Matt Taibbi: All the Top Secret Information Trump Is Releasing & What He Should Declassify Next

Donald Trump is releasing more secrets than any president in history. Matt Taibbi on the top ten mysteries we’re likely to solve. (00:00) Fauci’s Pardon (07:32) The J6 Committee’s Pardon (11:02) The Golden Age of Journalism Has Begun (17:44) The Major Questions We Should Be Asking Now That Trump Is President (31:00) The Destruction of Nord Stream Will Kill the EU (37:57) The Key Players of COVID That Have Yet to Be Investigated Paid partnerships with: ExpressVPN: Get 3 months free at https://ExpressVPN.com/Tucker PureTalk: Get your free iPhone 14 or Samsung Galaxy at https://PureTalk.com/Tucker Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:01Speaker 00

  Are you ever shopping online and suddenly a discount that helps you save pops up? It makes your day, sometimes even your week. Want that feeling month after month? Well, new customers who save by switching their home and auto insurance to Progressive, save hundreds. Cue your happy dance. Get your quote today at progressive.com. Progressive Casualty Insurance Company affiliates and other insurers not available in all states.

• 0:27Tucker Carlson?

  So everyone's mad that, even some Democrats, I think, are mad about these last-minute Biden pardons of Fauci and the J6 committee, et cetera, et cetera. So let's just set that aside. My concern is not that these people are punished. Fauci's 81.

• 0:44Speaker 02

  Yeah, who cares?

• 0:44Tucker Carlson?

  I think he'll be punished, you know, in some larger sense. But I want to know what they did. That's the... Okay, so can we just go through a couple of these? And like, why would you pardon Fauci? What are the potential crimes, the crimes you think he committed and could be punished for that you're trying to prevent him from being punished for by pardoning him?

• 1:05Speaker 02

  Well, with Fauci specifically, the one thing that comes to mind immediately is perjury.

• 1:11Tucker Carlson?

  Yes.

• 1:12Speaker 02

  Because he's been accused of that essentially already by, you know, the House Committee.

• 1:18Tucker Carlson?

  Lying under oath to the Congress.

• 1:19Speaker 02

  Lying under oath to the Congress, in particular, saying, you know, that we have never funded gain of research, that we weren't doing it during this time period, even as there are other people in the government, like, you know, the Deputy Director of the NIH, saying, yes, we were, or Ralph Baric, who was one of the scientists at UNC, saying, yes, absolutely, that was a gain of function.

• 1:46Tucker Carlson?

  Yeah.

• 1:47Speaker 02

  So there's a little bit of a problem there. Now, he later amended the statement and said that he was speaking in a specific way, under a specific definition, but there's exposure there. But that's, that's not really the issue with Fauci. The issue...

• 2:01Tucker Carlson?

  I believe that.

• 2:13Tucker Carlson?

  Welcome to the Tucker Carlson Show. We bring you stories that have not been showcased anywhere else, and they're not censored, of course, because we're not gatekeepers. We are honest brokers here to tell you what we think you need to know and do it honestly. Check out all of our content at TuckerCarlson.com. Here's the episode.

• 2:32Speaker 02

  The issue is, really, it's about the whole rat's nest of gain-of-function. How much did the authorities know about what was going on at the Wuhan Institute? Did they have human sources at the Wuhan Institute? Was there advance warning that this was coming? Were they suppressing investigations into the possibility of a lab leak because of the connections to US research? All that stuff is in play. I mean, there's a lot of stuff that's going on that you want to know.

• 3:07Tucker Carlson?

  So Fauci was part of the US bioweapons program, obviously, right? I mean, if you're funding gain-of-function, vaccines are one part of that, but probably not the only part of it, right? So the idea is you make the virus more dangerous in order to create a vaccine to fight the virus. But in the process, you wind up with much more dangerous viruses.

• 3:26Speaker 02

  Right. And that's one of the things that raised a red flag for some of the people who were looking at the COVID phenomenon is just look at the surface characteristics of the disease. It's highly transmissible. It's not terribly symptomatic. Everybody's going to get it. Not everybody's going to be harmed by it. It's what they designed, what you would do if you were designing a disease to carry a vaccine, for instance.

• 3:55Tucker Carlson?

  Yes. So my interest is not in Fauci. I think any normal person can make up his mind about Fauci. It's pretty obvious Fauci is the super bureaucrat. It's in the bioweapon programs and the Frankenstein science that's being funded by our tax dollars around the world, to be specific, in Ukraine, in China, in Djibouti. We have biolabs.

• 4:22Tucker Carlson?

  In a lot of places around the world and like, what are they doing?

• 4:26Speaker 02

  What are they doing? What was their relation to, to the Wuhan Institute also? I mean, I think those are all important questions, like both the bioweapons and, you know, their, their relation to the, to the pandemic.

• 4:41Speaker 02

  But the, the thing is about these pardons, they're a mistake. If you want to know what's happening, they just made it a lot easier for us to find out.

• 4:51Tucker Carlson?

  Wow.

• 4:52Speaker 02

  Because now, uh, once the pardon's, uh, delivered, the person can't plead the fifth. If they're brought before a grand jury, they can't take the fifth anymore. If they're brought before a congressional committee, uh, they, they can't evoke their right against self-incrimination. So they have to say something. And this is what's so interesting because I've been talking to criminal defense attorneys, people who are former Senate investigators, some current Senate investigators, and they all kind of said the same thing. It's so illogical to give somebody a pardon if you're trying to cover up, uh, things that the only reason you would really do it is if there's very serious crimes involved, right?

• 5:34Speaker 02

  So that's a red flag for us. When we see somebody getting, getting a pardon, we think, well, why would they do that unless there's something really bad there, right? So, uh, either it's a mistake where they just stupidly made it easier for everybody to investigate, or there's something we don't know about that is interesting.

• 5:52Tucker Carlson?

  Well, it's such a profound thing to do. I mean, I, if somebody said to you, Matt, would you accept a pardon? You would say, well, why would I, why would I need a pardon? No, I mean, it's like, it's, it's incriminating, it's morally incriminating, or it has the appearance of moral incrimination, just by its fact, right?

• 6:10Speaker 02

  It's not only morally incriminating, it's legally incriminating. As the Department of Justice itself said in a memo, I think, on one of the J6 cases, it said, this does not unring the bell of conviction if you get a, a pardon going forward. So you're making an admission if you accept a pardon. Uh, so.

• 6:32Speaker 02

  Yeah, I I wouldn't accept one if I were totally innocent.

• 6:34Tucker Carlson?

  Of course.

• 6:35Speaker 02

  Yeah, and also, I I wouldn't accept one if I had something to hide. Because now, you know, if I'm dragged before a congressional committee, or especially a grand jury investigation, now I can't tap out and say, yeah, I'm sorry, I'm gonna take the fifth on that.

• 6:49Tucker Carlson?

  That's fascinating.

• 6:50Speaker 02

  Right? So it the the whole thing is really illogical.

• 6:55Speaker 02

  I think it was more meant to be a symbolic gesture. And this is really, I think, speaks to the the the thinking of the Biden administration about so many things, right? They were so driven by optics with Trump that they did so much. They did a lot of things that were incredibly stupid. So they want to portray him as vengeful and out to get people. And the the pardons are a good way to do that. I mean, if you're aiming for that audience, but it had the negative effect of of opening all these investigations up, it seems to me.

• 7:29Tucker Carlson?

  So you really think this was aimed at MSNBC viewers? Just to paint Trump as a vindictive person?

• 7:36Speaker 02

  So I asked a lot of people, why did they do this? Like, what's the point? And one of the theories was that, that this is messaging.

• 7:45Tucker Carlson?

  Yes.

• 7:45Speaker 02

  That they were trying to create a headline. And there were lots of headlines instantaneously. If you saw them, they all basically said the same thing, like, you know, to to ward off future vindictive retaliatory acts by the Trump administration. You know, Biden issues pardons. It's always after the comma, right?

• 8:06Speaker 02

  That's one theory. The other theory is that in the last days of a presidential administration, it gets pretty chaotic in the White House. And people who want things and, you know, they will come in and there will be a hurried frenzy to put stuff on paper. And that's why there are unprecedented things in these pardons. For instance, the J six pardons, this has never happened before, where you give a pardon to a category of unnamed people, right? It says to the members of the committee, to the Capitol Police officers who testified, to the staff, but it doesn't delineate the names of the people who are pardoned. So now, if you want to invoke your pardon,

• 8:50Speaker 02

  you actually have to go over a test to prove that you're actually part of that category that I testified before the committee. Does that mean that the committee called you? That you talked to a staffer once? Or does that mean you actually sat in front of the hall and testified? It's very weird. And the only explanation that I could come up with from people is that they were in a hurry. They didn't have all the names.

• 9:16Tucker Carlson?

  It's amazing.

• 9:17Speaker 02

  Right?

• 9:18Tucker Carlson?

  So, but why would you preemptively pardon the J6 committee? I mean, that's like the single most legitimate, morally empowered, great group of people ever impaneled in this country. Like, truly.

• 9:34Speaker 02

  Well, I mean, there are obviously some theories about why they would do that, right?

• 9:38Tucker Carlson?

  What?

• 9:41Tucker Carlson?

  Mother Teresa, she was such a great person, we're gonna preemptively pardon her. Like, what? This is like crazy.

• 9:47Speaker 02

  No, it is absolutely crazy. And if I were some of those people, I'd be offended.

• 9:53Tucker Carlson?

  Yes.

• 9:53Speaker 02

  Especially the people who testified and who didn't lie under oath.

• 10:00Tucker Carlson?

  Yes.

• 10:00Speaker 02

  For instance, right? Because they're all named. Yeah. All the police officers who testified to the committee. Now, what if they're only really trying to protect a couple of them? And there are some very conspicuous names.

• 10:14Tucker Carlson?

  I think we know who they are.

• 10:15Speaker 02

  Right, yeah, exactly.

• 10:17Tucker Carlson?

  The ones they're trying to protect.

• 10:18Speaker 02

  Right. But what if you're one of the other ones? Who just gave some testimony?

• 10:22Tucker Carlson?

  They, I mean, they interviewed hundreds and probably thousands of people, right?

• 10:26Speaker 02

  It's some number like that.

• 10:28Tucker Carlson?

  Massive, massive number. And I assume most of them told the truth.

• 10:31Speaker 02

  I mean, right. Right.

• 10:32Tucker Carlson?

  Most people do tell the truth, actually, I think.

• 10:34Speaker 02

  I think that's probably the case, yeah. I mean, especially if you're under oath and you're a law enforcement officer. I mean, it's a very serious thing to lie in those situations. And, you know, there are a couple of places in the testimony where it doesn't look good for some of the people who testified. But for the vast majority of them, I would take it as a grievous insult to be given that pardon. And especially to not be named. That's what's so weird about it.

• 11:00Tucker Carlson?

  But it suggests what I have thought from the first week, which is there are like serious crimes here.

• 11:07Tucker Carlson?

  I mean, you talked to Steve Sund, you know, who ran Capitol Police, who's like a non-political person, just career law enforcement, former MP, you know, former Washington DC cop. I don't think he has any weird agenda. He, I mean, his story is so unbelievable. They just didn't give him any intel at all and didn't give him any resources and everybody else knew this was happening except him. I mean, the whole thing is so nuts that you're like, wait, there's something going on here. I don't really know. The pipe bombs at the

• 11:33Speaker 02

  The pipe bombs, the gallows that was erected by some weird, unknown group the night before.

• 11:39Tucker Carlson?

  Right. Will we ever get disclosure? I guess that's what I want. I just want to know. Again, I'm not, I am not vengeful. I don't really want to punish people so much as I just want to know. That feels like punishment enough. Will we?

