what they're going for. And I don't want that. I wanna live in the country we lived in in 1993 or 1985. Not ancient history. Post Civil Rights Act, we can do that.
Let's do it right now. That's my point.
Speaker 0: You're right on that's what they're they're doing. It is it's amazing to watch. It's exactly the stuff that I talked about, back at Fox. It's tough down inside out. It's the way the communist did it.
It's the color revolution, and it's Cloward and Piven. It's it's all of it, and it's happening right in front of our eyes. It's crazy.
Speaker 1: People Americans need to know that because our sense of reality is shaped digitally and Wikipedia is our history and Instagram is our present and Twitter is our future x, you know, people forget that we didn't have this just a few years ago. And that's why going to places that are different really reminds you, it triggers in you this this chain reaction of thoughts, and you realize I cannot believe I'm putting up with this. I can't believe there's a homeless encampment in front of Union Station in our nation's capital directly across from the capitol building. That's so much more horrifying to me than anything that happened on January 6th. That's such an expression of contempt and loathing for the American people.
That's such an admission of defeat and lack of self respect. Like, no. You are not allowed to do drugs in front of Union Station. I don't wanna hear your excuse. I'm not responsible for housing you.
Get out of here. Like, it's just it's not hard. And that is kind of the society that they have in a lot of other countries. Right? I mean, it's it's people should travel and see this stuff.
It'll make you love America more and make you want better for America. That's the only point.
Speaker 0: No more interruptions, from here on out. Let me just tell you a couple of things. First of all, good ranchers. £5,000,000,000 of meat are imported and sold in the US every year. £5,000,000,000.
Why? Well, because because our government is doing everything they can to put our ranchers and our farmers out of business. Good ranchers are the number one source for 100% American meat that I would trust to my family and feed my family. Instead of getting overpriced imported meat at the store, yeah, they can legally put the little flag, product of the US, because they might wrap it here. Not kidding.
Good Ranchers delivers my meat to my family. We eat it, all the time, and they deliver it right straight to the door. We have chicken. We have beef. We have great, great bacon.
Right now, if you subscribe to any of their 100% American meat boxes to secure their leap year offer of free bacon for 4 years. That's £70 of Applewood smoked bacon you'll get just by subscribing. Beef, chicken, pork, wild caught seafood, all amazing. Remember, it's all 100% America, which your grocery store can't really say. Not sure which box to choose?
Try their best seller, the Rancher's classic. Or if you got a hungry household, check out their family feast bundle. Get quality, local food you can trust and feel proud to feed your family. Go to goodranchers.com. Use the promo code Glenn.
Claim over $900 in free bacon before the leap year sale ends. Goodranchers.com, American meat delivered. Also, let me tell you about SAT 123. This is something that, my family has. We always take it on vacation or anything, because I learned after 9:11.
Imagine for a moment that you have a phone that will take and receive calls literally anywhere on earth. No reliable cell network to worry about. I happen to live up in the mountains half the year, and I have no cell service up there. What if that phone also had an encrypted signal so no one could listen in to your calls? No one could read your text other than the person that you send them to?
That kind of phone, exists. It usually is in the military, and members of the senate use it for encrypted secure calls. But you don't have to imagine having one because what I'm describing is a sat phone, a satellite phone. You know, I'm always telling you how to be prepared for any emergency situation. Well, if we're in a situation where the cell phone service is down remember the Lahaina fires in Hawaii last year cell service was down The guy who's running the Marriott Maui Ocean Club used a satellite phone and ended up helping 14,000 people.
Satellite phone stores have got you covered with plans starting as low as 95.99 or they have discounted family share plans with up to 3 satellite phones. Go to sat123.com today. Sat123.com or call 855-980-5830. That's 855-980-5830. Sat123.com.
So let me let me go back to the interview. He Putin was telling you, weaving a story that our president isn't really in control, wasn't he? And did you Of course. Have you done anything and reached out to try to verify any of this that it was true? I mean, do you believe him?
Speaker 1: That the president's not really in control of him. Obviously, obviously
Speaker 0: Yeah.
Speaker 1: The policies don't change.
Speaker 0: Well, I will tell you. I will. I when I heard him say that to you, I thought of something that George Bush told me in the Oval Office. I was asking about the policies and how they were gonna change, and he said, Glenn and then he tried to make me feel good by saying this. Glenn, don't worry.
Whoever sits behind this desk in that chair is going to have the same advice given by the same advisers, and they'll realize the president's hands are tied. I walked out of that room horrified. Horrified.
Speaker 1: Uh-huh.
Speaker 0: Then why do we even have elections?
Speaker 1: Yeah. I I I, of course, I I couldn't agree more. And, I mean, look. They haven't released the JFK files Right. Over 60 years later.
Speaker 0: I know.
Speaker 1: Okay? No president has just one. We have over a 1000000000 classified documents. So it's not a it's not a democracy in the sense that they told us it was. And I think it can be fixed.
I think the president's primary power is his communication with the public. And I continue to think that any president who decided to go right to social media, like a direct feed. Here's what I know. Here's what's going on. He could harness the power of the population, and he could make a change.
I mean, look, it's the US the federal government's the largest organization in human history. You can't probably not gonna change it in 4 years, but you could make this country more democratic. And you know what you could certainly do is change the conversation away from where they want it, which is getting black people and white people to hate each other. Okay? Race hate is a manufactured phenomenon in this country for the most part.
Yeah. And it's actually provable. That happened during occupy Wall Street in 2012. The mentions of white supremacy and racism in the New York Times went up 100 of fold. So this is an intentional strategy to get people to hate each other on the basis of race.
And as I walk around this country, I'm really surprised by how little race hatred there is. It actually hasn't worked very well. Most Americans don't want to do that. And they don't want to talk about foreign policy and the economy, which are the core functions of state. And on those two topics, like, why do private equity people pay half the tax rate that you do?
Like, that seems like a kind of an interesting conversation. Shut up. And why are we sending sending all this money to Ukraine? I I wanna hear an amazing story that just tells you everything about this. So I'm over in Moscow.
I'm waiting to do this interview. It gets out that we're doing it. And I'm immediately denounced by this guy called Boris Johnson who was for a short time the prime minister of Great Britain. And Boris Johnson calls me a tool of the creme on or something. And I'm thinking, well, that's kind of I mean, his name's not actually Boris as I'm sure you know.
His name is Alex Johnson. And he called himself Boris in high school. So the guy who calls himself Boris is accusing me. I was like so I was annoyed. So I put in a a request for an interview with Boris Johnson, as I have many times, because he's constantly denouncing me as a tool of the Kremlin.
He says no. So I'm thinking about something getting more annoyed. So I know a lot of people who know Boris Johnson. So I reach out to them. Finally, one of his advisors gets back to me and says, he will talk to you, but it's gonna cost you $1,000,000.
He wants $1,000,000 What? In US dollars, gold or Bitcoin. No. I'm this just happened yesterday or 2 days ago. And and I'm like, he wants a $1,000,000.
Yeah. And then he will talk to you about Ukraine. He will explain his position on Ukraine and explain what so he attacks me without explaining how I'm wrong, of course, or how he's right. This is, by the way, the guy who single handedly, at the request of the US government, stopped the peace deal in Ukraine a year and a half ago, and is, I think, for that reason responsible for the deaths of 100 of thousands of people. He won't explain any of that to me in an interview until I pay him a $1,000,000.
And I said to the guy, you know, I just interviewed Vladimir Putin. I'm not defending Putin, but Putin didn't ask for a $1,000,000. So you're telling me that Boris Johnson is a lot sleazier, a lot lower than Vladimir Putin.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 1: Which is true. Yeah. So this whole thing is a freaking shakedown. Why $60,000,000,000 I mean, I could get boring on this because I've learned a lot about it. But $60,000,000,000 is not gonna allow Ukraine to prevail over Russia.
No honest person thinks that's gonna work. This is a money laundering operation. A lot of the people involved in it are making money from it. And if you're making money off a war, you know, you can deal with God on that because that's really immoral. Like, that's actually really, really wrong.
And a lot of people are including Boris Johnson.
Speaker 0: So I pointed out that, the Ukrainians were funding, really through us, this Nazi, you know, group on the border of Russia. We had been funding them for quite a while because they were fighting against Russia. Okay. Now I guess it's okay for everybody to be, you know, in bed with the Nazis. When Putin said that, do you is he just evoking the Nazis because what it means to his people?
Is that really one of his goals? Is that really what's what's hap whatever what what did you finally get from him on what's happening on his side? Why is he doing this?
Speaker 1: I thought it I thought it was stupid, the whole Nazi thing. I mean, there's no, you know, the Nazi party was a German party, which obviously repugnant, party, but was responding to a specific historical set of circumstances growing out of the Treaty of Versailles. So Nazism, there's no there's no Das Kapital of Nazism. Right? And so it doesn't kind of transfer.
Like Nazism died in April of 1945 when Hitler shot himself. So, you know, there are all kinds of ugly political movements in the world, but let's think of a new name for them. I I think it's like a weird Well,
Speaker 0: national socialist.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Or whatever. But, like, what ideology are you talking about? I just don't even underst. So, like, look.
Russia moved into Eastern Ukraine because the Biden administration pushed them to. There's a war in Ukraine because the Biden administration wanted a war in Ukraine. And that's very obvious, and it happened in public. Biden sent his vice president to the Munich Security Conference days before the invasion, 2 February's ago, to announce in public at a press conference that we wanted Ukraine to join NATO. That would mean nuclear weapons on Russia's border.
Now this is not a new conversation. This has been going on for 30 years.
Speaker 0: Right.
Speaker 1: Russia does not want nuclear weapons aimed at Moscow on its border and has said that's the red line as it would be with with for any country for if, you know, know, if the Chinese did that in Mexico, I hope we would say no. We're going to war before we allow that. And they knew that. And they pushed him to do this. Of course.
Now their motive, you know, I we can only guess at it, but that absolutely happened. And you're, like, not allowed to say that, but that's true.
Speaker 0: Yes. It is.
Speaker 1: It's not a defense of Putin. It's an attack on the craziness of our foreign policy, which is, like, purely destructive. Nothing is built, only destroyed. It's nuts.
Speaker 0: Let me, let me switch here for, for a second on some things that have happened just recently while you were gone. Navalny, went for a walk in the Arctic Circle because he liked to walk outside, and then he came back. They say they tried everything they could to resuscitate. Was he assassinated or not?
Speaker 1: Are you asking me if I
Speaker 0: did it? Yeah. I did. No?
Speaker 1: I can tell you. Oh, sorry. Sorry. I should never I'd never admit it. You know, was he assassinated?
I have no idea. No one in the United States has any idea. All these buffoons like Chuck Schumer, the c our senile president jumping up and down in Russia to this. I mean, they don't know that. They don't know anything about it, actually.
I have no freaking idea. I can tell you it didn't help Russia to do it. They put him in prison. You can argue about whether they had justification for doing that. I'm not that interested.
Russia is not a free country in the way that the country I grew up in is, was, and I care about my country being free. That's all I care about. So, whatever. I don't know. I'm not that interested.
I haven't spent a lot of time reading about Navalny. I know this, Him dying during the Munich Security Conference in the middle of the debate on Ukraine funding, both of which they're highly aware of, doesn't help Russia. Yeah. So the people say, oh, Putin just had him murdered last week because they're idiots. They don't actually know anything.
They don't know anything. These are the same people who told us that Ukraine was gonna win. Really? Russia has a 100,000,000 more people and far deeper industrial capacity. Like, that's insane.
No person outside the United States thought that for a second that Ukraine could win. Not maybe they're rooting for Ukraine, maybe not. I mean, who knows? But as a factual matter, the information desert that we live in is really, really scary. And sometimes I think maybe the average North Korean knows more about what's happening in the world than the average American who watches NBC News because it's just so distorted.
The lies are like so it's like a vacuum. You don't even like like, the the two facts I just did, Russia has a 100,000,000 more people and the capacity to produce 7 times the number of artillery shells as all of NATO. Those are just two facts that I'm not sure the average person in this country had as ever before. And those are the determinative facts in a ground war. Do you have more people?
Do you have more material? Do you do you have more, howitzer shells? And, like, the people making these decisions, Anthony Blinken. Anthony Blinken. I can't believe that guy is the secretary of state.
What a mediocrity. That he doesn't know that or something? Like, the whole they're just so ignorant that it's scary.
Speaker 0: Super scary. But I don't know if they are ignorant. Look at look at the Iranian policy. Who doesn't know Iran is a terrorist state that really truly means they're going to burn the Jews in the fire of the Islamic fury? Who doesn't know that?
Who doesn't know that enough to say, you know what? We shouldn't send over $8,000,000,000. We we just shouldn't do it. We we shouldn't play
Speaker 1: I gotta be honest. I understand that. And then that was, of course, something that Obama did, and there was
Speaker 0: And quite a
Speaker 1: bit of debate with the party. And he, oh, boy, he pushed it through. And I've thought about that for almost it's been almost 10 years.
Speaker 0: No. But Biden has Biden, I think, has done another allowed them to dip in to another 6,000,000,000, you know, as long as it's used for peaceful purpose. You don't you would never make that deal with Adolf Hitler. You you you know who they are. You know, somebody said to me once, is a rattlesnake a bad pet?
No. It's a perfectly fine pet as long as you always remember it's a rattlesnake. We are treating people who are in our own country like enemies, and people who are oppressing people, we're we're treating them like friends.
Speaker 1: Well, yeah. I've I've noticed that. And and I have to say the disproportionate outrage at the Russians, is puzzling to me. But again, all of it is playing out against the backdrop that I care about, which is life in the United States. And I feel like we're in a moment where things are moving south at high speed
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: Particularly the demographic replacement. American citizens being replaced by foreigners who are being encouraged to go into the military. Let's let's hand them we don't know who they are. They don't know anything about the United States. They may or may not be loyal to it.
Let's give them guns. I mean, where do you think that's going, Glenn? I mean, of course, the military will be used as it was on January 6th as a tool of domestic political control
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: Obviously. And it's much easier to do that with foreigners than it is with people who grew up in this country. So that's way scarier than anything that happened to Navalny in some Siberian I mean, I guess that's kind of what I'm saying. It's like I'm against putting Navalny or any political opponents in jail ever, whether it's the January 6 people who are still rotting, whether it's Navalny, whether it's Gonzalo Lyra, the American citizen who died in custody in Ukraine. I mean, I'm opposed to all of that stuff.
But all I don't understand this weird externalizing process of emotion that happens for a lot of well educated Americans where they they don't they're not mad about what's happening around them. They're mad about what's happening in some country they've never been to. It's like, what is that? In other words, it's like, you you you've got a kid who's a drug addict but you don't have time drive him to rehab because you're sending money to
Speaker 0: The drug company.
Speaker 1: Burkina Faso or something. No. But you're sending it to, like, some kid you've never met Oh. In a country you've never been to. It's like, what is that?
Yeah. And I and the last thing I'll say is I've noticed that a lot of the most passionate sort of advocates for this idea that, you know, the only problems are brought and we need to spend all of our money on those problems are people with very weird and hollow personal lives. I I'm sorry. I'm not I don't wanna be mean. I'm just being honest.
Very dishonest, personalized, creepy personal lives, unsettled inside, like a normal person in this in all countries wants like, I want to have dinner with my wife and play with my dogs and see my kids grow up and have grandchildren and I want my neighborhood to be safe and I want my friends to be happy and I want you know what I mean? Like those are the kind of core and concerns for most people. It really takes someone like Lindsey Graham, who doesn't have children, to be like, no. The most important thing is Kharkov or something,
Speaker 0: which is
Speaker 1: so silly in Eastern Europe. But, like, honestly, what does that have to do with El Paso or my kids? Nothing. It's a it's a syndrome, kind of. Do you know what I mean?
Speaker 0: I do know what, what you mean. The reason why I brought up Navalny is because Donald Trump this week is in trouble because he said, well, yeah. Navalny. I mean, that's what happens when you put political prisoners behind bar. When when you take somebody who is is running against you and the state has so much power, they pull you off and put you in jail.
Sound familiar? And while the left has a problem with Navalny, as you would say, oddly so, they don't see the connection on what we're doing here, what we're doing with Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: Oh, they see it. No. They see it. They just look. The one thing they're really good at, they're not good at engineering or building anything or even preserving what our ancestors handed us in New York City, for example.
They'll destroy everything in the physical world, but the one thing they're really talented at is occupying the moral high ground in an unjustified way, is flying into such a hysterical frenzy that they intimidate people into repeating their slogans. Why? Where are you in Navalny? Navalny? I don't know.
I mean, I'm against people being killed, I guess. I don't know anything about it. You know what I mean? And what? Where are you in Navalny?
You don't have a position in Navalny? He has not spoken on Navalny. You know, the the thing? Damn. It's like which was I I was I was I was, like, thousands of miles away 2 days ago in a car.
And somebody sends me this piece from the Daily Mail, which used to be kind of a good newspaper. It's like total garbage at this point along with the New York Post. It's like so weird how these papers get captured. But they had some peace. Like, Tucker Carlson has not said a word, issued a statement about Navalny.
Well, I didn't know. I didn't know anything about Navalny. I didn't know he died. I didn't know anything. Nobody I did have an airplane from Dubai.
It was like, you don't have a statement? And I do think if we're gonna reclaim our humanity from people who would turn us into slaves, one of the first things we need to say is I control what I think and what I say. I can have my own opinions. By the way, I don't have to have an opinion. I don't have an opinion on that.
It's not important to me. It's okay to say that. Your priorities don't have to be mine. Mine don't have to be yours. And if they do then I'm no longer a free person.
I'm a slave. You consider me subhuman. I'm like your dog. You can you can tell me what to care about, what to eat. But as a free man, no.
I I don't have to share your priorities. I don't have to be interested in Navalny's death. I can be very interested or not. But, you can't force me to be. And I think that's really important for people to to make the decision that they're going to think independently and not be intimidated by these these freaks.
Yeah. And they are freaks.
Speaker 0: By the way, I just, you know, as somebody who, emailed you something, I I just wanna say thank you for text messaging me while you're in Russia, and the NSA is watching. I just I just thought that was a great move from a good friend. Oh, thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Well, I'm excited. I have this way of confident. Like, I have all these people, like, come to me. Well, you need to get this software. Do that or whatever.
Speaker 0: And you need to get your phone.
Speaker 1: You gotta throw your phone. No. No. In fact, I may I may send, you know, some naked pictures of myself to the NSA just to just to wreck their day. You know?
This no. I'm not I don't have to do that. I'm not you know what I mean? I'm an American citizen.
Speaker 0: I do.
Speaker 1: You're a criminal, not me. Yeah.
Speaker 0: Not me. You mean the NSA. Let me with that being said, when you were over and sitting in front of Putin, who has absolute control, and is a former KGB guy, Was there any time that you because he he said several times, like, oh, I I know who you are. I know you studied history. I mean, he knew you.
When you got to the question about the Wall Street Journal reporter, did it ever cross your mind that I'm not in my home country? I'm saying this to a very powerful man who does, do what he wants. Were you ever worried?
Speaker 1: No. Not at all. I wasn't worried for a single second I was there. I wasn't worried going over there, not because I trust the Russian government, I don't, but because my kids are grown and, like, I don't really care at this point. I feel protected.
I say my prayers. Much more worried about my government, much more worried about my country than I am about Russia because I'm not Russian. You know? I wasn't no. I wasn't intimidated at all.
I was annoyed a couple of times. I thought it was interesting. I thought he was interesting. He was hostile to me. Oh, he's said that he's somehow
Speaker 0: you didn't even ask hard questions. Whatever. Yeah. I know.
Speaker 1: Did he really say that?
Speaker 0: Oh, yeah. You didn't hear that? Yeah. He he came out and said he was very disappointed you didn't ask any hard questions.
Speaker 1: Oh, that's funny. Yeah. I mean, I what what's a hard question to Putin?
Speaker 0: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean, I I just wanted to hear his view. And I think one of the thing I mean, it's not about me. That's kind of the point, and that is one of the uglier things about journalism, if you can call it that. It's all the hair hats wanna make it about them because that's why they're in television in the first place because they're so they just like yearn for the adulation of strangers. They're empty inside.
I don't care about the adulation of strangers. I just was sincerely interested in who this guy is and I still don't think I know but I learned a few things and one of them is he's very wounded by what he sees as the rejection of the West. And and I think it makes him angry, really angry. I think he was angry at me about it. I've got nothing to do with that.
But no. I mean, the Soviet Union ended in August of 1991. I was on my honeymoon. I'll never forget it because my family had been involved in the Cold War. So, like, this was a topic of conversation.