• 11:50Speaker 02

  I think we will. I think we're, we're heading into a golden age for investigative journalism. I think this is after eight years of crazy misleading news stories and dead ends and unanswered questions and fake news, you know, ranging from Russiagate to Nord Stream to, you know, the COVID origins where we were actively kept away from one side of that story for years. I think we're going to find out a lot of this stuff. There are investigations already underway, document hunts going on all over the place. There are reports that have been commissioned to look into a lot of these questions and they're

• 12:35Speaker 02

  going to be staffed up with a lot of money and a lot of personnel. And it's just an unprecedented situation where, for instance, the DHS or the FBI or the DOJ would be in sync with congressional investigators to the point where they're not going to have to issue subpoenas for a lot of this stuff. They're just going to sit down and say, here's a list of the documents we want to find. And I think that they're going to have that collaborative arrangement.

• 13:03Tucker Carlson?

  Incredible. There's panic. I sense panic. And I sense it in some of these confirmation battles, particularly the sort of offline stuff that you don't see in the media, but just when you find out the lengths to which permanent Washington is going to say sabotage Tulsi Gabbard.

• 13:20Tucker Carlson?

  Who's an army officer who's had a clearance for more than a decade, carries an automatic weapon. I mean, clearly, we trust her with America's, you know, defense. Why can't we trust her with America's secrets? Well, of course, we can. So what is this? And it really is, people are panicked that what they've been doing is going to come to light, I think.

• 13:38Speaker 02

  Well, they should be panicked because if you read the executive order on the weaponization of government, it specifically empowers the Director of National Intelligence to conduct a wide-ranging report into the possible misdeeds of the entire intelligence community and orders her to come up with, you know, anything negative that they can find.

• 14:02Tucker Carlson?

  Holy shit.

• 14:03Speaker 02

  So can you imagine?

• 14:04Tucker Carlson?

  No.

• 14:04Speaker 02

  Right? I mean, that's like trying to make a list of everything.

• 14:09Tucker Carlson?

  [laughing]

• 14:11Speaker 02

  She'll be doing it from now to the end of time. But, no, I mean, in perfect seriousness, this is, it's setting the stage for, you know, kind of a second Church Committee hearings era. And that was a great moment in American history.

• 14:26Tucker Carlson?

  Once every 50 years.

• 14:27Speaker 02

  Right.

• 14:28Tucker Carlson?

  We find out what they're doing with their black budgets.

• 14:30Speaker 02

  Yeah. And really, in the mid 70s, who would have known, right, that we were doing such an incredibly wide-ranging, you know, list of horrible, stupid things from, you know, trying to

• 14:45Tucker Carlson?

  Yes.

• 14:46Speaker 02

  murder Castro with exploding seashells, to spying on Martin Luther King Jr., to trying to, you know, leak news about mistresses of civil rights leaders. I mean, the list went on and on and on. And we only found out about it because they went too far, right? And now, suddenly, people in the Senate had a hammer to start looking, you know, into this direction. And it all came out. Well, not all of it, but a lot of it came out.

• 15:14Tucker Carlson?

  A lot of it. Frank Church sadly got incredibly fast-developing cancer, I noticed.

• 15:19Speaker 02

  Did he?

• 15:20Tucker Carlson?

  Yes, he did. He did kind of like Jack Ruby-style cancer, Hugo Chavez-style cancer. It's interesting.

• 15:25Speaker 02

  Huh. I did not know that.

• 15:27Tucker Carlson?

  Yeah, couldn't treat it. He died. Sad.

• 15:31Tucker Carlson?

  Sorry.

• 15:32Speaker 02

  No, it's alright. I mean, look, it's hard not to think. I, I never thought this way until, uh, like a year ago, a year and a half ago.

• 15:40Tucker Carlson?

  I'm like, oh, no, I did not think this way. I, I attacked anyone who did.

• 15:44Speaker 02

  Right, yeah.

• 15:45Tucker Carlson?

  But I, can I say one thing that I've noticed now that I'm in middle age? Um, is that all my life, the older guys I've known, like you go on duck hunting trips or whatever, in, in Washington where I live, like with my dad and his friends or whatever, and the guys who are in their 50s and 60s, all thought this way. They all thought this way, you know, after like a lifetime of government service as an operations officer, or whatever you're doing, right?

• 16:07Speaker 02

  Right, right.

• 16:08Tucker Carlson?

  They all had this mindset. And I remember sitting like in a duck blind thinking, these guys are fucking crazy, they're all nuts. What I didn't realize was, there's a reason that people become more open to these sorts of explanations, the more they see.

• 16:26Speaker 02

  Of course, and maybe, right?

• 16:28Tucker Carlson?

  Right, yeah. I don't know why I didn't get that.

• 16:30Speaker 02

  Yeah, well, I, it's probably just our generation that thought the Schoolhouse Rock thing was true. I mean, right?

• 16:38Tucker Carlson?

  It's so true.

• 16:39Speaker 02

  Cause you know, we, we, we grew up with all the president's men and after the church committee, so we thought it all, it had could come out. The good guys won, there's transparency, we have the Freedom of Information Act, we can find everything out. No, right? It turns out, no, right?

• 16:55Tucker Carlson?

  No, you're, I never thought of Schoolhouse Rock and all the president's men as sophisticated propaganda put there by the intel agencies, but I think you're right.

• 17:06Speaker 02

  Whether they're, whoever did it, it was effective.

• 17:08Tucker Carlson?

  Wanna hear something creepy? You are being bought and sold every day without your knowledge. Data brokers are watching everything you do online. They track every website that you visit, every link that you click, every video that you play. They collected information about you and your behavior and your thoughts, and they sell it to anybody who wants to buy it, including governments. No privacy whatsoever. Obviously, it should be illegal, it's not illegal. People are getting paid off to keep it legal, politicians specifically.

• 17:38Tucker Carlson?

  Politicians, by the way, are some of the ones using your data. They buy it and then employ it in campaigns to swing your vote. It's creepy as hell. There's a way to get around it, though. It's called ExpressVPN. With ExpressVPN, our online activity here at this office goes through secure encrypted servers. That means no data brokers can see what you're doing online, or we're doing online, not that we're doing anything wrong. ExpressVPN also hides our IP address. There's no way for information we bought or sold. We cannot recommend it enough. It's our identity defender. It could be yours as well. Right now, you get an extra three months for free when you use our special link. Go to expressvpn.com/tucker. Get three extra months of ExpressVPN.

• 18:22Speaker 03

  Imagine if every time inverse Kramer or another top investor bought a stock, you bought it too, in your own brokerage account, automatically. Well, that now exists and it's called Autopilot. Built by the team behind the viral Pelosi stock tracker, Autopilot lets you browse their marketplace of strategies run by proven investors or AI-driven models. Just find one with a high return, connect your personal brokerage account like a Schwab or Robinhood, and every trade they make, you make automatically. Your money never leaves your own account. Autopilot just mirrors the moves. So now, no more guessing, no more staring at charts, and no more checking the market between meetings. Also, over 1.3 billion is already invested.

• 19:05Speaker 03

  So if you wanted to check it out, search Autopilot in the App Store or go to joinautopilot.com. That's joinautopilot.com. Investing has risks like the loss of principal.

• 19:16Speaker 04

  We all hear the radio ads about the IRS. They tell you to be afraid, to be scared, and they try to frighten you into calling. I'm not here to do that. Tax relief advocates is different. TRA is here to tell you that if you owe money to the IRS, whether it's 5,000, 50,000, or 500,000, we have a solution. It doesn't matter if you're sitting in your car, at work, or with your kids, no matter where you are. Call now. 800-576-. 4705. Don't lose hope. TRA can eliminate or reduce what you owe to the IRS. Generous programs are now available that can give you a fresh start. Our passion is taxes and helping individuals fix their IRS problems. We have over 1,000 five-star reviews on Google and an A+ with the Better Business Bureau. You don't need to be afraid of the IRS any longer.

• 20:00Speaker 04

  End your tax nightmare today by visiting us online at TRA.com or call 800-576-4705. That's 800-576-4705. Tax Relief Advocates. Real solutions for real people.

• 20:30Tucker Carlson?

  So can we just go through, since I

• 20:32Speaker 02

  Sure.

• 20:32Tucker Carlson?

  think you're, as I've said many times, and I mean it, I think you're one of the great reporters still working. Not that there are many. Now, there's a ton of competition.

• 20:39Speaker 02

  Yeah, there aren't many.

• 20:40Tucker Carlson?

  But, and you are by your nature, a curious person, which is like requirement one for journalism. And like the one thing, no one else seems curious about, I think, but you are. So can you just, just go through in no particular order, the stories whose endings you'd like to know? Like, what are you curious about as we enter an age of disclosure, and God willing, we do? What do you want to know?

• 21:07Speaker 02

  So first of all, just to back up, I tried to make a list a couple of days ago.

• 21:11Tucker Carlson?

  Oh, did you really?

• 21:11Speaker 02

  Yeah, of all the things that I would want to investigate if I were, you know, in that kind of a position to order these kinds of things.

• 21:19Tucker Carlson?

  I'm actually going to take notes as you talk, because I want to follow along at home as this happens. Okay.

• 21:24Speaker 02

  But I couldn't finish. There were so many different things that I never got to the end, but I would say that the big ones. You know, there are huge glaring questions, which is unusual. For instance, who was president the last four years, especially the last year? I mean, I think that's an enormous question.

• 21:46Tucker Carlson?

  Tony Blinken.

• 21:47Speaker 02

  Do you think it was Blinken?

• 21:49Tucker Carlson?

  You know, I, I think Blinken's so evil, so demonstrably evil and also stupid that I just see his fingerprints everywhere.

• 21:59Speaker 02

  Right, right.

• 22:00Tucker Carlson?

  But I, that's a pure guess.

• 22:03Speaker 02

  That's, that's the problem. We don't really know.

• 22:04Tucker Carlson?

  I know that in the last two months Blinken did everything he could to accelerate the war between the United States and Russia, which is like, I should be illegal. I don't know how he got away with that. Nobody said anything about it, but that's a fact. So anyway, sorry.

• 22:18Speaker 02

  No, but he, and he, you know, the, his State Department was also involved in the censorship stuff too. So.

• 22:25Tucker Carlson?

  Who was president?

• 22:26Speaker 02

  Who were what? Who was president?

• 22:27Tucker Carlson?

  Let's start with a big question.

• 22:28Speaker 02

  Yeah, no, I mean, I, I think of all the crimes that are on the table and the potential corruption issues, people signing documents or somehow getting documents signed by an incompetent president or an unfit president has to rank up there with the most serious things that have ever happened in, in American history, right? So you have to look at what were the, what was the process of the White House operation? Right? Who was actually running things? We know from a surface point, who was, who held the posts, right?

• 23:09Speaker 02

  So Ron Klain was the, the chief of staff. We know roughly who else was in Joe Biden's orbit. What, what were the, what was the schedule? You know, did he, did he sign things by auto pen? Cause they have this, this machine that does. And who, and who was, who basically had the power of attorney to turn that on, right? Like, these are all questions that we have to get answers to. What was the day to day operation of the Biden White House? And again, especially in the last year, because I think, you know, that gets to bigger questions of who was really making these big foreign policy decisions? And who was making decisions about things like?

• 23:51Speaker 02

  You know, cutting off the Democratic primaries to challengers, you know, I think these are big party decisions, not necessarily White House decisions. Who decided to kick Biden off the ticket? Biden on July 13th was giving a speech in Detroit and he's like, I'm running. I mean, he couldn't have been more affirmative about the idea that he was not going to drop out of the race. Within seven days, he was out of the race. Within three days after that Detroit thing, there were stories leaked out in Politico that were basically saying that Nancy Pelosi was going to ask him to or going to try to pressure him to drop out. But I don't believe that. I

• 24:36Speaker 02

  think we need to find out exactly what those communications were. I mean, who had the authority to push the President of the United States off his own ticket? Unless he had a sudden change of heart. Do you believe that?

• 24:50Tucker Carlson?

  I think it's really obvious that his statement dropping out on Twitter was issued before he knew. I mean, I've heard that. Again, I don't know is the truth, but I've heard that.

• 25:01Speaker 02

  It's very conspicuous that when he, when he wanted to say things, he said it on camera. But there were all kinds of things where the wording was much more careful and that was done on Twitter or in a letter or in a press release. I mean, even, even the, the note explaining the pardons, who wrote that? Right? It was on a, you know, Biden's Twitter account. I doubt he's sitting there tweeting.

• 25:25Tucker Carlson?

  So it's just a coup. I mean, that's a coup. If you take a sitting President of the United States and force him to drop out. I mean, right?

• 25:33Speaker 02

  It's on the table. It has to be. Because, you know, Jill Biden has been very circumspect in talking about it. She's said these really curious things about how she wants to reevaluate her relationships. I think she, she was referring to Nancy Pelosi. But what exactly happened in, in that one week period between, you know, the middle of July and the 21st or so? And then what happened in, between the 21st and the 22nd or whenever it was when Biden suddenly came out and, and made Kamala the nominee? Like, how did that happen? Who made that decision?

• 26:13Tucker Carlson?

  So that was after the Republican convention?

• 26:17Speaker 02

  Yes, yes.

• 26:19Tucker Carlson?

  So you had this incredible week or two where Trump gets shot, survives, you have the convention and Biden drops out. I mean, that's, and as far as I know, I don't think anyone's ever done like a real TikTok on that.

• 26:35Speaker 02

  No, there were, there were stories, but they were incredibly incomplete. And this is one of the things where, you know, I was looking at it even from just the professionalism point of view in terms of the New York Times, the Washington Post, all of these, these papers. How does nobody ask who made the decision to nominate Kamala Harris? How did that happen? Um, how was he kicked off? Uh, or how did he come, come to that decision? Normally there would be a big show of that, right? There would be, somebody would come out and give an interview, uh, to, I don't know, 60 minutes and say, well, here's how that happened, right? And whether it was true or not, there would be a grand explanation.

• 27:20Speaker 02

  Um, whenever there's something big that happens with the president. Here they just, they just kind of did a little tweet or a press release and there were things that were leaked out in newspapers. None of it made any sense. So, uh, you know, they have to get all those communications. And I think that's what was important there. You know, there were preservation letters that were sent out by some Senate committees. I hope it captured a lot of this stuff, but we'll see.

• 27:46Tucker Carlson?

  Do you, um, have any sense of what the answer is to either one of these questions? Who was functionally operating the Biden administration and who kicked Biden out? Who made these decisions?

• 27:57Speaker 02

  I've only heard theories about this, right? And, and that's the problem. It's kind of irresponsible for reporters to speculate.

• 28:05Tucker Carlson?

  I agree.

• 28:06Speaker 02

  We don't know. All we know, we, we saw little bits and pieces of things. Like there was the, there was a really weird moment. You might remember when, um, Biden said something to the effect of, we can't allow Putin to stay in office or whatever it was, right? And, and people immediately interpreted that as a regime change.

• 28:25Tucker Carlson?

  Of course.

• 28:26Speaker 02

  Right. Forty seven minutes later, the White House comes out with a walk back clarifying statement saying, you know, our, our policy towards Russia is unchanged or something, something ambiguous like that. But there were leaks in the press about what happened there. And there was a remarkable line in one of those stories saying that Biden was allowed to participate in the workshopping of that second statement. Um, how is he not in charge of it? First of all, right? Like, uh, and you know, they're talking about Jake Sullivan is, is, uh, involved in the process. But that just gives you a little glimpse into this idea of

• 29:05Speaker 02

  a collective presidency where at best Biden was a participant. So I, I think we need to know, um, a lot of things about who was actually making those decisions. It might be different in terms of, you know, for each realm of the government, right? Maybe the national security questions were dealt with by one person than, you know, the foreign policy things by another. I don't know. I mean, we'll see.

• 29:34Tucker Carlson?

  Um, and then domestic policy, which doesn't even really exist in this country. It's all national security, like runs everything. Right. Right. Um, who's doing that? Yeah.

• 29:44Speaker 02

  Oh, that was only the first thing in the list, right?

• 29:47Tucker Carlson?

  No, you just got, you know, it's so funny as you say this, and I won't interrupt you anymore, but I just can't. I mean, it's like crazy. You're going through this stuff. This just happened this summer. Yeah. And I was there. I mean, I know a lot of the people. I feel like I'm not that informed, but maybe more informed than average because it's my job. I kind of forgot about all this stuff. Like so much stuff has happened. It's like, it's amazing. Yeah. What we have allowed to sort of pass bias without demanding answers.

• 30:16Speaker 02

  I mean, I remember being in Russia in the late nineties. There were multiple, uh, episodes that you might classify as quasi coups. Yes. Right. There were, there was an, uh, an episode where people tried to arrest Yeltsin's bodyguard, Alexander Karshakov, and it kind of turned out. The other way in the end and but there was intense reporting about this by the supposedly unfree Russian press at the time. And then there was also the whole question of, you know, why was Putin brought in? What did he do when he was immediately kind of used to clamp down

• 30:58Speaker 02

  on the an investigation of Yeltsin that was done by the general prosecutor at the time? I mean, that's all in the weeds. What I'm trying to say is even in a third world country, we got more information about stuff that was going on than we got last year in the United States of America, where we had a gigantic press corps sitting in Washington supposedly covering all this stuff. It blows my mind.

• 31:25Tucker Carlson?

  I mean, you've done this your whole life. So you know, and you grew up in it. So you you must still know people in that gigantic press corps.

• 31:33Speaker 02

  A few, but you know, the ones that I'm still in touch with mostly have been kind of squeezed out. You know, there are people who did try to get to the bottom of what happened. I mean, Si Hirsch did a story about the mechanics of how it got to be went from Biden to Kamala. And, you know, that story came out on Substack, but it wasn't picked up anywhere. And that's kind of the way the media works.

• 32:01Tucker Carlson?

  Si Hirsch also broke the story that the United States, NATO, the Biden administration, was behind the sabotage of Nord Stream, the natural gas pipeline to Western Europe, to Germany. And

• 32:13Speaker 02

  That I mean, that's on the list too, obviously.

• 32:15Tucker Carlson?

  But that's, I mean, I think we can say that's true. And, I mean, why isn't Si Hirsch getting the Pulitzer for that? Why? You know, he was immediately, this guy's been a hero on the left for my entire life. Before I was born, he was a hero on the left. And all of a sudden, everyone's like, shut up, Putin apologist.

• 32:35Speaker 02

  Oh, I know. I know. I mean,

• 32:37Tucker Carlson?

  I'm sorry. And you know, all this is just, ah, drives me insane. It drives me insane. But not only are there almost no good reporters left, the few good reporters left are like attacked all the time.

• 32:47Speaker 02

  Yeah, they've all been kicked to the curb. You know, it's, I think it's very notable that a lot of the high profile investigative reporters just can't even publish in the United States, you know?

• 33:01Speaker 02

  You know, look at somebody like Jeff Girth, who writes, who made a point of kind of keeping ties to traditional media and not burning bridges and doing all that stuff and worked his butt off to get this 24,000 word piece about Russiagate into the Columbia Journalism Review. And it should have landed hard. It should have landed like a Mike Tyson uppercut, you know, and it, people just ignored it. So even when they don't kick you out of the club, they just, they ignore the hard for reporting.

• 33:36Tucker Carlson?

  Jeff Girth, for people who were, you know, under 40 was definitely one of the most famous investigative reporters in the world and feared.

• 33:43Speaker 02

  Yeah. New York Times, front page.

• 33:46Tucker Carlson?

  Worse, Jeff Girth, big deal guy for many, many years.

• 33:49Speaker 02

  He was the bulldog going after the Clinton administration on everything, right? So, I mean, when he did a story, it mattered. It was on the desk of every senator in the country.

• 33:59Tucker Carlson?

  Of course.

• 34:00Speaker 02

  You know, and that, that's what's so interesting about this period is that there, there is none of that. The, the stuff that lands on the desks of people in the relevant committees in Washington is PR. There's no reporting there for the most part. Maybe that will change now. I don't know, but, um, you know, I doubt it.

• 34:21Tucker Carlson?

  People read your stuff, I happen to know, so that's, that's good.

• 34:26Speaker 02

  That would be great to do.

• 34:28Tucker Carlson?

  They do.

• 34:29Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 34:30Tucker Carlson?

  So, um, okay.

• 34:31Speaker 02

  But Nord Stream, don't forget that.

• 34:32Tucker Carlson?

  Okay, so Nord Stream, let's go to Nord Stream, and I'm gonna stop interrupting. Nord Stream, what do we know, I mean?

• 34:37Speaker 02

  I mean, we know that there's five or six shifting official explanations of what happened. They eventually settled on this kind of labyrinthine story about a rogue Ukrainian operation that apparently without our input went, went and did this. Um, yeah, I don't believe it. Uh, I mean, it's, it's, it's laughable to think that that's true. And so, you know, but that's the kind of, Nord Stream is just one, it's like looking up at the stars in the sky. That's just one of them. Um, and that's a huge story. I mean, think about it, that could have started.

• 35:19Tucker Carlson?

  It destroyed the German economy. It will destroy the EU ultimately when people wake up from their. Dream state, it will destroy NATO because it was an attack by one NATO power on a NATO ally. Another NATO member was attacked by the United States on Germany. So, and it wrecked the German economy.

• 35:35Speaker 02

  Absolutely. It strained, it strained the incoming relations and, and uh, it's, it's just, it could have resulted in, you know, an immediate nuclear escalation. I mean, there's so many different things and it was a massive ecological disaster. It's a deep water horizon level environmental event.

• 35:55Tucker Carlson?

  The greatest manmade emission of carbon dioxide in history.

• 35:58Speaker 02

  Right. And, and it's a, it's a tiny footnote to the insane lunacies that happened during this period. It, I'm sorry, but it is like Nord Stream is, if you're making a list of the, the 10 weirdest things that happened, uh, in the last eight years, it, it's probably at the bottom, I would think. I mean, I mean, don't you think? I mean, Russia.

• 36:21Tucker Carlson?

  I think that's right. I just, you know, I like Western Europe. I think it's important to have a thriving Western Europe. I don't think they're a rival. I think they're a complementary region to the United States. And to see it destroyed intentionally by the Biden administration, well, let's just wreck Western Europe. Like, why would you do that? And I, so I'm, I'm fixated on it, but, um, but you're right. So what are the others?

• 36:44Speaker 02

  So COVID.

• 36:48Speaker 02

  I mean, there, there are so many different areas where they're going to have to investigate, re-investigate that. Uh, we just went through a period where, you know, there was sort of mass stonewalling of, of Congress when it was trying to investigate what happened with COVID. Uh, you know, people, there were key people like Peter Daszak from the Eco Health Alliance, who just didn't answer subpoenas, right? And, and so we're gonna, there are documents that, that we know exist that we're gonna get now, uh, you know, with FBI communications between the bureau and a lot of these scientists, you know, dating back 10 years.

• 37:32Speaker 02

  And it's going to tell a very crazy story. I mean, a really interesting story. There's a reason why Fauci's pardon is backdated to 2014 because that's the time period that they're going to be have to start looking, which is, you know, when did we start defying the ban on gain of function research? We clearly did. I think that's, I think that's pretty established at this point. Why were we doing it? What connection did that have to the Wuhan thing? What kind of advance notice did we get? What kind of lies were told about it? Who were responsible for those lies? What information did we get about the

• 38:14Speaker 02

  inefficacy of the vaccine? And how did that connect to statements by the CDC and the White House? This also connects to the censorship issue in a major way because there was also a sort of massive effort to control public, the public conversation about this that went through the health agencies. So we know they're looking at that. And that's another executive order, by the way, the free speech order, you know, directs them, the Department of Justice to come up with a comprehensive review of all the censorship stuff. So we're going to find out about that. But I just think COVID is a gigantic rat's nest of stuff.

• 38:58Speaker 02

  And, you know, it's going to be like a turkey shoot. Every direction they look, they're going to find something, you know, revelatory.

• 39:06Tucker Carlson?