And the idea was, well, why can't we work together? If not be friends, at least, you know, be allied in some way that's mutually beneficial. He in 2000 this is a he said this in the interview and it's true. He asked Bill Clinton if Russia could join NATO. Now NATO exists as a as a bullwork against Russia.
Right? So if Russia wants to join NATO, then there's no reason to have NATO, and we can just call it a big win and go home Right. And build our own countries, do something constructive. And they turned him down. And it's like, I've never no one seems to think that's a big thing.
I think it's a very big thing. Why would NATO, which exists to control Russia, turn down Russia's entry into the alliance? Like, it's insane. And then he asked again, George w Bush, I would like to be in a missile alliance with you against Iran. And Bush is like, yeah.
It sounds like a good idea. And then Condi Rice, one of the dumbest people ever, is like, no. We can't do that. Why why can't we do that? Why wouldn't that be in the interest of both of our countries?
And so you sort of come away thinking like there's a lot more going on here than Russia's unprovoked full scale invasion of Ukraine. That's not actually what happened. Yes. Russia invaded Ukraine. Yes.
It's bad. 100 of have died. Ukraine's been destroyed. A small number of people have gotten very rich. Boris Johnson hopes to get rich from it, etcetera, etcetera.
But there's a context here that does not make American policymakers look good at all. In fact, it's shameful. And the last thing I'll say is, you know, the point is to depose Putin, kill Putin, whatever, get Putin out of office. What happens then? So Russia is the largest country in the world by land mass.
It has the world's largest stockpile of nuclear weapons. It's an incredibly diverse country. It's about 20% Muslim. All these different republics, 80 of them, I think. And so what happens to the nuclear arsenal Mhmm.
Without Putin? Is is that good for the world? Like, it sounds like chaos. It sounds like the kind of chaos that we created in Iraq, in Syria, in Libya, Afghanistan. None of that made the world safer.
None of it helped American interests. It actually made the world much scarier, more volatile, and allowed China to surpass us economically, which it has. So, like, why would we want to do that to the biggest country in the world? I think that's insane. If you're powerful and wise, you seek to bring stability and order and predictability and peace.
That's what a father does in his family. That's what a good CEO does in a company. It's what a good general does.
Speaker 0: But an abusive abusive husband or or father, creates instability intentionally, always keeping people on the edge.
Speaker 1: Exactly. Can
Speaker 0: I ask you, you were such a, I don't I don't mean this as a bad thing? You're just such an odd individual in the fact that your dad was in government. He was kind of obliquely in intelligence too, wasn't he? Or not?
Speaker 1: Well, I applied to the CIA. Okay. Yeah.
Speaker 0: Okay. But yeah. But you're but you're Yeah.
Speaker 1: That was I grew up in a world like that for sure.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Okay.
Speaker 1: And by the way, I couldn't less of the CIA now to be completely clear. I'm so grateful.
Speaker 0: Yeah. I know. I used to have real respect for our agencies. I think they're enemies of the state, quite honestly, or the people. Let me, help me understand how you grew up.
I grew up working class, and now I live a different life, but I always feel like I'm still working class even though I'm not. Okay? You've never really been working class. You've always been that upper class in the in all of the places that make people into the the leaders of tomorrow that are that don't care about the people. How how is it that you have held on to something I don't think you ever really had, and that is that that average everyday citizen that is going out punching a time clock and coming in and just trying to make ends meet.
Where did that come from with you?
Speaker 1: Well, I mean, I don't have that perspective. I never have. I mean, I've you know? I mean, no. I'm not from that background at all.
I'm from the opposite background for sure every day of my life. And so I would never pretend to be the voice of the working class. No.
Speaker 0: I know. But I the opposite. Right. I don't think
Speaker 1: that No. No. My my motive comes from not and I actually now live in a in a working class area, and I love the people there, but I'm not that's not my world. I'm motivated by my loathing of the people in charge. The one thing I know a lot about are the people who populate the ruling class because I spent my whole life with them.
I'm not against ruling classes. Every society has one. Someone's gotta be in charge. There's always an elect that runs everything. They're always Brahmins.
Okay? Always. And there always will be. So I'm not against it. I'm not a populist in that sense.
I'm just against incompetent, selfish, nasty, stupid people being in charge. That's exactly who we are. And I'm so mad about it because I know exactly who they are. And so when you're telling me that Anthony Blinken is a statesman, I'm like, no he's not. He's like a low IQ political hack who's acting for, like, personal reasons, have nothing to do with the welfare of the United States in his Ukraine policy.
And I know that. And I know them all. And I know I lived next to them my whole life. 35 years in DC. So it's like, I'm not fooled by that.
Oh, well, it's I've you know, we're I went to Harvard and, you know, and then HBS, and I'm at the you know, I spoke at Aspen this summer. It's like, I know how mediocre that is because I've been around it my whole life. So I'm just not impressed. I don't want anything from them at all. I'm not rich.
I have enough. So it's like, I I'm just in this weird position where I know exactly who they are. I don't want their stupid little merit badges. I couldn't have more contempt for them. And I'm old enough now that, like, why not just say it?
Speaker 0: Right.
Speaker 1: And I am. I just don't I just don't care. I'm gonna keep saying it.
Speaker 0: That's what makes you so dangerous. So dangerous. So let me end we've just got a couple of minutes. Let let me end with, you know Max Benz, and I heard your podcast with him. Oh, Mike, Mike Benz.
No. Is it? It's Max, isn't it? Max Benz. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Mike no. No. Mike Benz. Yeah. That guy's so smart.
Speaker 0: So smart. So smart. And, he what he says is truly remarkable. And you kind of listen to it and say, wow, all of this makes sense. I think it's probably accurate and no way out, no way out.
That, you know, that doesn't help America at all. It doesn't help us to think no way out. I'm much more of a optimistic catastrophist. I think you're just generally an optimistic guy. How do we navigate the next 8, 9 months?
How do we bring people together with the armada that is arrayed against Americans?
Speaker 1: I think it's really important to create a hierarchy of importance just in life and in public policy and just every sphere of life. Like, decide what's most important, what do I do first? And my smartest friend, my wisest friend, who's been really successful, just because he's wise, always says, look, it it comes down to food, water, energy. You know, the countries rise and fall on the basis of food, water, energy. And And every time he talks like that, he talks in terms of fundamentals, like what actually matters.
It's not really about trans swimmers or black lives matter. It's about energy, food, water, and it's about the use of force. And so the number one thing you need to worry about in any country is the military. And we just don't have a history of worrying about the military, but we should be very worried about the military because that's where the guns are. And so if you wanted to take a pop a continental sized country like ours with the population of 350,000,000 people and you wanted to subdue them, you would need force.
And so it's the it what was so striking about what Ben said was, it's the DOD, it's the military that is censoring us, and they're doing it for political reasons. And that is a completely different thing from, say, the Democratic National Committee or even the FBI. The military has to be nonpartisan. It has to be controlled by elected officials, civilian control. So the voters have some control over the military.
And conservatives and it's such a wonderful and clever op on the part of the left because conservatives just imagine the people who serve in the military are just like them. But the officer corps is not at all. They're, like, speaking at the Aspen Institute. They don't share your values. They hate you.
They hate Christianity. And they're they're dangerous. Now the average NCO or one of the listed guys are great. And they're, you know, red blooded Americans that are met. But the leadership of the military is dangerous.
They're dangerous. They're dangerous not simply because of the many failed wars, they've been involved in, but because they're dangerous because they could be used against the US population. That's not crazy. And adding, you know, hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens to the military over the past 10 years, which they absolutely plan to do oh. And so I just think if you want to make the country better focus on the big things.
Let's make sure the power grid works. Let's make sure the military is not population. Like let's just start there. And those are the things that conservatives just miss because they're off on all this other stuff. No no.
Energy, force of arms, these are big things. The bigger it is, the more important it is. That's why I'm focused on Ukraine because it's like it's a war. Mhmm. People are getting killed.
What's more important than that? Oh, shut up. Leave it to the experts, no. No. Thanks.
I'm a citizen. You know what I mean? I can have a view.
Speaker 0: Tucker, I think at first, both of us years ago years ago didn't know what to make of one another. But tough times brings out the best in people. And I have watched you over the last, 5 years just become one of the the most frank and honest, journalists, in America. And I it's an honor to know you, especially at this time. I I hope you write down everything that you're doing every day because you are playing a big role in history.
You are. You are. You are.
Speaker 1: Well, it's accidental. Trust me.
Speaker 0: God bless you.
Speaker 1: Appreciate it. Thank you. See, man. God bless you.
@Real_RobN - 🇺🇸RealRobert🇺🇸
Tucker Carlson ‘they rigged the election’ and wiped their crimes clean ‘in front of all of us and nobody did anything about it.’ https://t.co/nlk8BmRWFx
Video Transcript AI Summary
I spoke to law enforcement agencies, urging them to collect forensic evidence from computers to prove or refute election fraud claims. Despite my requests, the evidence was not gathered. Chain of custody logs and records in Delaware County are missing, making 100,000+ ballots questionable. There is no remedy for this situation, which could impact the presidential election certification.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In the most upsetting really upsetting to me and the most upsetting was I had, spoke to multiple law enforcement agencies and literally begged multiple law enforcement agencies. They said, go in. And it's in order to prove prove that nothing's happening. In either exonerate yourselves in the process or refute what I'm saying, please. It's very simple process.
Just go get the forensic evidence from the computers. It's a simple process. You take the that you turn the computer off. It's non destructive, takes moments, maybe half an hour, 20 minutes to do it properly and collect the evidence. You open the computer up.
You take a a a device called a bit blocker. You put it in the hard drive. It's done under the observation of law enforcement officers. They take a forensic image of the drive. Put it all back together.
It wouldn't have taken more than an hour to to image all 5 machines. That was never done despite my objections, and that was 3 weeks ago. Lastly, when they said they said, well, we've got all the forensic records and so forth. We just learned 2 days ago that virtually all chain of custody logs, records, yellow sheets, everything was gone. All forensic evidence, all custody sheets in Delaware County are gone.
They had a signing party where they sat down and and poll workers were invited back to recreate those logs. And our understanding as of today was that they were unsuccessful in getting them all. So we have a situation where we have 100,000 ballots to 120,000 ballots, both mainland and USB. They're in question. Now, there's no cure for this.