  The question is, will that information reach the public? Because there is the intermediaries, the media. So like congressional investigators, executive branch agencies like DOJ, you know, they, they're constantly inspectors general, they're always releasing reports and I'm like, no one reads them because nobody picks them up in the media. Do we have enough interested reporters to like disseminate what they find?

• 39:30Speaker 02

  See, I think we do because I think that what we think of as the media is dead. They no longer really matter. The, the, the media that matters now.

• 39:43Speaker 02

  Are people like you and Joe Rogan and other, you know, there's podcasters out there. There's this gigantic, thriving, independent media culture.

• 39:54Tucker Carlson?

  It's incredible.

• 39:54Speaker 02

  That turned the last election, clearly.

• 39:57Tucker Carlson?

  Yeah.

• 39:59Speaker 02

  It was also abundantly clear that the old media no longer had any ability to control the narrative about anything. They're totally discredited. So I think this stuff is going to come out and because it's going to be so explosive, it's going to sort of solidify and heighten the prestige of all this new media. I think we're probably going to see whole institutions that are going to be built around.

• 40:25Tucker Carlson?

  I agree.

• 40:25Speaker 02

  These disclosures. We're going to have new newspapers, new TV stations.

• 40:29Tucker Carlson?

  So I normally save this for the end, but I'm feeling so enthusiastic, I'm gonna do it now in case people don't get to the end. Where do people find you? How do they support you if you've made it this far in this conversation? You're like, this guy's unbelievable. How did, I'm sorry, shamelessly promote for just one second.

• 40:44Speaker 02

  Oh, thanks. No, I'm at racket.news on Substack where a lot of these news sites are.

• 40:52Tucker Carlson?

  For those who didn't grow up playing squash, how are you spelling racket?

• 40:55Speaker 02

  R A C K E T dot news. So.

• 40:59Tucker Carlson?

  Racket. So not squash racket.

• 41:01Speaker 02

  Not squash racket, like racket, like that's a racket, you know, which this is.

• 41:05Tucker Carlson?

  Yes.

• 41:06Speaker 02

  It turned out to be aptly named, so.

• 41:08Tucker Carlson?

  Nice.

• 41:10Speaker 02

  But yeah, no, I'm feeling very optimistic now. I think there's, there are still some holes in this new media landscape. We don't have the huge institutions that have reporters who have beats, which I think is crucial, right? Because you need to have people who develop sources in one small area.

• 41:30Tucker Carlson?

  I agree.

• 41:30Speaker 02

  And.

• 41:31Tucker Carlson?

  Well, you saw that with Julie Kelly on January 6th. Julie Kelly, I don't even know what she did before. She's purely kind of a creation of the internet. Well, she's a self creation, but she, her medium was the internet and X specifically. And she's got mad about January 6th and just relentlessly focused on that. I'm sure she has other opinions, but she only did that. And I mean, man, this one woman.

• 41:56Tucker Carlson?

  And who thinks she's my age ish, like unearthed all this information that was like, no, no one else got it except her because she was just so focused on this thing.

• 42:05Speaker 02

  You know, it's great. It's incredible. And it's, that's exactly how the press is supposed to function. They're not supposed to be credentialed. Like, it's not supposed to be a thing where, you know, somebody confers a title, you are the official media. No, the citizen, like, that's part of our job is to be the press, right? Like, that's why the First Amendment was designed for exactly for that to happen. And there were, there was lots of incredible reporting that was done by either individuals or small, you know, organizations, like, the US Right to Know, they filed hundreds of FOIA requests

• 42:48Speaker 02

  on Fauci and gain of function and everything. And they really started the ball rolling on that whole side of that investigation. It's, you know, it was a relatively small site. And they had good, good young reporters that were hungry. And that's how this thing works, you know?

• 43:04Tucker Carlson?

  Amazing.

• 43:05Speaker 02

  Right?

• 43:05Tucker Carlson?

  Amazing.

• 43:06Speaker 02

  It's exciting.

• 43:07Tucker Carlson?

  It's so exciting. And it's also true that there are increasingly people making like a legit living, not getting rich, but like, paying the bills, doing this job.

• 43:19Speaker 02

  Right.

• 43:20Tucker Carlson?

  Which is important.

• 43:21Speaker 02

  And that's also how it's supposed to work. I mean, I remember hearing a story about I F Stone. When I was starting on Substack, I was calling around to some of the old timers and saying, like, is this a good idea for me to tap out of mainstream media? And they told me a story that, and they said, you know, I F Stone cranked out a newsletter. For those people who don't know, he was a-

• 43:44Tucker Carlson?

  Izzy Stone?

• 43:45Speaker 02

  Izzy Stone. He was a, you know, one of the original independent investigative journalists. He worked out of his house. He put out this little newsletter, the I F Stone Weekly. It was great, reporting, independent, didn't have to answer to editors who told him to shape things one way or the other. And he made a nice living, got himself a nice little house, and that was enough, right? And he had an impact. And you can do that now. The internet makes it easier, actually.

• 44:14Tucker Carlson?

  It's amazing. In America, we do things a little differently and we always have. When the British said, "Hey, we're going to tax your favorite morning beverage." The revolutionary Sons of Liberty said, "No." And they poured the entire shipment of tea into Boston Harbor and created a new country. A country based on personal choice and freedom. Well, 251 years later, it is time to throw something else overboard. Your overpriced big wireless contract, you don't need it. Do you need to pay $100 a month just to get a free phone? I don't think so. The cell phone company we use, PureTalk, says no to all of this inflated prices, the BS, the contracts you can't understand,

• 44:58Tucker Carlson?

  and instead gives you service that you need, that you actually need. With PureTalk, it's super straightforward. You get unlimited talk, text, 25 gigs of data, mobile hotspot at a fraction of the price. And with a qualifying plan of just $45 a month, they'll throw a free Samsung Galaxy your way. So you get everything and you know exactly what it is. It's not designed to deceive you. We strongly recommend it. PureTalk provides the same coverage as the other guys. It's just a lot more affordable and a lot more straightforward. You can find out for yourself. Visit puretalk.com/tucker. Make the switch today. PureTalk, America's wireless company.

• 45:39Speaker 00

  Progressive's Accident Response can contact emergency services if you're in a major accident. The only thing worse than someone you love being in an accident is not being able to help them. So Progressive is here to help when you can't. So get peace of mind knowing your loved ones are protected with Progressive's Accident Response. Learn more at progressive.com. Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates. Limited availability in California. Driver is responsible for emergency and towing charges not covered by the policy. Coverage subject to policy terms and conditions.

• 46:09Speaker 05

  It's me, the

• 46:14Speaker 05

  We don't need the jingle twice. Stop it. This is about vacation inflation and how Priceline negotiates amazing deals on hotels, flights, and rental cars.

• 46:26Speaker 05

  Yeah, but I didn't mention that you can save up to 60% off hotels in the Priceline app.

• 46:32Speaker 05

  Fine. No one deals more deals than Please stop. Touche. Priceline.

• 46:52Tucker Carlson?

  You wonder, again, I'm delaying you in your narrative once more, so with apologies. But you wonder, even just the four topics you've mentioned so far are so big that if we got the truth, or some, you know, higher percentage of the truth about those things, you wonder about the social effect. So one of the things the censors always say is they're doing this or preventing you from knowing certain things to preserve societal stability.

• 47:17Speaker 02

  Yeah, and trust in institutions.

• 47:19Tucker Carlson?

  Trust in institutions, exactly. Trust in institutions. So, I mean, that's already gone away, but it will evaporate completely the more we know, don't you think?

• 47:29Speaker 02

  Yes. Yes, but it'll be like, I mean, hopefully, it'll be like the Church Committee hearings, where, look, we just have to accept, people are going to have their minds blown by discoveries, revelations. For instance, it's already starting in the news media. We're starting to get stories from journalists who are told they had to suppress

• 47:53Tucker Carlson?

  I saw.

• 47:54Speaker 02

  Certain angles, right? You know, there was a Politico story about some people who were told to stay away from the Hunter Biden laptop story.

• 48:03Tucker Carlson?

  Two Politico reporters having left Politico admitted that Politico, which is supposedly covering Washington, told them, no, we're not, we're not doing that.

• 48:12Speaker 02

  Right, exactly. And, you know, my first question is, why didn't you say that when it happened? But I guess people have jobs, right? So that's, that's a thing. But there are going to be a lot more of those. I mean, there are already kind of whispers going around. But people are going to learn that institutions they believed in their whole lives were fraudulent, that they lied to them about important things. And it's going to be difficult at first, especially since there are not solid new institutions in place to replace them.

• 48:49Tucker Carlson?

  Yes.

• 48:50Speaker 02

  You know, it's one thing if you're taking down the CIA in the 70s and there's a supposedly reformed CIA there, right?

• 49:00Speaker 02

  This is different. The media is gonna have to rebuild itself from the ground up. I think it's already doing great, but it doesn't have that look for a lot of people.

• 49:10Tucker Carlson?

  Right, that's right. It looks very different.

• 49:12Speaker 02

  Yeah, and so, you know, it's gonna be, I think that's a good point. It's a transitional period for people.

• 49:18Tucker Carlson?

  I guess, look, if you want trust in institutions, and I definitely do, I do. I grew up trusting institutions. I don't now. That's their fault, not mine. I think your country doesn't work if nobody trusts any of the institutions, right? It just doesn't. So, we want that. The only way to that is through transparency, honesty. So, I get all that, and I'm for it vehemently. I guess what I'm saying is, the people who've been administering the system and benefiting from it are completely freaked out. Right? That's why they're trying to stop Tulsi. But I wonder if they get threatened enough, if they don't become like just flat out dangerous to everybody else.

• 49:59Tucker Carlson?

  Like, the only way to stop disclosure at this point would be with like a catastrophe that's so all encompassing, 9/11, COVID, that it just, everything shuts down. All trends in progress stop. And I just feel like there's a lot at stake for these people. If you're, you know, John Brennan or Jim Clapper, and you're like a criminal, or Mike Pompeo, you're a criminal. That's my opinion, but I think they're obviously criminals.

• 50:24Tucker Carlson?

  Like, you know, you've got a lot to lose.

• 50:26Speaker 02

  Absolutely.

• 50:26Tucker Carlson?

  Yeah.

• 50:27Speaker 02

  Yeah, and people in the intelligence agencies, whose names are not known to the public, they're about to be.

• 50:35Tucker Carlson?

  Exactly.

• 50:36Speaker 02

  And, you know, that, we don't know what that's gonna result in,

• 50:43Speaker 02

  what impact that's going to have.

• 50:44Tucker Carlson?

  So, this was my thinking about, you know, the period between the election and the inauguration this week.

• 50:52Tucker Carlson?

  I think that's one of the reasons that Tony Blinken was pushing so hard for a real war, trying to kill Putin, for example, which the Biden administration did. They tried to kill Putin.

• 51:01Speaker 02

  Really?

• 51:01Tucker Carlson?

  Yes, yes, they did.

• 51:02Speaker 02

  Wow.

• 51:03Tucker Carlson?

  Which is insane. If like, okay, so who takes over Russia?

• 51:07Speaker 02

  Right.

• 51:07Tucker Carlson?

  And what happens to the nuclear arsenal? In a country that's like so complex outsiders can't even understand. I mean, you live there, you know, that's demented that you would even think of something like that.

• 51:17Speaker 02

  Absolutely.

• 51:18Tucker Carlson?

  So why were they? Because chaos is a screen that protects them. I mean, I don't know this. That's just like watching what they're doing. I'm like, why would they be doing that? Part of it is because like it's, it's like when you're taking off of the roof of the embassy in Saigon, you burn all the papers, right?

• 51:32Speaker 02

  Absolutely.

• 51:33Tucker Carlson?

  But they can't because they're digital. So maybe you need like a war to hide your tracks.

• 51:37Speaker 02

  Or to keep the public's attention.

• 51:39Tucker Carlson?

  That's what I mean.