There's no remedy for this. As a home charter, we can we could have a reelection in Delaware County for our own representatives within our own town, but there is no cure for that for the president of the United States. And I believe as a citizen and an observer to this that anybody could certify that vote in any good conscience.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Many Georgia counties have failed to provide electronic ballot images from the 2020 election, with as many as 74 counties admitting to destroying these records. Legal action is being considered due to violations of federal and state law, as well as obstruction of open records requests by over a dozen counties. The possibility of two separate lawsuits arising from these issues is being discussed.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Actually has been, evidence proven in Georgia that, these 2020 election records were actually, destroyed in some counties. What is the latest with this information?
Speaker 1: Yeah. That's right, Cameron. It's a project we've been working on for several months, and it is it's, the electronic ballot images. It was not just a few counties. It was actually, as many as 74 counties have been unable to to fulfill open records of requests for ballot, the original ballot images from the November election.
So they were supposed to retain these, images for 2 years under Federal State Law. The, system creates the images in order to tabulate. So despite the fact that it creates the images, they're an integral part of election records, probably the most key part other than the results themselves. 70 counties or more have actually admitted destroying these records. And this is what we announced today, along with some of the statistics that go with that.
Speaker 0: Mhmm. And so will this information and kind of, findings that you and, other mobilized groups have determined. Will this go forth with a legal suit, in Georgia?
Speaker 1: We are discussing that right now, Cameron. We think that that's most likely. We have several issues that, the counties are, just horribly violated the, federal and state law. And we also have another group of about, over a dozen counties who basically tried to subvert our open records request by just flat not responding or charging us too much money or these types of activities. So there has the possibility for 2 different, lawsuits out of this.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Two Clark County Technical employees revealed that votes on voting machines and USB drives changed overnight. They were only allowed a visual inspection of the USB drives and denied a forensic examination.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: 2 Clark County Technical employees came forward completely independent of each other, and explained that they discovered that the number of votes recorded by voting machines and stored on USB drives would change between the time the polls were closed at night and when they were reopened the next morning. In other words, votes were literally appearing and disappearing in the dead of night. When we attempted to verify the integrity of these voting machines, we were allowed only a useless visual inspection of the outside of a USB drive. We were denied a forensic examination. Finally,
Video Transcript AI Summary
I found Brian in the server logs, showing him the database. Christy Francois let him in, which could be a problem later on.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So here's the video that everybody is calling me. Let's see. Who do we do? The the server logs. Well, I went back to to our logs.
Logs. And guess who it is? Who it is. Brian. Brian.
Brian. Here you'll see a database in the next vendor. That's what I find find different. What a great person to have on a AT and T. There's an amazing Nissan.
Christy Francois, I went to the service server. Here's the app. He actually should be showing showing her what I am. And then then here's the delete delete of the log log. Just wanna log log in the database.
Here she is letting Brian into the server And and again, again, that's another, law law because probably all plan later in the year.
reSee.it AI Summary
Channel 4 aired a critical segment on X and Elon Musk, suggesting his far-right views are causing issues. They featured Nina Jankowicz, known for her controversial take on disinformation, adding to the narrative.
@BGatesIsaPyscho - Concerned Citizen
Legacy Media Channel 4 in UK Just ran a hit piece on X & Elon Musk Presenter - “Musk has caused all this trouble with his Far Right views this side on the pond” They then cut to former US Disinformation expert Nina Jankowicz who was made famous for this ridiculous little number on the subject. 🤡🌎
Video Transcript AI Summary
Information laundering occurs when lies are made to sound credible by being repeated in Congress or mainstream outlets. This hides the lie and makes the information's origins seem less atrocious. Examples include Rudy Giuliani's statements on Ukraine and TikTok influencers claiming COVID can cause pain. People should take note of information laundering and not support lies with their wallet, voice, or vote.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Alluring is really quite ferocious. It's when a hopster takes some lies and makes them sound precocious by saying them in congress or a mainstream outfit. So this information's origins are slightly less atrocious. It's how you hide a little hide a lie. It's how you hide a little hide a lie.
It's how you hide a little hide a lie when Rudy Giuliani shared that in terms on Ukraine. Or when TikTok influences say COVID can cause pain. They're laundering to sinful when we really should take note and not support their lies with our wallet voice or vote. Oh, information laundering is really quite ferocious. It's when a Huxley takes some lies and makes them sound precocious by saying them in congress.
Remains remarket's notice. Information's origin seems likely less atrocious.
reSee.it AI Summary
I reacted strongly to the news of the second assassination attempt on Trump, feeling frustrated by the media's portrayal of the suspect as a Trump supporter. Lindsey Graham's claim that he worked for Iran shocked me. It turns out this individual had extensive connections and had been interviewed by numerous outlets in Washington, revealing a more complex background than initially reported. I can't help but wonder about the true motivations and affiliations at play here.
@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra
Tucker Carlson Reacts to the 2nd Trump Assassination Attempt They Said he was a Trump Supporter.. huh? Lindsey Graham said he worked for Iran on Fox… what!? “I’m screaming at my television… They LIED! They’re Lying!” Come to find out, this guy was had been interviewed by every media outlet in Washington.. he was a neocon who did a lot of interviews, and had a lot of contacts with members of Congress and their staff, and other US government agencies. 🤔 I wonder who? https://rumble.com/v5fcwbd-tucker-carlson-reacts-to-the-2nd-trump-assassination-attempt.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker watched news coverage claiming the man arrested for attempting to murder Trump was a Trump supporter. Lindsey Graham blamed Iran. However, the speaker says the would-be assassin's politics align with Graham's, as he is a neocon who volunteered in Ukraine.
The speaker believes the media is lying by omission, distorting reality, and preventing the average person from knowing the truth. The attempted assassin was interviewed by every major media outlet and has a lengthy criminal record, yet The New York Times portrayed him as a "freedom fighter" in Ukraine and detailed his contacts with US government agencies. The speaker fears this information will be memory-holed, and the public will be misled into believing a false narrative.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And I'm I'm watching this. They're literally telling me that this guy whom they've arrested is a Trump supporter. So you flip channels and then you learn that I flipped over to a channel I used to work on. And there's Lindsey Graham. And I know, I know, I know.
He's a Republican senator from one of the most conservative states. How does that happen by the way? If democracy is real, how is Lindsey Graham a senator? But whatever. So I'm watching Lindsey Graham and Lindsey Graham's looking right into the camera and he's like, you know who did this?
Iran. Iran? So I looked into this. Yeah. That's for sure.
Well, it turns out someone has yelled warmonger. Well, the guy who shot Trump was also a warmonger. And in fact, the closer you look at it, the more you realize his politics are exactly the same as Lindsey Graham's. He's a neocon. He literally volunteered in Ukraine.
And Lindsey Graham's like, no, Iran did. I was like, no, you have no opinions that are different from this guy's. And you're lying to me. And the audience I used to speak to five nights a week, you were lying to them. I'm shouting this in my hotel room, nobody heard me.
My wife was brushing her teeth. She's like, what is that? They're lying. It drove me completely insane. And there's no mention of the fact that this guy who by the way has been interviewed by every media outlet in Washington.
This guy was like a very famous guy. You may not even know this. There's only really one place to learn any facts at all and that's Elon Musk's social media app. It's crazy. I don't have a TV at home, so I'm spared most of this.
I have no idea what's going on. By the way, I strongly recommend ignorance. If you're looking to stay happy in a moment like this, just know less. Unfortunately, my job requires me to know more, but if you think about it, did God punish Adam and Eve for ignorance? I don't think he did.
He punished them for knowledge. So maybe I shouldn't watch cable news. This was my I don't wanna know what they're saying, but this week I've had to pay close attention. And every single thing is a lie either directly or it's a lie more much more prevalent and much more sinister. It's a lie by omission.
They're just not telling you the facts. And without belaboring the point, I'm using this as just one example among a countless number of examples where reality is completely distorted and the average person has not only no idea but no way of knowing what the truth is. So the guy who is now in custody for attempted murder against the Republican nominee, the former US president Donald Trump. That guy has been interviewed countless times by every big media outlet in The United States. He's got, you know, a criminal record, the length of your arm, 20 charges including possession of weapons of mass destruction.
The New York Times didn't bother to learn any of that before they held him up as a freedom fighter in Ukraine where he was living. And then the piece describes the contact he's had with members of congress and their staffs and other US government agencies. Wait a second, that's the same guy who brought a rifle with a scope to a golf course in South Florida to murder Donald Trump and he's had all these contacts with US government agencies. I don't know what that's about, but I think it's time to find out. No?
Yes. But no one's gonna find out. It's just gonna be memory holding. In a week, will never have happened. And you'll be the crazy person for remembering.
People like what? Didn't some Trump supporter bring a rifle because you're against gun control or something? No, no, no, That's not what happened. A guy who was a darling of the New York Times who has the exact same world view as Lindsey Graham decided to try and murder Donald Trump and it will be completely gone. Will have disappeared.
@jimstewartson - Jim Stewartson, Antifascist 🇺🇸🇺🇦🏴☠️
Alex Jones and Mike Flynn take a call from Tara Reade who “is under political asylum in Russia” to promote Putin’s nuclear terror campaign. I will never understand how the intelligence community and DOJ allowed the Russians to take over without a shot. This is plain Treason. https://t.co/ahJ23vdUNB
Video Transcript AI Summary
Alex Jones expresses admiration for General Flynn and raises concerns about influential figures in the administration, like Jamie Rubin, advocating for limited nuclear war. Flynn emphasizes that the concept of "limited" or "tactical" nuclear war is a dangerous narrative. Once nuclear weapons are used, it triggers a global chain reaction, potentially leading to widespread destruction and loss of life. He warns that this could pave the way for globalists to instigate a massive conflict with Russia, which would be catastrophic for the United States and could threaten its very existence.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And, Alex Jones, I am such a fan of yours. You just keep being the warrior that you are. General Flynn, I had a question. You know, I worked for, Leon Panetta and for Joe Biden in the past, and now I'm under political asylum in Russia. I won't get into my personal story.
I wanted to stay on topic here because we are running out of time. But my question was, there's a lot of talk about people like you mentioned, people you don't see up front, like Jamie Jamie Rubin, who's actually in the president's ear in the in the administration, very hawk like. He was brought up by Madeleine Albright. They're talking about limited nuclear war, and that's how they're trying to manufacture consent. Can you talk a little bit, educate people who might not know how dire that is and how scary that is and limited nuclear war and what they mean.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Thank you, Tara, and I appreciate the call and and you being being part of what you're doing. Yeah. There there is going to be a narrative. There the the left, the you know, there and their minions, they're very good about creating a narrative.
There is no such thing as when you use the word nuclear, okay, there's no such thing as limited, and there's no such thing as tactical. Okay? Once the genie is out of the bottle, once the nuclear genie is out of the bottle, you know, there's nuclear capable nations all over the world. Okay? And there are It creates a literal and figurative chain reaction.
And and and so, you know, now what do you do? And what it does is it opens the door for the globalists who want to come in and start a massive war with Russia. And and and what does that get us? It gets us nowhere. It gets more killing.
It's gonna destroy a lot of things. It's gonna it's gonna cost the American people. So from a US from an American perspective, it's going to cost this country possibly the the the the existence of our nation as it is. Well, don't most of the war games say it it never stays?
@AnonymousDigs - Anon Researcher
@TuckerCarlson continues to blow Russia/Ukraine narratives wide open! https://youtu.be/IYDFzdBQ7SY?si=KJcE0EIWAjZGdqIh
@MyLordBebo - Lord Bebo
🇺🇸🇩🇪🇷🇺🇺🇦 Tucker Carlson interview “Russia won. We have to acknowledge that. I’m an American I wanna win, but you can’t lie to yourself.” https://t.co/KcsUAVAwGJ
@Bobby1_x - Bobby Thorne
Is Tucker Carlson is a CIA asset? Yes. And here's 30 minutes-worth of proof: https://t.co/UPRNcgWihR
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 3 launches a documentary-style indictment of Tucker Carlson, asserting he has “many connections Tucker Carlson has to the CIA and other groups,” that Carlson is “leading a major part of America off a cliff with his false conservative platform,” and that he is “a total shill, a puppet being used to distribute propaganda.” The speaker argues the left-right paradigm is false, claiming CIA agents train people in media propaganda regardless of network (CNN or Fox). Anderson Cooper is cited as an example, with the claim he interned at the CIA and was born into the Vanderbilt family, making him the face of CNN and Carlson the face of Fox. The speaker then traces Carlson’s background in detail: born 05/16/1969 in San Francisco; his father Richard Carlson divorced and remarried Patricia Swanson; Carlson attended multiple boarding schools in Switzerland and Rhode Island; graduated from Trinity College in 1991. The claim is made that Carlson attempted to join the CIA after graduation but was denied, with the suggestion that his journalism path was encouraged by his well-connected father.
The narrative then catalogs Carlson’s father’s career: Richard Carlson started in journalism as a copy boy at the Los Angeles Times and a UPI reporter; later worked at several LA and San Diego outlets; became involved with San Diego Federal Savings and Loan (headed by Gordon Luce, a Reagan-era figure); ran for mayor of San Diego in 1984 and lost; Reagan announced his nomination to the United States Information Agency in 1986; served as Director of Voice of America, described as a propaganda broadcasting division; VOA is linked to the CIA, with the assertion that its purpose shifted from abroad broadcasting to domestic and international propaganda, including a CIA black site in Thailand (Cat’s Eye/Detention Site Green). The father’s later roles included ambassador to the Seychelles and CEO of King World Public Television; he became vice chairman of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (an Israel-lobby-linked group).
The speaker asserts that Carlson’s path mirrors his father’s, arguing that Carlson’s early journalism work included policy review (Heritage Foundation publication), where Heritage Foundation’s founders (Paul Wyrick, Edwin Feulner, Joseph Coors) are described as influential, with Feulner allegedly connected to KCIA donations and UN reform task forces linked to CFR and the Project for the New American Century. The Heritage Foundation’s funding is linked to Coors, Chase Manhattan, Pfizer, Dow, Sears, GM, Amoco, Mobil, with David Rockefeller’s Chase Manhattan leadership invoked to support broader conspiratorial links among the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, CFR, and related networks. The claim is made that Buckley and Crystal (William Crystal) were CIA-connected or staffed, and that Tucker Carlson’s journalism career spanned outlets including Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Weekly Standard, New York Magazine, Reader’s Digest, Slate, Esquire, The New Republic, The New York Times, The Daily Beast, The Wall Street Journal, and television work for CNN, PBS, MSNBC, before Fox News.
The video then connects Carlson to Murdoch’s News Corporation (which also owned The Weekly Standard) and to Genie Energy, with other board members named such as Jacob Rothschild and James Woolsey; Carlson’s overlap with Rockefeller- and Rothschild-linked networks is highlighted, including Charlie Rose’s Vanity Fair article about a Rothschild–Rockefeller merger and Rose’s program history. The speaker argues “these overlaps” explain why Carlson ridicules 9/11 skeptics and avoids addressing Rothschilds on his show, implying his gatekeeping role.
A separate segment covers a Washington, DC climate-conspiracy joke by a city official about Rothschilds controlling the climate, followed by a joking discussion about microaggressions at UC Santa Cruz.
Speaker 3 reiterates the claim that Carlson is “CIA?” and contends mainstream media is controlled, citing Operation Mockingbird as a precedent. The speaker concludes that even if direct government documentation isn’t present, Carlson’s numerous connections and the overlaps among the elites make his CIA linkage plausible to believe, urging viewers to do their own research and turn off the television.
The transcript then shifts to a late-appearing discussion involving a Ron Paul event in Minneapolis (2008) with speakers debating 9/11, Building 7, and government involvement, with participants sharing mixed views on 9/11 conspiracy theories, evidence, and the appropriate stance on such claims.
Towards the end, Steven Jones, a Brigham Young University physicist, offers a televised segment presenting a hypothesis that explosives might have contributed to the World Trade Center collapses, including Building 7, mentioning molten metal in basements, thermite, and a kink in the collapse symmetry, while acknowledging FEMA’s report noting only a low probability for the conventional (fire) hypothesis and calling for further investigation. The exchange ends with a brief acknowledgment of the need for follow-up by viewers. A final red-string/prophecy monologue introduces a biblical-tinged conspiracy frame involving “Jews” and “the red string,” Rahab the harlot, and spies, cutting off before a concluded point.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You're about the most unordinary person I know. You're an elitist. You're an asshole.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I don't know. I'm a but see, I'm an out of the closet elitist. I don't run around pretending to be a man of the people. I'm absolutely not a man of the people at all.
Speaker 2: How do you pay your bills?
Speaker 1: Well, I'm, like, extraordinarily loaded just from, like, money I, you know, inherited.
Speaker 0: You're a trust fund baby, are you not?
Speaker 1: No. Completely. I've never needed to work. I mean, it's all just the whole cable news thing was like a phase I was going through.
Speaker 3: I will document the many connections Tucker Carlson has to the CIA and other groups. The reason I'm doing this is because right now, he is leading a major part of America off a cliff with his false conservative platform. He rages about the elite and how America seems to be going down the drain when he himself couldn't be more connected to these same elites helping to do it. He is a total shill, a puppet being used to distribute propaganda. What people need to realize is the left and right paradigm we are given is entirely false.
Whether you watch CNN or Fox, you are getting CIA agents highly trained in propaganda, usually coming from wealthy families. Take Anderson Cooper for example. He admittedly interned at the CIA and was born into the Vanderbilt family. He could be called the face of CNN just as Tucker is the face of Fox. Follow me as I take you through his career and document his highly suspect rise in journalism.
Don't forget to take notes and research these things yourself. Tucker Carlson was born on 05/16/1969 in San Francisco, California. When he was six years old, his father Richard divorced his mother Lisa and married Patricia Swanson, one of the heiresses to Swanson Enterprises most notable for their TV dinners. Carlson attended many boarding schools during his youth, including locations in Switzerland and Rhode Island. He graduated from Trinity College in Connecticut in 1991, which is known as one of the Little Ivies, which are a group of private schools which compete with Ivy League schools.
Supposedly, Tucker attempted to join the CIA when he graduated, but his application was denied. I can't find an explanation as to why he wanted to be in the CIA or why they rejected him. His father was a very well connected man in the media industry and encouraged him to pursue journalism because, quote, they'll take anybody. His father Richard started his career in journalism at the young age of 22. He had jobs as a copy boy at the Los Angeles Times as well as a reporter for United Press International, which at the time was one of the largest newswire services in the world.
He worked for a few TV stations in Los Angeles and San Diego before joining San Diego Federal Savings and Loan in 1977. The bank was headed by Gordon Luce, who was the former public affairs director for Reagan. Richard became vice president of finance within three years, and during this time, the bank had a lot of political controversies due to their connections to current and former members of the Reagan administration. In 1983, he decided to get into politics, and in 1984, ran for mayor of San Diego. He lost to his opponent, Roger Hedgecock, who was later forced from office in 1985 after it was revealed he received over $350,000 illegally during his campaign.
Coincidentally, he would also go on to become a conservative radio host. In 1986, using his connections to the White House, Reagan personally announced his intention to nominate Richard as associate director of the United States Information Agency. He became Director of Voice of America, which was a propaganda broadcasting division of USIA. He served as their longest running Director. Voice of America started in 1941 when President Roosevelt established the Foreign Broadcast Information Service as a program directed by the Office of Strategic Services, which became the CIA.
The intention stated publicly was to communicate America's views abroad, but it was really an outfit to disseminate propaganda. The first few broadcasts for Voice of America were done over British Broadcasting Corporation transmitters but expanded rapidly and fell under control of the Office of War Information in 1942. The Office of War Information was tasked with creating distributing propaganda domestically and internationally. They did this through various means such as broadcast, newspapers, posters, films, and other media. The agency was terminated by President Truman in 1945.
Their offices were transferred to the State Department and most of their responsibilities were transferred to the CIA. It should also be noted that a Voice of America relay station in Thailand was used as a CIA black site referred to as Cat's Eye or Detention Site Green. These overlaps and connections between Voice of America and the CIA should not be glossed over. In 1991, Richard Carlson was personally nominated by President George H. W.
Bush to be The U. S. Ambassador to The Seychelles, a nation of islands off the Eastern Coast Of Africa. In 1997, he became CEO of King World Public Television, which was later purchased by CBS in 1999 for $2,500,000,000 He became the vice chairman of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, which is an organization that is part of the Israel lobby in The United States. It was founded by Clifford May, who was also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, the project for the new American century, and vice chairman of the Republican Jewish Coalition.