• 51:40Speaker 02

  Elsewhere. Right. Yeah, exactly. Um, yeah, I, I had the same fears and that was part of my, my thinking when they started, you know, approving the firing of American missiles into Russian territory and British missiles and French missiles. I'm like, why would you do like, what possible reason would there be to do this? You're not really going to make any military gains by doing this. So it's, you're doing it either to provoke the other side or to create a headline. The headline, I don't think it gets you anything. So what were they doing? And, you know, if you're, if that's you're saying there, there were fiddling with regime change in the, in the interim.

• 52:23Tucker Carlson?

  Yes.

• 52:24Speaker 02

  Yeah. I think that was a fear that a lot of people had. I, I didn't think that frankly, that, that Trump would become president. I, I thought I, you know, for a variety of different reasons, I, I don't, I don't know exactly what could have happened to stop that. But I, it was hard for me to accept that it did happen.

• 52:45Tucker Carlson?

  I, I was sitting about six feet away and I just thought, wow, I can't believe this has actually happened.

• 52:49Speaker 02

  Right.

• 52:49Tucker Carlson?

  Up until the second he said the oath, I was like, man, you know, I mean, I, you just get superstitious or paranoid or whatever it is, having seen all the stuff.

• 52:58Speaker 02

  And I was embarrassed to have those thoughts.

• 53:00Tucker Carlson?

  I agree. I totally agree. I was like, wow, I'm becoming crazy.

• 53:03Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 53:03Tucker Carlson?

  But it's not totally crazy when you see the pattern. So, but I guess my, the point I would make is it's like, we're not, the process has not unfolded fully yet. So like, there's still a lot that we don't know. Disclosure is, as you've said, like imminent. And that sets up an incentive for the people being exposed to do something really crazy.

• 53:22Speaker 02

  It does, but the, I, I think the moment is past.

• 53:26Tucker Carlson?

  Good.

• 53:27Speaker 02

  For, for the real, like there was a moment where.

• 53:32Speaker 02

  They could have installed, you know, a European style regime to stop misinformation. This is, this is the new trend, right? Remember the, the hurricanes happened and immediately FEMA is talking about setting up an anti misinformation center, right? It just happened in California.

• 53:52Tucker Carlson?

  Fucking crazy.

• 53:53Speaker 02

  Right? I mean, you know, the, the fact that Gavin Newsom had time to try to come up with a state bureau for protecting my reputation. But, but they could really have done that. They, they could have basically put a net over everything with, I mean, that, that's the thing that's scary about the, the European situation is, is they already have that massive infrastructure in place to completely control the flow of information, what people see, what people don't see, that they can punish people who've stepped out of line. And we were, you

• 54:34Speaker 02

  know, this far away from being part of something like that. And if they were going to do that, if they had done that, and I think there, there was probably some thinking that, that would have been accomplished by 2024. If you go back and look at some of the European Union's papers on the subject, they were anticipating that we were going to be signatories to certain agreements, like the Code of Practice on Disinformation, that we would have our own version by now. If they had done that, then none of this would be possible. You know, all these independent outlets, they could scream to high heavens, but no one would see it. It would be like, you know.

• 55:12Tucker Carlson?

  No, it's totally right.

• 55:13Speaker 02

  Right? I mean, you, you know this because you, when you were doing shows about COVID, well, now we can look behind the scenes and see that the White House was demanding that Facebook dial it down. They turned it down to 50%. I mean, that's in print. I, I mean, what did you think when you saw that, by the way, when?

• 55:32Tucker Carlson?

  I totally ignored it. I ignore all coverage that in any way pertains to me. I don't want to become self-conscious. So I didn't spend, you know, one second thinking about it. I've had a couple of other things and one other thing, in particular in the last year, that was like so shocking, I never thought about it again.

• 55:49Speaker 02

  Hmm.

• 55:49Tucker Carlson?

  Because you just don't. I'm sure you've been through this. I mean, you were speaking of mistreated. I'm not going to bring it up, but you were identified as disobedient and I mean, they tried to end you. I watched it. Yeah, so you shrug it off or whatever, but you shrug it off. But from my perspective, it's always, you see things clearly when you're looking at someone else's life.

• 56:08Speaker 02

  Sure, absolutely.

• 56:10Tucker Carlson?

  I didn't even know you at the time. I was like, why are they trying to, why are they trying to kill this guy?

• 56:14Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 56:14Tucker Carlson?

  Right, well, they were. And that's my interpretation of it anyway. But you can't brood on it.

• 56:21Speaker 02

  No, but, but the, the fact that the mechanics, they, they were trying to install the mechanisms by which

• 56:30Tucker Carlson?

  Oh, yeah.

• 56:31Speaker 02

  the, all this stuff would have been locked down. And, and we saw during the COVID period how, how effective it was.

• 56:38Tucker Carlson?

  Yes.

• 56:38Speaker 02

  Uh, I mean, look, we've, the, the new head of the NIH, you know, Jay Bhattacharya, we mostly didn't hear about his research, right? I mean, this, this is the guy who

• 56:50Tucker Carlson?

  Can you believe Jay Bhattacharya, who I love, thoroughly decent man, by the way, in addition to being right on the science, but he's a decent guy.

• 56:58Speaker 02

  He's like the sweetest guy in the world. Yeah, no, absolutely.

• 57:01Tucker Carlson?

  He's the head of NIH?

• 57:02Speaker 02

  Yeah, I know. Isn't that amazing?

• 57:04Tucker Carlson?

  You're kidding?

• 57:05Speaker 02

  Yeah. He went, he goes from being censored to being the head of NIH. It's, it's an amazing transition, but the, but the thing that, that's so extraordinary about it is America would have had a completely different idea about lockdowns if they had understood how infectious the disease was, how fruitless it was to try to physically prevent people from, you know, getting infected. And, and, and how unlikely that was to succeed and how, you know, compared to all the other negatives that could have happened from keeping people at home and everything like that. Like, they wouldn't have made that decision going forward, but they were able to effectively suppress

• 57:50Speaker 02

  that point of view, which is really scary, right? I mean, there was real research out there and most people didn't see it. I didn't see it until a year and a half later.

• 57:59Tucker Carlson?

  No, I know.

• 58:00Speaker 02

  Right?

• 58:00Tucker Carlson?

  I know.

• 58:01Speaker 02

  So, uh, and that's, that's what could happen. That's what could have happened with all this stuff.

• 58:06Tucker Carlson?

  So, but, but I, I know that you, without getting too specific, but you're, you know, you're in touch with doctors, like on a personal level, like you know, doctors. Just practicing, you know, clinical physicians, right?

• 58:18Speaker 02

  My wife's a doctor.

• 58:19Tucker Carlson?

  Okay, I didn't know if you wanted to say that. You're married to a doctor. So did they know, like, they, it was kept from them too, like, they didn't.

• 58:27Speaker 02

  Yeah, I mean.

• 58:28Tucker Carlson?

  Your average, like, emergency room physician was like aware that a lot of the COVID propaganda was fake.

• 58:34Speaker 02

  Well, yeah, I mean, I know some ER doctors as well. Um, and they had to go looking for, for information. And it was very hard to find and, you know, to this day, if you, you go on Google and you go looking for things, you're not likely to find the, the sort of counter narrative thing easily. Uh, and I think for a lot of doctors during that period, it was frustrating because, um, even peer reviewed research was not always easy to find, uh, for them. So, yeah, uh, during that period, it, it affected the whole question of like,

• 59:14Speaker 02

  experts who talked to the press, like, they weren't always informed about what was going on or, or about different studies that had been done. And, yeah, we had a completely different idea about the, about the pandemic than maybe we should have. But the point being is not so much that that was destructive in itself, though I think it was, but that it was a proof of concept of something that, that was to come, you know?

• 59:40Tucker Carlson?

  Do you think that as we unearth more about COVID, that the biggest question of all, which was, what was the point of that? Clearly was the point, I mean, if every part of the society was coordinated and aimed toward the same goal, which was increasing the fear, um, preserving the lies about its origin, hiding a lot of stuff and like telling you and, and pushing you toward the vaccine. So like, and it was utterly coordinated, if anything was coordinated, that was from the churches, to the schools, to the media, everything, everyone's on the same, like, why?

• 1:00:15Speaker 02

  I don't know. I mean, that's, that's what we have to, that's why these documents will be so fascinating to get.

• 1:00:20Tucker Carlson?

  Do you think that we'll ever get to, that we'll ever be able to say with some certainty or confidence, like, this is why they did that?

• 1:00:28Speaker 02

  We, we may not know some of the higher level thinking about things. I mean, you're probably not going to get a document that says, "Look, it's really important that we do this because if we really stress masking, then we'll have established the precedent of that visible symbols of conformity are, are, you know, a positive goal for an authoritarian regime." I mean, they're not going to have that on paper anywhere, right?

• 1:00:55Tucker Carlson?

  Yes.

• 1:00:56Speaker 02

  But there, you know, there might be emails back and forth about how we get people to, to follow instructions, about how, how we manage the problem of academic freedom, right? There, there probably going to be emails back and forth saying, "We have to change America's thinking about this and get them to start thinking more in the direction of trusting authority," right? There's probably going to be some stuff about that because we've already seen that in, you know, FOIA disclosures with some, you know, some of these anti-disinformation groups and that, that sort of thing. So I imagine there's, there's

• 1:01:36Speaker 02

  going to be some stuff with the White House, the CDC, the NIH. There, there, there might be some things like that in there. But the higher level, sort of broader conspiratorial questions, I don't, I don't know what we're going to get, but I'm fascinated to find out.

• 1:01:53Tucker Carlson?

  Me too. I want to tell you about an amazing documentary series from our friend Sean Stone called All the President's Men: The Conspiracy Against Trump. It is a series of interviews with people at the very heart of the first Trump term, many of whom are close to the heart of the second Trump term. This is their stories about what permanent Washington tried to do to them, in many cases, send them to prison for the crime of supporting Donald Trump. Their words have never been more relevant than they are now. Steve Bannon, Cash Patel, I'm in there even. All the President's Men: The Conspiracy Against Trump, and you will find it only on TCNTuckerCarlson.com. Highly recommended.

• 1:02:34Speaker 00

  Progressive's Accident Response can contact emergency services if you're in a major accident. The only thing worse than someone you love being in an accident is not being able to help them. So Progressive is here to help when you can't. So get peace of mind knowing your loved ones are protected with Progressive's Accident Response. Learn more at progressive.com. Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and Affiliates. Limited availability in California. Driver is responsible for emergency and towing charges not covered by the policy. Coverage subject to policy terms and conditions.

• 1:03:04Speaker 05

  Bonjour, compadre. It's the

• 1:03:07Speaker 05

  How do I negotiate so many great travel deals? My greatest gadget, the Priceline app. It's got hotel deals, flight deals, rental car deals, all of those deals in a bundle. Deals, game day deals, concert trip deals. No one deals more deals than Priceline. Hold your horses, there's more. The app lets you filter hotels by neighborhood, vibes, star level, and amenities like pools and spas and beachfronts. And, wait, I'm not done. Stop cutting me off.

• 1:03:47Tucker Carlson?

  So, okay, so, COVID. Next.

• 1:03:53Speaker 02

  Okay, Russiagate?

• 1:03:55Tucker Carlson?

  Russiagate.

• 1:03:57Speaker 02

  And, you know, the sort of related phenomenon of fake news, intelligence leaks, designed to destroy careers, which bleeds into kind of lawfare, right? But Russiagate specifically, that's a big story. That's a place where I think that's going to be the easiest hit for investigators because we know where the documents are. In some cases, we even have them already. We just They're redacted. Um, so we get to look under the redactions now. Why did they start the original investigation? What was the, what was the impetus for the July 31st

• 1:04:38Speaker 02

  opening in 2016 of Crossfire Hurricane? You know, there's some conflicting stories in the past. Did it really come from Britain? Did John Brennan really advise the CIA to look into it? Or was it something else? Why did the FBI open an investigation into Trump specifically after he had taken office in May of 2017? It's just an extraordinary thing. Thinking of, you know, back to that time, we don't remember it. But the FBI opened a probe into the sitting president of the United States to ask the question of whether he was working for a foreign power at that time.

• 1:05:23Speaker 02

  And what evidence could they have possibly had for that? Apart from the fact that he fired Jim Comey? If there's

• 1:05:31Tucker Carlson?

  Did they even, I mean, they had no evidence.

• 1:05:32Speaker 02

  They, if there's nothing under those redactions more than that, then that itself was, it's an extraordinary scandal just by itself, right?

• 1:05:41Tucker Carlson?

  So the predicate for all of this, I think, maybe even earlier, but to my knowledge, late in the summer of 16, with the hacking of the DNC and the emails from the DNC. And the FBI never investigated it. Never investigated the actual, you know, the physical removal of this data from their servers. Instead, a company called CrowdStrike, which worked for the Democratic Party, did. And then exactly at that moment, or right around that moment, a DNC staffer was killed in Washington DC in an apparent robbery in which nothing was taken from him. That I happen to know for a fact, the MPD, the Metropolitan Police Department, thought was like bizarre. And they kind of didn't believe it.

• 1:06:24Tucker Carlson?

  A Fox News host went on air and asked questions about this killing. Why wouldn't you? And the parents of the man who was killed either sued or I think they sued. They certainly threatened to sue and basically scared the crap out of everyone. So no one's ever asked a question about it since.

• 1:06:41Speaker 02

  They hired a private investigator who looked around in that case. I remember, and there were, there were some odd details there. The FBI ended up in possession of, of his laptop.

• 1:06:57Tucker Carlson?

  And then FBI wind up in, I mean, this is a local crime, right?

• 1:07:02Speaker 02

  Yeah. This was one of the first reasons I started to look at that case because I got a call from somebody about that. And, you know, I don't know why that was the case, but it is the case.

• 1:07:16Tucker Carlson?

  But and there were people at the DNC, one of whom I know, who thought that he was murdered for political reasons at the DNC. A very high ranking person in the DNC told me that. And I probably should just say, but I, everyone can guess who it is who's informed on this, but I don't want to betray confidence, but I'm not making this up. And I don't know what happened, but like, as far as I know, not one person has looked into that in the media.

• 1:07:42Speaker 02

  No, and, you know, even if it is just an unsolved murder of a type that they normally solve, the whole situation, that, that whole timeline was very strange. It doesn't really make sense. The, you know, the hacking of, of the DNC, the bringing in of CrowdStrike, the, when the information was released online, they never really proved that case, but they immediately made inferences about it. And there was an incredibly sophisticated kind of public campaign to create this narrative

• 1:08:23Speaker 02

  that, you know, upon closer examination turns out not to be true. So we got to go back and find out what did exactly happen there. Why did they? Why did they order this Crossfire Hurricane probe? Why were they sending informants in after Trump? Or people in his orbit? And we know they did.

• 1:08:45Tucker Carlson?

  And who were all those informants? It'd be interesting. I have some suspicions.

• 1:08:49Speaker 02

  Yeah, well, we know, we know who some of them were, right? But we don't know who all of them, all of them were. I mean, I did a story to the effect that the, the people in the House Intelligence Committee who were looking at this, you know, Cash Patel's initial probe, that they came up with a number that it was 26 different people who were being investigated in Trump's orbit. No matter what happened, it's, it's a huge story because it's, it's a political espionage story. It's not unlike Watergate, really.

• 1:09:23Tucker Carlson?

  Exactly.

• 1:09:24Speaker 02

  And they, and we've, we've laughed it off. Or the, you know, the mainstream press is, has shrugged and snorted at the idea that this is a scandal that needs to be taken seriously, but it does. It absolutely does. Just because it's Donald Trump, doesn't mean you can ignore the FBI conducting political investigations, willy nilly and inventing predicates to, to look into people's campaigns and using FISA and all, all kinds of other crazy, can I say crazy shit? I mean, that stuff was all nuts and we, we need to find out exactly what happened with that.

• 1:10:04Speaker 02

  And that is one of the reasons I think that people are nervous about this weaponization of government probe because it's absolutely going to look in that direction.

• 1:10:14Tucker Carlson?

  Yes.

• 1:10:14Speaker 02

  And, you know, that's one of the first things they're, they're going to, to look at is who was behind that? You know, who cooked up the Steele dossier? How was that released? You know? And then there's the whole question of, you know, leading up to impeachment and the, the leaks that were done, a lot of them were kind of illegal on their face, right? Like you can't leak signals intelligence to newspapers and it was done repeatedly during that time.

• 1:10:47Tucker Carlson?

  Happened to me. They did it to me.

• 1:10:48Speaker 02

  Right? Yeah, exactly.

• 1:10:49Tucker Carlson?

  The NSA.

• 1:10:50Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 1:10:50Tucker Carlson?

  Read my texts and leaked them to the New York Times twice.

• 1:10:53Speaker 02

  Right.

• 1:10:53Tucker Carlson?

  Um, yeah. And they, you know, admitted it one time, but it was under FISA, so it was.

• 1:11:00Speaker 02

  Which is, by the way, hilarious because initially they were denying that it even happened, right? And then, of course, later, it turns out it was more advantageous to leak the contents. So, but people had developed, they developed very short memories during this time period. They were not able to retain information, among other things, because journalists got out of the habit of repeating the story. That was one of the things that we were taught. You know, when I was taught growing up, when you're doing a story about anything, you have to recount all of the facts as if the reader has never encountered this story before.

• 1:11:44Tucker Carlson?

  Each story should stand alone.

• 1:11:45Speaker 02

  Yes, exactly. You have to retell the whole thing so that they don't have to go looking for another story to find out what this means.

• 1:11:53Tucker Carlson?

  Exactly.

• 1:11:54Speaker 02

  And one of the subtle little changes that happened to the media business in the last eight years is they stopped doing that. They would tell you.

• 1:12:03Tucker Carlson?

  That's fascinating.

• 1:12:04Speaker 02

  Right? They would tell you the thing that happened that day, and they wouldn't tell you all this backstory that you needed to know to really understand what you were reading. And so, yeah, I think we're going to have the opportunity now to see these things laid out in full and, you know, in hindsight, and that's hopefully going to be able to persuade people who didn't see it the first time.

• 1:12:32Tucker Carlson?

  That's such a fascinating observation, which I've never heard before or thought of.

• 1:12:35Speaker 02

  But isn't it, isn't it true?

• 1:12:36Tucker Carlson?

  It's so true. It's so true. And so, everything's out of context.

• 1:12:40Speaker 02

  Right. Yeah.

• 1:12:41Tucker Carlson?

  There's a certain element of dot connecting required in journalism. Like, why am I telling you this? Why does it matter? How does it connect to things that happen, other things that happened or may happen?

• 1:12:51Speaker 02

  Even simple things like when, you know, if Anthony Fauci comes out and says, "Well, masks are important because of X." Well, you have to put in the timeline of what he originally said about that.

• 1:13:07Tucker Carlson?

  Yes.

• 1:13:08Speaker 02

  Or, you know, Joe Biden saying, you know, "We have to..."

• 1:13:15Speaker 02

  Correct misinformation because they're killing people and you got to point out that they were wrong about things themselves that they that or that the Biden administration itself was deamplified by by some of these platforms accidentally, but they were right. But yeah, they just left out a lot of backstory and we have to get back into the the business of telling people the whole story from the beginning.

• 1:13:40Tucker Carlson?

  Fascinating. Um, okay. So Russiagate.

• 1:13:46Speaker 02

  Russiagate, we, I mean, and that's one of the reasons why the the pardon of Adam Schiff is kind of interesting, because he's a central figure of of both the J six committee but also the Russiagate story. And, you know, he was somebody who was giving interviews saying that preemptive pardons should never be given, but whatever. Um, yeah, Russiagate is a thing. Then there's the whole question of lawfare, right? And the effort to make sure that Biden faced no opposition at all in his reelection campaign.

• 1:14:26Speaker 02

  And this is here, I'm not just talking about, you know, Donald Trump and the lawsuit to prevent him from being on the ballot because of the 14th amendment and all that. This extends to even to groups like No Labels or the Green Party or Dean Phillips or Marianne Williamson or Cornel West. There was an extraordinary calculated effort to prevent competition.

• 1:14:54Tucker Carlson?

  Now, yes, that's not necessarily illegal.

• 1:14:57Speaker 02

  Parties can do whatever they want internally, but it's still fascinating that there there had to have been some kind of coordinated campaign. If if there's any communication between the White House, say, and the groups that were suing, um, you know, No Labels or RFK or, you know, issuing challenges. No Labels went through this extraordinary incident where somebody created a dummy No Labels site and it had a big picture of Donald Trump on it so that we try to associate No Labels with Trump. And there's a lawsuit going on about it right now.

• 1:15:42Speaker 02

  What was the real origin of that? Like, you know, who financed that whole thing? I mean, I think there are a lot of stories about little tiny dirty tricks that are going to be coming out.

• 1:15:54Tucker Carlson?

  Well, and also, like, the main question was, who makes these decisions? So if the Democratic Party is running the United States, which they have for four years, I think we can say that, what does that mean? Who's running the Democratic Party?

• 1:16:04Speaker 02

  Right.

• 1:16:05Tucker Carlson?

  I mean, I would imagine it's a coalition of, you know, elected officials, you know, Chuck Schumer, the big fundraisers, right?

• 1:16:15Speaker 02

  Mm-hmm.

• 1:16:16Tucker Carlson?

  You know, Jeffrey Katzenberg and, I don't know, Obama, I guess? But who really is running this? Who's on the Central Committee?

• 1:16:25Speaker 02

  Right. And how is that done? How was the coordination managed with these sort of legal action committees that were mass filing suits about everything from, you know, the ballot access issue to there were Klan actsuits that were filed against people? And did that have any connection to people who are actually in office? If it did, you know, then we have another corruption situation involved. But yeah, the larger question of who was managing all this stuff?

• 1:17:00Speaker 02

  Because it clearly wasn't Joe Biden.

• 1:17:02Tucker Carlson?

  Right. Who runs the country?

• 1:17:03Speaker 02

  Who runs the country?

• 1:17:05Tucker Carlson?

  Don't in a democracy, we have a right to know?

• 1:17:07Speaker 02

  Right. You know, our mutual friend Walter Kern talked about this, saying that this was the first time that we had a president where that had a sign on his desk, basically that said, "The buck does not stop here."

• 1:17:22Tucker Carlson?

  No.

• 1:17:22Speaker 02

  Right? We don't know where the buck stopped during this period. And so, that's a fascinating question. But the whole, you know, war gaming of the last election season, there are a lot of stories. People don't even remember this. Like, New Hampshire held a primary, right? People went and they voted in the New Hampshire primary. And then, the results were canceled and they held a second nominating event on a Saturday night, months later, where a bunch of officials got together and they just decided to allocate the delegates themselves.

• 1:18:01Speaker 02

  Like, I'd never heard of that before, just canceling an election and just sort of redoing it in a closed meeting? Like, how does that happen?

• 1:18:08Tucker Carlson?

  And just turning the spoils over to somebody else?

• 1:18:11Speaker 02

  Well, I mean, I think it ended up mostly having the same result, but for some reason, they, they, they held the second contest. It's just very strange, you know, why that happened. So that we got to get into, um, you know, then there's the whole question of the investigation of the Trump assassination incidents. We heard nothing about that. It was the most extraordinary news story that I've ever, I mean, apart from the disappearing president and the mysterious nomination and COVID, uh, you know, presidential candidate

• 1:18:51Speaker 02

  and ex-president gets shot and the story's dead within like 48 hours. Uh, and all you read in the news from the FBI, uh, there were these comments saying that they don't have any motive evidence. We've done a hundred interviews, um, but we don't know anything about why this happened or, you know, what was going on there. Do you believe that? I, I, I have a very hard time believing that there's nothing interesting.

• 1:19:18Tucker Carlson?

  He was kind of your classic 20-year-old American kid with no social media presence whatsoever, ever.

• 1:19:24Speaker 02

  Right. Yes, exactly.

• 1:19:27Tucker Carlson?

  And it is a very typical American story where one day you just wake up and decide to die assassinating a presidential candidate for no reason.