Now you're starting to see that it was no mistake Tucker wanted to join the CIA and become a journalist, like father, like son. Tucker Carlson got his start in journalism when he was hired as a fact checker for policy review. This was a publication put out by the Heritage Foundation. The Heritage Foundation was founded in 1973 by three men: Paul Wyrick, a political activist and commentator Edwin Feulner, an academic who attended London School of Economics, which is a Rothschild controlled school, who was also advisor to different government agencies and domestic policy consultant to Reagan, and last but not least, Joseph Coors of the Coors Brewing family. In 1975, Congress investigated the activities of the Korean Central Intelligence Agency in The US.
Mr. Feulner had met with the KCIA station chief, Kim Young Hwan, and in the early nineties, the Heritage Foundation started receiving donations from the KCIA. It should also be noted that in 2005, Mr. Feulner was appointed to a task force on UN reform, which included such people as former CIA Director James Woolsey with the goal of achieving a more effective United Nations. The task force was also supported by the Council on Foreign Relations.
In 1977, Paul Wyrick hired a man named Roger Pearson to write for policy review. In 1986, an intelligence agency watchdog publication called the Covert Action Quarterly documented Pearson's connections to James Jesus Engelton, who was the former chief of CIA counterintelligence, as well as Daniel Graham, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. The Heritage Foundation was largely funded by Joseph Coors through his family wealth, but it also received funding from Chase Manhattan Bank, Pfizer, Dow Chemical, Sears, General Motors, Amoco, and Mobil. David Rockefeller was CEO and Chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank at the time. It should also be noted that David's grandfather, John D.
Rockefeller, who started the Standard Oil Company, had to break it up due to antitrust laws, and Amico, as well as Mobile, were once part of the company. John D. Rockefeller also donated the 16 acres of land upon which the United Nations headquarters sits in New York. In David Rockefeller's O Memoirs, he is quoted as saying, some even believe we, the Rockefeller family, are part of a secret cabal working against the best interest of The United States, characterizing my family and me as internationalist and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure. One world, if you will.
If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it. He also funded and was chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations. A quick little fun fact. Before the homosexual political commentator David Brock, founder of Media Matters for America, a leftist propaganda outlet which received funding from George Soros and given office space by alleged pedophile and human trafficker John Podesta, he was on the board of the Heritage Foundation. He supported Hillary Clinton for president twice and dated James Alifantis, has been accused of being a pedophile and human trafficker.
He is also a friend of Lynn Rothschild. Lynn Rothschild supposedly abhors Trump and fawns over Clinton publicly, yet her and Trump go way back as well. Also, here's a photo of Trump laughing it up with happy Rockefeller, wife of former vice president and New York governor Nelson Rockefeller. It's a great example to show you that these people are all liars and actors. They will fill whatever role they need to fill when they need to fill it.
Sometimes that involves swinging to the total opposite side of the false paradigm politically if it's advantageous to the agenda of the elite. Pick your central banking puppet, left or right. It's all controlled, and these people are shameless whores. When Tucker Carlson left his job at policy review, he went to work for the Arkansas Democrat Gazette under the tutelage of editor Paul Greenberg. Mister Greenberg was very well connected having his pieces published across 1,400 different newspapers within the Tribune Content Agency Syndicate at the time.
He also won a Pulitzer Prize in 1969 and appeared on major television networks as commentator on talk shows such as Charlie Rose. Now I can't actually prove that mister Greenberg was CIA, but when I started to look at a few publications he put out, it made me start to wonder. In one article entitled How to Break the CIA, published on jewishworldreview.com 09/02/2009, he defends the CIA from what he believes to be unfair persecution. He defends the torture of possibly innocent people as justified in the, quote, war on terror. When referring to the torture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, he says, are we supposed to be sorry about that and proceed to punish those who uncovered these plans?
On what theory? That no good deed for your country should go unpunished? He also boohoos about the morale of the CIA and how investigations might increase their agents' anxiety. In another article by Mr. Greenberg entitled Hooray for Snooping, published in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette October 2333, he talks about a national conference of editorial writers he attended in Calgary, Alberta in the seventies or eighties.
In the article, he says that, quote, that year at Calgary, one solemn resolution proposed that we stop talking to the CIA since a number of journalists abroad had been assassinated on the pretext that we were all CIA agents, capitalist spies, tools of imperialism, and, well, you know the rest. As if the killers were so lacking in imagination, they couldn't come up with some other excuse to do away with us if they hadn't invented this one. So there we were, an all too solemn convention assembled, First Amendment or no, debating whether we should gag ourselves. I dissented, being an American, and unaccustomed to being told whom I could talk to or not talk to. Memory grows furtive, but I believe the resolution was defeated.
That it was ever considered was disgraceful enough. It occurs to some of us that if the CIA and FBI and NSA had been allowed to talk even to each other before 09/11/2001, that date might not have become another one that will live in infamy. If only big data could have been mined back then the way it is now, the country might have been a lot safer along with the thousands of innocent victims who found themselves in the Twin Towers that fateful day and others rushing to their rescue as firefighters and cops, and the troops who were stationed at the Pentagon as airliners were turned into flaming engines of destruction, their passengers and crews wiped out, including those who, like the ones aboard Valiant Flight United 93, were the first to mount a counterattack against the terrorist in the still continuing war. It would seem mister Greenberg, a very well connected columnist, was very sympathetic to the ambitions of the CIA for seemingly no reason. It should also be noted he was Jewish and a Zionist.
When Tucker left the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, he went to work for the Weekly Standard News magazine in 1995. It was founded by William Crystal and Fred Barnes. William Crystal is Jewish and the son of Irving Crystal, who's been described as, quote, the godfather of neoconservatism. Irving Crystal was also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and worked for the Congress for Cultural Freedom. The Congress for Cultural Freedom was a group started by a Jewish CIA agent named Mikkel Jocelyn in 1950.
It distributed anti communist propaganda in 35 countries and published over 20 magazines. In 1966, The New York Times are in a series of articles exposing it as a front for the CIA to transfer money to the State Department and the United States Information Agency, the same agency which broadcasted Voice of America, which Tucker's dad was the director of. In the book, Finks, How the CIA Tricked the World's Best Riders, author Joel Whitney talks about, quote, how the good versus bad CIA is a false divide and that the cultural cold warriors again and again used anticommunism as a lever to spy relentlessly on leftist and indeed writers of all political inclinations and thereby pushed US democracy a little closer to the Soviet model of the surveillance state. He alleges that Crystal was in fact a CIA employee, The man who referred to Irving as the godfather of neoconservatism was a man named Jonah Greenberg, also Jewish and editor in chief of The National Review, a semimonthly magazine. The magazine was founded by William F.
Buckley Jr. And has played a significant role in the development of conservatism in The United States. Like Krystal, Buckley was also outed as a CIA employee in Joel Whitney's book. It should also be noted that Fred Barnes, cofounder of The Weekly Standard, currently moderates a show on Voice of America called Issues in the News, again, the same program Tucker's father, Richard, was director of. It would seem William Crystal was also a fan of Paul Greenberg, Tucker's first mentor at the Arkansas Democrat Gazette since he quoted him in an article he published in the Washington Examiner 11/01/2004 entitled the 09/11 connection.
In the article, he quotes Paul as saying, everything we had thought, assumed, expected in the golden nineties hadn't been so. The surface piece of the nineteen nineties had been bought at a great price. On nine eleven, a failure of American leadership was revealed, a failure to look ahead and act forcefully to forestall threats, to do what Bush has called, quote, the hard work of fighting terror and spreading freedom. William's father Irving, alleged CIA employee, also only had kind words to say about mister Greenberg when he wrote the forward to his 1991 book, Resonant Lives, 50 Figures of Consequence. He said, and I quote, our intellectual and spiritual elites today are, with some notable exemptions, semi educated at best.
This explains why someone like Mr. Greenberg has not received the recognition he deserves. Oh, yes, he has won a Pulitzer Prize and other awards, which is nice, but these are tributes to his journalistic talents as a columnist and editorial writer. As a master of the brief moral essay, he has yet to come into his own. These men all seem to connect to one another in some way, and they all seemingly support the, quote, alleged war on terror while increasing the size of the government in the name of preserving freedom.
They protect Israel and promote their agenda while scapegoating Muslims for false flag attacks meant to justify giving more power to their think tanks and intelligence agencies which answer to nobody except the people lining their pockets. After leaving The Weekly Standard, Tucker then went on to write for New York Magazine, Reader's Digest, Slate, Esquire, The New Republic, The New York Times, The Daily Beast, and The Wall Street Journal. He would also go to work on camera for CNN, PBS, and MSNBC before finally settling into his role at Fox News as the poster boy for conservative values. During those years, he also somehow found time to appear on shows like King of Queens, 30 Rock, and Dancing with the Stars. While he is now on Fox News as arguably their most popular personality, this wasn't his first tango with News Corporation, which owns Fox News.
News Corporation owned by Rupert Murdoch also owned The Weekly Standard where Tucker worked under Bill Crystal. News Corporation headquarters is located in none other than the Rockefeller Center Complex in New York. Rupert Murdoch is also on the board of Genie Energy, an American energy company located out of New Jersey. Other noteworthy people on the board of Genie Energy include Jacob Rothschild, the head of the Rothschild banking dynasty, and James Woolsey, former director of the CIA, who, if you remember earlier, was also on the UN reform task force in 2005 with Heritage Foundation founder Edwin Feulner, whose goal was to create a more effective United Nations, the same United Nations which resides on land donated by John D. Rockefeller.
In a 2015 article written by Charlie Rose in Vanity Fair, he details a merger between Jacob Rothschild and David Rockefeller. Rothschild bought 37% of shares in Rockefeller Financial Services through his RIT Capital Partners. This is the same Charlie Rose who would have Arkansas columnist Paul Greenberg on his show to talk politics and the same Paul Greenberg who was held in such high regard by William Crystal and his father Irving. There are so many overlapping connections that can be made that I probably missed dozens, if not more, during my research into the topic. Given these connections to the CIA, the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, etcetera, it's no wonder Tucker Carlson ridicules people who believe that 09:11 was an inside job and calls these people parasites.
It's also no wonder Tucker Carlson won't seriously address the Rothschilds on his show as his boss probably wouldn't be too happy even though they have so much control and influence. Whenever people bring up legitimate issues, it's his job to mock them so his viewers won't get to the truth of the matter.