• 1:19:34Speaker 02

  Right. It's like, it's like your first joint. Yeah.

• 1:19:37Tucker Carlson?

  Your first joint. Yeah. Um.

• 1:19:43Speaker 02

  And then this, the second one, I mean, you know, the, the Ryan Ralph thing that that's not weird at all. Like, I just flew into Florida last night. I don't think I could have gotten, gotten my hands on, you know, a Chinese-made SKS semi-automatic rifle without help. I mean, I, I don't know. That's being a little conspiratorial, but look, there are a lot of-

• 1:20:07Tucker Carlson?

  Well, he met with members of Congress. He was lived in Ukraine. What? And we know that our intel agencies, working through the Ukrainian intel agencies, have murdered all these people and tried to murder all these people, including some I know personally. And so that's a, like, that's just a fact. And he, he was there with them. But this had nothing to do, and by the way, are those the only two attempts on Donald Trump's life, do you think, during this campaign season? I don't think so. So why don't we know more about that?

• 1:20:36Speaker 02

  I don't know why we don't know more about that.

• 1:20:38Tucker Carlson?

  Yeah, right. So-

• 1:20:41Tucker Carlson?

  And I, I mean, I've, you know, talked to the Trump people and Trump himself and I, I'm being sincere. I really don't have a sense of what they think of all of that. I know that in public, they haven't been anxious to talk about it at all.

• 1:20:54Speaker 02

  So I've talked to some of them and, you know, I've heard a lot of anger about this that, you know, and I think this is, this is the impetus for these investigations. I think the, probably the second attempt was the last straw for some of the people on his staff. And, and, you know, it's part of the reason why I think they're going to be very public about this.

• 1:21:24Tucker Carlson?

  Can't come, it can't come too soon. I really think, and, and I will say, you know, whatever people watching think of Trump, I know for a dead certain fact that a lot of the people who work for him really like him personally. So I think they are mad about it.

• 1:21:36Speaker 02

  They're, they're very mad about it. And, and, and then, sorry, just to finish off the censorship thing.

• 1:21:46Speaker 02

  That is going to be a major investigation. There's, there's at least two that I know of that are already underway. You know, the government affair, the, you know, Rand Paul's committee, government oversight committee in, in the Senate. They, they really want to do a big thing, like a government files type of thing where it would be like the Twitter files, but for the whole federal government, basically. And I, I think there are so many different wings of the government that were involved in what we got to see in the Twitter files, which, you know, to follow the, the example of what I just said, I have to repeat what this is.

• 1:22:29Speaker 02

  When Elon Musk bought Twitter, he opened up Twitter, Twitter's internal correspondence. And we got to see that there was this big bureaucracy with government pressuring platforms like Twitter and Facebook to censor content, but we only got to see a little bit of it. And I think what's going to come out is, you know, how extensive it really was, what agencies were really involved in it.

• 1:22:56Speaker 02

  You know, how many people were, were committed to that effort, what also?

• 1:23:03Speaker 02

  Were we negotiating with the European Union to be part of the Digital Services Act? Was the State Department doing that? You know, I think, so there's going to be a big-

• 1:23:16Tucker Carlson?

  For people who haven't followed it, can you just describe the Digital Services Act?

• 1:23:19Speaker 02

  The Digital Services Act is like the, it's like the wet dream of every censor in the world, right? Basically, it mandates that every internet platform abide by the recommendations of these people called trusted flaggers, who are basically licensed content reviewers, who look on, at things on social media. And if they see a narrative that they don't like, they will elevate it to the platform. If the platform does not abide by the recommendations, they get crippling enormous fines. And this is one of the reasons why there was a dispute between Elon Musk and Europe

• 1:24:02Speaker 02

  about whether or not he was following these rules closely enough. This just came into effect last year, but it's, it's an extremely effective way to regulate speech, because it doesn't require the government to actually do it. It's the private platform that actually commits-

• 1:24:22Tucker Carlson?

  Of course.

• 1:24:23Speaker 02

  -the censorship. And this third-party methodology, which is specifically, by the way, what Donald Trump referenced in his Free Speech Executive Order, we don't want that to happen, we're going to not allow that. They already have the full-blown Death Star version in Europe of that, right? And so, the investigation here in the United States is going to basically uncover how far along were we into developing the same kind of thing.

• 1:24:55Speaker 02

  The Twitter file suggests that we were already doing it informally. And illegally, probably. But we want to find out exactly.

• 1:25:05Tucker Carlson?

  We have Snopes and all the other fact checkers.

• 1:25:08Speaker 02

  Yes, all the fact checking organizations, right? You know, sometimes that was done informally, by inference. Or it was done through NGOs that made recommendations, but I think the really dangerous stuff is when you had State Department agencies like the Global Engagement Center or the FBI's Foreign Influence Task Force, making direct recommendations to these platforms, or the White House in your case.

• 1:25:37Speaker 02

  We're going to find out all of these communications, not just little pieces of them.

• 1:25:40Tucker Carlson?

  What about the US government, the intel agencies, control of Wikipedia? Which basically is our collective memory at this point. It's elevated by Google, it's the top of every search, it is the only history most people will ever read. And it's controlled by the US government to disappear inconvenient facts.

• 1:26:01Speaker 02

  Yeah, I mean, Wikipedia has a very advanced system for regulating what gets into Wikipedia pages. If it's not a certain kind of source, it doesn't get on there. There was a bizarre incident last year where the Real Clear Politics

• 1:26:22Speaker 02

  you know, polling average, which is a tool that reporters have been using for almost two decades, they kind of left it off their page of polling average sites. Because they didn't like the page, I guess, I don't know. But yeah, I think we have to get some clarity about what happened there. Obviously, the former head of Wikipedia is now in a senior position in NPR. The deputy or the COO.

• 1:26:53Tucker Carlson?

  One government media job to another.

• 1:26:55Speaker 02

  Yeah, exactly. And the COO of NPR is the former head of this thing called the Aspen Commission on Information Disorder, which is one of the groups that we investigated in the Twitter files, was sort of heavily into this whole. Content moderation questions. So the merging of state media with platforms and regulation of sourcing and all that stuff, that's probably going to come out too.

• 1:27:21Tucker Carlson?

  Kind of weird that the head of the Aspen Institute wrote the biography of Elon Musk, isn't it?

• 1:27:25Speaker 02

  Right. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. The Walter Pincus, right?

• 1:27:29Tucker Carlson?

  Isaacson.

• 1:27:29Speaker 02

  Isaacson, sorry.

• 1:27:30Tucker Carlson?

  Walter Pincus was the CIA reporter at the Washington Post.

• 1:27:33Speaker 02

  Can you cut that? Sorry.

• 1:27:34Tucker Carlson?

  No, no, no, it's just funny. You remember Walter Pincus?

• 1:27:37Speaker 02

  Yeah, Walter Isaacson. Yeah.

• 1:27:39Tucker Carlson?

  Yeah.

• 1:27:39Speaker 02

  Yeah, no, it is weird. The Aspen Institute, I mean, they played a very strange role in the whole censorship story, but, um, but yeah.

• 1:28:01Tucker Carlson?

  So what happens to the, you said the media as constituted is dead, but I mean, like the Episcopal Church, like they have enormous like shells left. You know what I mean? Like the church has died, but the, they've got great churches, great buildings. What do you, what happens to like the Washington Post and NBC News? There's still those bureaus and CNN and like what, what happens to these things?

• 1:28:28Speaker 02

  They're going to struggle, I think, to get audience back. You already see that the strategy of some of them is to try to pander to the audiences that they betrayed previously.

• 1:28:43Speaker 02

  Yeah, there was a funny episode over last weekend where NBC and Saturday Night Live, you know, they finally did a joke picking on Rachel Maddow. It wasn't particularly funny, but it was a signal that, okay, we're, we're going to suck up to this group now, right? As opposed to the other one, which is so loathsome, right? And that, but.

• 1:29:04Tucker Carlson?

  Well, Rachel Maddow was not the core, whatever you think of Rachel Maddow, she's just like advertises herself as Rachel Maddow, you know, one person's opinions.

• 1:29:14Speaker 02

  It's funny. You sounded like her for a second there.

• 1:29:16Tucker Carlson?

  Yeah, well, I know her and I've never been mad at her. I couldn't disagree more. I know, I'm sure she's attacked me a lot. I wouldn't know, but I'm not mad at Rachel Maddow. I'm, I'm mad at Ken Delaney and like.

• 1:29:26Speaker 02

  No, of course.

• 1:29:27Tucker Carlson?

  You know what I mean? People who pose as reporters who are actually just mouthpieces for the intel world.

• 1:29:31Speaker 02

  Of course. And my only point is that. Just by, you know, changing their, the direction of their BS.

• 1:29:41Tucker Carlson?

  Right.

• 1:29:41Speaker 02

  They're not going to win back audience, right? People, you know, and this is something that I, that I've noticed since I've been in the business. People in media continually underestimate audiences.

• 1:29:56Tucker Carlson?

  Yeah.

• 1:29:56Speaker 02

  They think that they're much stupider than they really are. I remember when I covered Wall Street, I was constantly told that you, you can't do these big stories on credit default swaps and all these other things because audiences don't want to hear about it. They'll, they'll turn the page, but it's not true. People have a great hunger to find out things and they have a much stronger ability to understand things than most media people imagine. And so when they do these sort of transparent exercises in lying and PR and political propaganda, and they think that people won't notice, it makes it worse. The, the, the number's going to go down rather than up when they start.

• 1:30:41Tucker Carlson?

  Totally true.

• 1:30:42Speaker 02

  Don't you think?

• 1:30:42Tucker Carlson?

  Well, it's just interesting. I actually think it's more sinister even than you described. So the two topics after, you know, 30 years in the, in television, the two topics that they like never wanted to do, they always want to do stuff about trannies or race or, you know, whatever, all that stuff, but they never want to do economics or foreign policy ever.

• 1:30:59Speaker 02

  Right.

• 1:31:00Tucker Carlson?

  And their view was, or their, their stated view was, the audience doesn't care. And then I get fired and start doing foreign policy stuff and it gets crazy numbers. And I only do it purely because I'm interested. That's it. I was always interested and I'm also interested in economics, not an expert, but I think it matters. That's, that's why I'm interested, right? You do a story like that, you, you blow out of the water all the pap that they do. So it turns out there's a deep reservoir of interest among viewers and readers for these stories. And I'm starting to think that maybe the people who run the networks where I worked, they just didn't want to address that stuff because there was a consensus on it that they agreed with and that they didn't want to challenge.

• 1:31:40Speaker 02

  Absolutely.

• 1:31:41Tucker Carlson?

  You think so?

• 1:31:42Speaker 02

  Oh, I 100% I think that. I think that especially when you're talking about, you know, interventionist military policies, whether or not they've been effective. Try pitching stories to, you know, one of the big newspapers about, you know, maybe some kind of downside to an invasion or an occupation or the expansion of, you know, a thousand military bases in the Middle East or whatever it is, drone warfare, like, you know, you're gonna have a hard time selling that one, right?

• 1:32:18Tucker Carlson?

  But they did it in the slyest way. I mean, it went right over my head for decades. They did it not by saying, you know, we just don't agree, you know, we have one perspective in that and we're gonna stick with it. That's a straightforward way to explain it, which I can digest. They instead said, no, the audience just doesn't care and you're basically putting the business at risk by covering things that people have no interest in. So get back to Natalie Holloway or whatever the drama of the moment was.

• 1:32:42Speaker 02

  Yep.

• 1:32:43Tucker Carlson?

  And I believed that. I believed it. I mean, I just assumed people just aren't interested. I guess I internalized the, our audience is dumb position, which they had for the whole time I worked there.

• 1:32:53Speaker 02

  Yeah, and it's, it's worse in TV than it is in print, but, but it shouldn't be, right? And, but, and I got the same thing. I mean, not, not so much at Rolling Stone, but I remember we did one story where our plan was to do one story on what caused the financial crisis. And we got such an overwhelming response because it wasn't anywhere. People could not read anywhere what happened to the economy in 2008. There was not a rational explanation that people could read. And so-

• 1:33:25Tucker Carlson?