Speaker 4: Washington DC experienced a mild snowfall last week. Luckily, city councilman Trayon White was on it. He knows why it happened. Watch this.
Speaker 5: It's just started snowing out of
Speaker 6: nowhere this morning, man. Y'all better pay attention
Speaker 5: to this climate control, man. This climate manipulation, and DC keep talking about we are resilient city, and that's a model based off the Rothschilds controlling the climate. It should create natural disasters they can pay for to own the cities, man. Be careful.
Speaker 4: Yep. The Rothschilds control the climate. The Rothschilds, of course, are a wealthy Jewish banking clan. They're included in a great many conspiracy theories, but those theories rarely give them credit for the weather. That's an ambitious new twist.
Mark Stein is an author and columnist and a part time meteorologist, and he joins us tonight. What are you making? So this is by the way, I live here, so you can laugh all you want, but that's actually my city councilman speaking there. The Rothschilds control the weather. Did you know that?
Speaker 7: Well, I did actually, Tucker. They've they they bought the weather from God back in 1929, when he had a bit of a liquidity problem after the Wall Street crash, and, they keep it in the wine cellars at the Chateau Mouton Rothschild estate in France. And, they're able to micro target the climate. For example, it was light snow in your part of Washington, but I gather in the stairwell of Trayon White's, apartment building, he actually had an avalanche just on his floor. That's that's how micro targeted the big Jew weather machine is able to be.
Speaker 6: And he may and, by the way,
Speaker 7: you may you may think it's a light snowfall, but if you actually examine it, it's actually small pieces of gefelter fish, which is why it doesn't melt. And that's why the Jews control the snowplow business. So they scoop all the gefelter fish in Washington away, and they use it to make Louis Farrakhan calypso albums, which they put out to discredit, Louis Farrakhan from telling the truth about the synagogue of Satan. It all makes sense.
Speaker 6: See, the funny thing is I mean, I don't
Speaker 4: know if it's funny. It's actually so appalling and shocking that it's it's hard. I'm just gonna laugh about it. That was that was you made me feel better about a city out of control. So then I wanna run this by you.
May maybe you can make me feel better about this too. There's a new uproar on social media over microaggressions at UC Santa Cruz. The school has assembled a list of microaggressions. Tucker
Speaker 3: Carlson seems to be everywhere. He has become the face of the conservative and right wing movement in The United States, surely due to the incredible amount of connections he has to intelligence agencies and the government. This is why the gatekeepers and the media attempt to give him credibility and publish stories like how he's being spied on by the NSA or how a seemingly random man confronted him in Montana at a fly fishing shop and insulted him trying to start a confrontation, and it turns out that the man was actually an employee of the Asia Foundation, which was created in 1951 by the CIA as a front organization to distribute propaganda. If you had any doubts before watching this that Tucker Carlson was controlled opposition, I hope the research I presented will put that to bed. Mainstream media is all controlled in its one big incestuous pit.
Don't worship these people as heroes because they will sell you down the river in a heartbeat. Is Tucker Carlson CIA? Well, you can't prove that directly, but once you pour through all of his connections, you would find it incredibly hard not to believe that is the case. About the only thing we're missing at this point is official government documents detailing as much, which I am sure will come out at some point in the future. The CIA has a very long and documented history of infiltrating and controlling the media.
Operation Mockingbird is a great example of that. Tucker Carlson is just one of many examples you could make. Remember to always do your own research and turn off the television.
Speaker 6: Good to see you after, we met briefly at the event in 2008 in Minneapolis for Ron Paul.
Speaker 1: Oh, that
Speaker 6: was fun.
Speaker 2: I remember that.
Speaker 6: But but you had to leave early. What happened? The
Speaker 2: truth is stopping. The truth is stopping. I'll tell you why.
Speaker 1: I didn't bail on Ron Paul. No.
Speaker 6: I don't
Speaker 2: It's when Jesse Ventura got up and started saying 09:11 was an inside job.
Speaker 6: He didn't say that. Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah. He did say that. Answer your question. Sure. It wasn't controversial.
It was stupid. And if there's any evidence that the government is behind nine eleven, looks you know, I believe anything if there's evidence, but there isn't any. So knock it off. That's my view.
Speaker 6: Okay. But And
Speaker 2: I said that to him.
Speaker 6: Sure. Sure.
Speaker 8: But one stupid person says something
Speaker 6: stupid at Ron Paul event.
Speaker 2: No. No. But I I hate that. And and by the way, I am open to almost any crackpot theory about anything. It's just on that subject, come on.
You know what I mean? That's too much. That even for me.
Speaker 6: So just out of curiosity then, what what's your take on Building 7? Which explanation do you believe?
Speaker 7: Yeah. Come
Speaker 6: on. It's like it's a slick. No. That's a serious question. Which explanation did did
Speaker 2: it Okay. Which explanation?
Speaker 4: I I There's two explanations.
Speaker 6: It was either it was it was pulled or it was isolated pockets of fire on the building that blew that that were Let
Speaker 2: me let me get let
Speaker 6: me The towers coming down. They're coming down.
Speaker 2: This a no win conversation, so I'm not gonna continue it. But let me just say one The macro my macro view is is the obvious one, which is the buildings came down. There's a bunch of nutcases. We're playing into them.
Speaker 6: Okay. So are you still supporting Ron Paul? So are you supporting anybody in the race this year? No.
Speaker 2: I don't support. I mean, I don't even vote. I don't even vote. I'm hardly objective. I'm honest.
I'm not objective.
Speaker 6: There you go. Certainly not afraid to speak your mind.
Speaker 2: No. I'm not. No. You can assess my views. They're very clear.
You don't have any But I hate that nine eleven crap. Wish they just kicked those people out.
Speaker 6: I mean was supposed to be on the ninety third floor. Really? Oh. It's important for people and their families still involved to know the truth whether or not the government was involved or whether it was terrorists, but there's a history of government sponsored terror throughout the past century. I'm Yeah.
Exactly. So what do you mean kick them out?
Speaker 1: I don't know. Whatever.
Speaker 6: You you anyone who's a 09:11 intruder should be should be kicked out of the the country? Of course not. I don't, you know, I don't
Speaker 2: I don't even believe in parking tickets. I mean, didn't you please? I just don't I think that people, before saying something that heavy, ought to present real evidence and not just it's a coincidence or the questions remain a dumb
Speaker 6: I think like steel doesn't weaken until 2,400 degrees is evidence that that jet fuel couldn't cause a collapse of the tower from being at
Speaker 2: the top. Except the thing is it did.
Speaker 9: So
Speaker 10: problem. We we gave them a lot
Speaker 6: of money.
Speaker 10: See, see, pretty much trained them. I mean, mean, that's that's pretty much enough evidence for me.
Speaker 2: Did the government brought down the Twin Towers? You know
Speaker 10: what? The government that the government was involved in bringing that into our because they would not
Speaker 6: be trained because who because who trained them? The government trained them. The CIA trained them. The special ops trained
Speaker 2: them. Alright. I've I've had this debate so many times. It's not you know, I don't know. I just it it seems to me that it it's kinda beneath, sort of beneath, like, adult discourse even, really, I guess.
And it and it definitely discredits otherwise good ideas.
Speaker 6: I just think that the implications if if the government was involved, the implications are so vast that it should be looked into whether or not it seems ridiculous. Ridiculous.
Speaker 11: So for family members of
Speaker 6: the victims that are asking questions and want the evidence that's been withheld by the government released, you would say that they're less than adults somehow for wanting that
Speaker 2: I would say that parasites like you make it much worse for them. That's what
Speaker 10: I would say.
Speaker 12: I'm a parasite now?
Speaker 2: Yeah. It's it's filthy to say things like that with no evidence, and you have none. So you should stop. That's my point. Well, this is deal with this
Speaker 10: is insult of politics today.
Speaker 4: Back. Millions of people watch the horror of 09:11 right before their very eyes live on television. Two planes crashing into the World Trade Center. And less than a couple of hours later, both towers, of course, collapsing. My next guest says that hijackers may not have brought down the towers by themselves.
Here to explain his controversial theory, Steven Jones. He's a professor of physics at Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah. Professor Jones, thanks for coming on.
Speaker 9: Sure. Thanks, Tucker.
Speaker 4: Well, just sum up this, obviously, your theory, the one sentence that I just explained in the intro contradicts what we all think we know about how these towers collapsed. Quickly sum up your explanation for what happened.
Speaker 9: Well, I'd like to start with this paper that you referred to. It's available online. What I'm doing, Tucker, is presenting evidence, but it's a hypothesis to be tested. That's a big difference from a conclusion. And so I just wanted to clarify that.
But to sum up, I've looked at the official reports by FEMA and so on regarding the collapse of these buildings. I'd like to look at the collapse of Building 7 in just a minute. It was not even hit by a jet. So we should look at that one.
Speaker 4: Two towers. The explanation has been that the fire inside was so intense that it weakened the structural steel and that each floor collapsed collapsed down upon the next in a pancake fashion and they imploded in on themselves. Is that essentially I think what people think?
Speaker 9: Doctor. Yeah. That's basically it. Yeah. And so what I've done is to analyze these reports.
I would like to do a little experiment with you, Tucker, if I could. I sent out a video clip of the collapse of Building 7 because most people haven't actually seen that one and that's the crux of the argument I'm presenting.
Speaker 4: Sum up very quickly the argument for us. You believe there were explosives in the buildings planted by someone, detonated.
Speaker 9: Is that correct? In other words, hypothesis to be tested there's two hypotheses here. One is fire and damage caused all three buildings to collapse. The other is that explosives in the buildings may have caused the collapse. And so then we analyze and see which fits the data better, and I've done that in my in my 25 page paper.
Speaker 4: I wanna read you a quote from the Deseret Morning News, a paper in Utah from you. I'm quoting now. It is quite plausible that explosives were preplanted in all three buildings and set off after the two plane crashes, you, which were actually diversion tactic. Muslims are probably not to blame for bringing down the World Trade Center buildings after all. That's, I would think, pretty offensive to a lot of people listening.
Do you have any evidence for that?
Speaker 9: Well, not to the Muslims, I might say. I've got a lot of emails saying
Speaker 4: I'm sure your writings have been greeted with glee in Islamabad and Peshawar and places like that.
Speaker 9: Well, I haven't received any notes from there, but just good people. I have Muslim friends. Let me read for example, but I'm not going to let you off the hook. Really want to do this experiment with you.