  Well, you did big, I guess, numbers is not applicable to a magazine, but that got, I mean, your stories on that were widely read because you're one of the only people doing it.

• 1:33:36Speaker 02

  Right, but it wasn't so much what I was doing. It was just, it was just the fact of-

• 1:33:42Speaker 02

  You know, how does this work? Who was really profiting by it? What happened to the people who bought these homes, et cetera, et cetera? Just basic questions and people wanted to know and as you discover, they want to know other things. Where are they spending the money that I send every year that goes to the Pentagon?

• 1:34:00Tucker Carlson?

  That's right.

• 1:34:00Speaker 02

  Right? How is how is it disappear into a black hole and it's not auditable and that's okay?

• 1:34:07Tucker Carlson?

  I you know, it's funny. I remember getting back in the summer, late August of 2001 from Maine. I'd been in Maine and you know, on just on vacation, going back to work and our I was at CNN then and we were wall to wall, literally wall to wall on a story about a congressman from Bakersfield, California, Kern County called Gary Condit. And the question was, did he murder his intern, Chandra Levy? And then later, whatever, in case anyone cares, turns out she was killed by an illegal alien from El Salvador called Ingamar Guandeke. He killed a couple of other people, I think. Anyway, whatever. That was the story. But at the time, we were fully immersed in this question of is this moderate Democrat from Bakersfield a murderer?

• 1:34:52Tucker Carlson?

  And I mean, we did specials on it. It's all we did. And then that September, that was interrupted by 9/11. And I remember thinking at the time, like 9/11 came out of nowhere. There was no kind of backstory. It just happened. It was like truly like the least expected thing that ever happened.

• 1:35:10Speaker 02

  Right, right.

• 1:35:11Tucker Carlson?

  In retrospect, I think, were there things going on in the world? Long, bigger trends that maybe we should, you know, as a news company, we should have been paying attention to to kind of prepare people for the, at least the idea that like, wow, something bad could happen because there's a lot going on abroad.

• 1:35:27Speaker 02

  Yeah, I think if you had visited parts of the Middle East back then, you would have

• 1:35:31Tucker Carlson?

  We had the coal bombing and then like the Saudis where we had bases in places that were clearly very provocative for no real reason.

• 1:35:38Speaker 02

  The fatwa, the Kenyan bombing.

• 1:35:41Tucker Carlson?

  Yes, exactly. There was a lot going on and we just kind of ignored all of it. But we didn't just ignore it. We ignored it in like this manic way, like must cover Gary Condit. And I'm not a conspiracy nut, Matt, but you do sort of wonder like, what was that?

• 1:35:57Speaker 02

  Yeah, those were the good old days when when the the manias were things like the summer of the shark, right? Remember that?

• 1:36:05Tucker Carlson?

  Do I remember? I think I I think I participated in it.

• 1:36:11Tucker Carlson?

  But, but then you get nine 11 like this one, you know, sort of beautiful fall morning and everything changes. And it's like, I do think it's fair to ask, even if there's no intent involved, like, how did we, like, what should we have done differently to at least give people the sense that there were highly organized, well-funded elements abroad that hated us? Like, I just did not know that. And most people didn't.

• 1:36:34Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 1:36:34Tucker Carlson?

  And it can't. Why didn't we do that? Honestly?

• 1:36:37Speaker 02

  And it came as a shock to a lot of people.

• 1:36:39Tucker Carlson?

  Like, a complete shock?

• 1:36:40Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 1:36:41Tucker Carlson?

  Were you in the country when that happened?

• 1:36:42Speaker 02

  No, I was, I was in Russia. And.

• 1:36:45Tucker Carlson?

  Well, so at least you have that excuse, you know, you're living in another country. I lived in Washington DC covering the news for CNN. I mean, I hosted a show on CNN and I had no idea that like.

• 1:36:54Speaker 02

  That's a terrifying feeling, right? To, to be, you gotta cover something that you have no back, background in.

• 1:37:01Tucker Carlson?

  Well, there was no covering it. There was just watching it.

• 1:37:03Speaker 02

  Right.

• 1:37:03Tucker Carlson?

  Right? And there's never actually been any covering of it. No one's ever really covered nine 11. Like, what was that?

• 1:37:09Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 1:37:09Tucker Carlson?

  Exactly.

• 1:37:10Speaker 02

  And, and what followed it? Yeah, exactly.

• 1:37:13Tucker Carlson?

  Yeah, well, I did cover that. But like, the nine 11, like, how, how exactly did that happen? We have all these law enforcement and intelligence agencies protecting us and they had no idea that there, you know, dozens and dozens and dozens of, you know, the 19 hijackers, but then all the support people, living in our country, training, getting money from, we never really, what? Anyway, I don't know, I'm going off on that. But it's like, no one ever asked the basic questions.

• 1:37:41Speaker 02

  Right. Right. And, you know, there are a lot of people who didn't ask basic questions in the last eight years.

• 1:37:50Tucker Carlson?

  I've noticed. Including me, I guess, because a lot of the things you just said are like, yeah, whatever happened to that?

• 1:37:58Speaker 02

  Well, there's, it, it becomes overwhelming after a while.

• 1:38:01Tucker Carlson?

  That's right.

• 1:38:01Speaker 02

  I mean, you know, the 50th time they tell you that democracy is going to end in 10 minutes, or, you know, you're going to die if you don't, you know, take this medicine or whatever it is, or, you know, your kids are going to die. It, emotionally, it wears on people and it becomes very difficult. I mean, I think this was a factor in. It was a factor in a lot of the corruption stories because the audiences were not, they were not going to be receptive to alternative versions of what they had just heard because it was such an emotionally wrenching experience for them. So it's going to take a while for people to digest

• 1:38:41Speaker 02

  a lot of these things. You know, I think it's happening slowly, but, um, but what's going to be interesting about this period is that there's going to be this avalanche of primary material that's going to come out. And I'm fascinated. I can't wait.

• 1:38:58Tucker Carlson?

  You're going to need to hire more staff to keep up with it all.

• 1:39:01Speaker 02

  Yeah, absolutely. Probably, probably that's the case. Uh, and it's going to be a fun time for, for journalists like me, but just, just as a citizen, I can't wait to read it, you know?

• 1:39:10Tucker Carlson?

  So can I ask one last question of your, your reporting is marked by its command of detail, I would say. I mean, it is, I read it. So I know. Yeah. No, but of like a lot of detail, like a lot of detail. And so you look at things, I kind of like, you know, I'm not a detail guy. You are. What name, one like tiny detail that you are personally obsessed with and maybe mildly embarrassing, embarrassed to admit you're obsessed with, but like, what's the one thing that you just, you want to know, like you, that you've been wondering about?

• 1:39:43Speaker 02

  I mean, I, I think the thing that happened last year with that frenzied week in July with, with Biden and, uh, you know, and the, and the lying about the poll numbers and the, the phony, the clearly planted stories about Nancy Pelosi.

• 1:40:07Tucker Carlson?

  Lying about the poll numbers? What?

• 1:40:09Speaker 02

  Oh, there were, like, there were stories that Biden was ahead in the polls that, that came out as they were telling us that he had to drop out because the poll numbers were so dire. Uh, NPR did a story like virtually, I believe it was this, a couple of days after, uh, the debate. I'll have to go back and look at this, but there, but yeah, there were stories that, that he was doing fine in the polls. And, and of course, we later found out from Biden staffers that they said they never had, um, I'm sorry, that that was about Kamala. They never had internal polling showing Kamala ahead.

• 1:40:44Tucker Carlson?

  Yes.

• 1:40:44Speaker 02

  Even though there were scads of stories telling us the opposite, which is, but. For me, the, the, the story that I just can't get past is what happened in that one week?

• 1:40:57Tucker Carlson?

  Yes.

• 1:40:58Speaker 02

  And, and how did they, how did they manufacture that whole thing without anybody showing any kind of curiosity about it? Um, you know, had the media been so completely paper trained by that moment that they, I, I guess so, right? Uh, but.

• 1:41:16Tucker Carlson?

  Well, it's the same, but it's the same impulse that maintains discipline in Washington and in the media, which is commitment to party first. And what is, so that is the one thing, like, all the things I disagree with the Democratic Party and some in the Republican Party on policy, like I have all kinds of disagreements, like I think that, they think that's okay, got it. But the one thing I really can't relate to is the loyalty to party. What is that?

• 1:41:41Speaker 02

  I, I never understood that, you know, like what you're going to agree with a, a bunch of people on everything that they do and you're going to support that. It's one thing for politicians to act that way, but I cannot understand it in a media person.

• 1:41:57Tucker Carlson?

  Do you think that's a defining fact of like our life is this commitment to, to party?

• 1:42:02Speaker 02

  Well, right now we have the situation where the only versions of things that you get are essentially party.

• 1:42:08Tucker Carlson?

  Yes.

• 1:42:08Speaker 02

  Explanations. And that's why, uh, it's so, it's so interesting that there's this sort of intermediate podcast space where people are exploring things from all different directions. And that's where all the people are going. I don't think it's a coincidence.

• 1:42:24Tucker Carlson?

  Can that last?

• 1:42:26Speaker 02

  I think it can. I think what's going to happen is you're, you're going to have new institutions that are built up around that, that are, that are just going to find new ways to.

• 1:42:35Tucker Carlson?

  And you can't have, as long as that lasts, you can't have authoritarian rule.

• 1:42:39Speaker 02

  Right. Oh, yeah. And, uh, and that was proven. I mean, look.

• 1:42:45Speaker 02

  The handful of podcasts that a lot of people chuckled about had a huge impact in the last election. And you know what? Shame on those media people who laugh at those podcasts because among other things, they had lower numbers than a lot of those podcasts, like significantly lower.

• 1:43:02Tucker Carlson?

  Most of them, yeah.

• 1:43:03Speaker 02

  Right? And, you know, they're snobs about it. They say, oh, well, that's, you know, we have a better quality of audience. No, you, you, you just are not convincing. That's the thing.

• 1:43:13Tucker Carlson?

  Actually, they have a much lower quality of audience. You know, your average Rogan listener is way smarter than your average cable news viewer. Like, sorry.

• 1:43:24Speaker 02

  Right. Yeah. And, and they're more willing, and partly because they watch shows like Joe Rogan, which, which ask them to entertain multiple points of view on things. Right? That's kind of the whole idea. You, you, you'll see somebody, there are lots of people who go on the Rogan show that I disagree with.

• 1:43:41Tucker Carlson?

  Me too.

• 1:43:41Speaker 02

  But I hear it, you know? And that's the whole point, right? Is you get to hear different points of view. And that's been excluded from this other form of media, this kind of bifurcated, red, blue landscape, which doesn't work anymore and is in collapse. But I, I just think that this, this period now, it's going to be great for launching the, this new media that's necessary because they're going to have all this material to work with. And because it's going to be all documents, people are going to trust it. Right? In the same way that they trusted the Twitter files. I didn't have anything

• 1:44:21Speaker 02

  to say about it. I just sort of put it out there. But all these new, these independent organs are going to look at this, these reams of material, and they're going to discuss it and pass it around. And that's going to be how the public is educated, which is great. I love it.

• 1:44:39Tucker Carlson?

  It's the best, right? Man, you put me in such a better mood. Matt, tell you, thank you. No, thank you. Seriously. I mean, I, I, I think you would do this for free. I get that feeling.

• 1:44:49Speaker 02

  Absolutely would.

• 1:44:51Tucker Carlson?

  I love it.

• 1:44:51Speaker 02

  Thanks, Tucker.

• 1:44:52Tucker Carlson?

  Thank you.

• 1:44:52Speaker 02

  Appreciate it.

• 1:44:55Tucker Carlson?

  Thanks for listening to Tucker Carlson Show. If you enjoyed it, you can go to TuckerCarlson.com to see everything that we have made, the complete library. TuckerCarlson.com.