Speaker 4: We don't have lot of time for experiments, Professor, but if you could just give us one thing to hold on to. You make these claims or appear to make these claims. Do you have any
Speaker 9: collapse of Building 7. Can you roll the video clip that I sent to you?
Speaker 4: Okay. I'm not sure
Speaker 1: if we
Speaker 4: can, but to specify that is World Trade Center Building 7, smaller than the other two, not hit by a plane, of yet it collapsed.
Speaker 9: Right. It's 47 stories.
Speaker 4: That's right.
Speaker 9: 24 steel columns in the center. Right. Trusses asymmetrically supported. Now, I can't see what you're seeing.
Speaker 4: Are you rolling that? No, we just see the building. And just so our viewers know, the explanation that I think is conventional is that there was a large tank of diesel fuel stored in a lower level of that which caught fire and the resulting fire collapsed the building.
Speaker 9: That's basically it. But as we read in the FEMA report, it says here, and I put this in my paper, of course, the best hypothesis, which is the only one they looked at, the fire, has only a low probability of occurrence. Further investigation, analyses are needed to resolve this issue and I agree with that. But they admit there's only a low probability. And if you look at the collapse, see what I've studied is the fall time, the symmetry, the fact that it first dips in the middle, that's called the kink, which is very characteristic, of course, of controlled demolition.
Speaker 4: Professor, that we are out of time and I'm not sure that you've J.
Speaker 9: One fully other thing I want to mention
Speaker 1: about Doctor.
Speaker 4: Okay, if you can hit it,
Speaker 6: really quick.
Speaker 9: Doctor. Here we go. Molten metal in the basements of all three buildings. Yet, all scientists now reasonably agree that the fires were not sufficiently hot to melt the steel. So what is this molten metal?
It's a direct evidence for the use of high temperature explosives such as thermite. Thermite produces molten iron as an end product. Okay. So, we do have Yeah, it's very short time, but people will read the paper, then I talk about the molten metal, the symmetry of the collapse, and the weaknesses and inadequacies of the fire hypothesis.
Speaker 4: Professor, we're going to have to leave it to our viewers who are interested enough to follow-up to do just that. We appreciate you coming on. Even if I don't understand your theories, we appreciate you trying to explain them. Thanks. Okay.
Speaker 13: The red string is a symbol to show the Jews that they are helping the Jews usher in the new world order. The reason they do it is so that the Jews spare them from the nasty population that is happening. Not many people are allowed to live in a new world order. In the Old Testament, the book of Joshua, God was giving the Israelites the land of Canaan. Joshua sent in spies.
The Canaanites found out and were searching for the spies. The spies got help from a harlot called Rahab. The Canaanites went to Rahab's house, and she told them she did not see anyone. When they left, Rahab, the harlot, made a deal with Israelite spies. Since she helped the spies, she asked that they spare her and her family.
The Israelite spies agreed and Rahab let them down on a red rope from the on the wall, and the spies escaped safely. The Israelites killed all the Canaanites except Rahab and her fam
@TheMilkBarTV - Nathan Livingstone (MilkBarTV)
You really want to play this game with Tucker Carlson? The man's been on the wrong side of every issue only until it was profitable not to be (Israel included) - he worked at CNN, MSNBC & PBS. https://t.co/5vBVjpfBpX
Video Transcript AI Summary
- Tucker Carlson Today debuts with Douglas Murray as the chosen guest, presenting him as someone with “crystal clarity” on global and national events, though Carlson previously described Murray as clever but not an expert on anything.
- Carlson discusses Trump, saying he would not be a good president and would likely cancel the next election if elected; he adds, “We didn’t understand the country we preside over,” encompassing both the political class in DC and those with authority or money in the United States.
- A speaker quotes Carlson stating, “I hate him passionately. I can’t handle much more of this.” and notes Carlson saying, “We are very, very close to being able to ignore Trump most nights,” adding that Trump is a “demonic force, a destroyer, but he’s not gonna destroy us.”
- Carlson mentions following Bobby Kennedy Jr. at a Donald Trump rally in Madison Square Garden as part of discussions on American politics and national sentiment.
- In an aside about foreign policy and allies, Carlson says: “America’s supporting Israel because it’s an ally,” and notes that Qatar is a close ally with “the largest American air base in The Middle East” located there.
- On global health, the discussion references “The Chinese coronavirus” as a major event that will affect life, adding that it’s “definitely not just the flu,” and includes a claim about past flu deaths versus COVID, with one remark questioning if anyone they know died of COVID and noting uncertainty about that.
- The conversation touches on military ethics and civilian harm, with a claim that incinerating tens of thousands of civilians would be “a bad thing,” and then a provocative line about not calling for nuclear weapons against Ayatollah if there’s a belief in a murderer with nuclear weapons.
- A controversial topic is raised about teenage sexuality, asserting that a 15 to 17-year-old boy is biologically driven to procreate and faces a choice between harming a peer emotionally or seeking a safer, though illegal, outlet with a professional partner; the stance is framed as “harm reduction.”
- There is a reference to Emmanuel Macron, with a claim that he was 14 or 15 when he met someone, and a challenge to the assertion that it is wrong or child molestation; the broader point is about Buchanan’s argument that American involvement in World War II may have been a mistake, inviting scrutiny of that view.
- The host recounts a summer after freshman year spent in Nicaragua to engage in war, linking to broader foreign policy debates about war and citizenship.
- A provocative claim is made that anyone who serves in a foreign military should lose his citizenship immediately.
- On Sharia law, the transcript states: “Sharia is intolerant. Women have, in the Quran, fewer rights than men do. I think that in every Muslim majority country in the world, non Muslims are treated, have fewer rights. Sharia law is bad, Seth. I don’t know if you’ve heard that. It’s bad. It’s worse than what’s happening in New York and Detroit. It’s just bad.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Hello, and welcome to the very first episode of Tucker Carlson Today. We had a broad range of possibilities for the first person to talk to as we begin this new show, this new series. But really, in the end, there was only one choice. The one person we know who has crystal clarity on what's happening, not just in this country, but in the world, someone who's watched it and chronicled it for years now. His name is Douglas Murray.
I know Douglas, and I think that I'm always gotten along with him, I think he's clever, but he's hardly an expert on anything. Well, Mike, what? I don't think Trump would be a good president. I think he'd probably cancel the next election if he got elected. You know?
It happened because we didn't understand the country we preside over. And by we, not just the political class in DC, but anybody with authority or money in The United States.
Speaker 1: Referring to Trump, Carlson says, I hate him passionately. I can't handle much more of this.
Speaker 0: We are very, very close to being able to ignore Trump most nights. I truly can't wait, Carlson texted. That Trump is, in his words, a demonic force, a destroyer, but he's not gonna destroy us. It's such an honor to be here, and it's wild. Just another day following Bobby Kennedy junior at a Donald Trump rally in Madison Square Garden.
I mean, what? America's supporting Israel because it's an ally. I don't even know what those words mean. I'm just saying my principles. They're ally.
Right? I mean, they they both what that means to be an ally. Qatar is, like, one of our closest allies in the world. The largest American air base in The Middle East is in Qatar. They're a close ally of ours.
The Chinese coronavirus is a major event. It will affect your life. And by the way, it's definitely not just the flu. Oh, so thousand twelve, 2013, I read up, More people died of the flu that year than COVID did. Yeah.
Would you know anyone who died of COVID? Did people really die of COVID? I don't know. I never knew anyone who did. Technology.
They've only been used once. If you end up killing, incinerating tens of thousands of civilians, that's just a bad thing. Let's let's just be honest. That's just a bad thing. And I just don't understand why you're not calling for the use of nuclear weapons against the Eyatollah right now.
I'm serious. If they're if you really believe there's a murderer nuclear weapons. See, whatever is the case. So you're a 15 to 16, 17 year boy. You're you are driven by biology to procreate.
Yes. You're either going to be inflicting your attentions on one of your peers who is, let's be honest, not ready for it. She's gonna get hurt emotionally. Or you can have a safer, albeit technically illegal outlet with someone who knows what she's doing. You're not gonna hurt her.
You know what I mean? Like, this is harm reduction.
Speaker 1: Now admitting that Emmanuel Macron was only 14 when they met, when he was in that play. 15, she says, whenever this affair happened.
Speaker 0: I'll just go with 15 and say that's wrong. Yeah. Isn't that child molestation? Theme, it's the it's the larger point that Buchanan is making that perhaps American involvement in World War two was a mistake that that that people are upset about and that I think you can take him to task over. Because I think it's a it's a wrong and in some ways an odious point.
I think the story we got about World War two is all wrong. I think that's right. And you can hardly say that this country won that war. In what meaningful sense? The summer after my freshman year, my roommate and I decided to go down to Nicaragua for the summer and work and, you know, get involved in the war.
Think anybody, by the way, who serves in a foreign military should lose his citizenship immediately. Sharia is intolerant. Women have, in the Quran, fewer rights than men do. I I think that in every Muslim majority country in the world, non Muslims are treated, have fewer rights. Sharia law is bad, Seth.
I don't know if you've heard that. It's bad. It's worse than what's happening in New York and Detroit. It's just bad.
@MsBlaireWhite - BLAIRE WHITE
Dude who pushed the COVID vaccine and Iraq war says someone else is sabotaging America. https://t.co/Y6zeIWnSDA
@tedcruz - Ted Cruz
Nothing says America First like bear-hugging America-hating terrorists….
@AGHamilton29 - AG
Tucker can’t go one episode or newsletter without promoting lies about Israel or Jews. Latest episode with an antisemitic anti-American guest who was literally sanctioned by the Trump admin for her pro-terror agenda. https://t.co/TE5vrfFram
@TCNetwork - Tucker Carlson Network
We remain grateful that @tedcruz gives so much attention to our podcasts and newsletters. It really means the world. Want to read what the Canada-born senator is so whipped up about for yourself? Sign up to have the TCN Morning Note sent straight to your inbox here: https://watchtcn.co/MorningNote
Bitly | Page Not Found | 404
watchtcn.co
@tedcruz - Ted Cruz
Nothing says America First like bear-hugging America-hating terrorists….
@AGHamilton29 - AG
Tucker can’t go one episode or newsletter without promoting lies about Israel or Jews. Latest episode with an antisemitic anti-American guest who was literally sanctioned by the Trump admin for her pro-terror agenda.
