#and I'm also picturing him as former law enforcement | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

talkingpointsusa · 8 months

Text

This is the dumbest, most poorly informed account account of what actually happened on January 6th

The amount of likes this has makes me weep for society (Source: Tucker Carlson on X, formerly Twitter)

Tucker Carlson sucks ass and I hate him with a passion.

I was hoping that Tucker would go straight into histories dumpster alongside Bill O'Reilly when he was fired from FOX but in a horrifying twist, being fired has only amplified his voice in the right-wing grifter-sphere. Former FOX hosts are like cockroaches, they just won't go away.

For those who don't know, Tucker Carlson has created his own media network based around his Twitter that revolves around him "interviewing" other right-wing grifters and essentially becoming Alex Jones for your uncle who used to watch FOX before it became "too leftist". It's been a downward descent into further extremist stupidity since then; from interviewing Alex Jones to saying that he's "open" to the possibility of a flat earth but that guns might prove that the Earth is round Tucker can't stop being an extremist lunatic.

Now, Tucker doesn't just suck ass, he's also a grifter who doesn't believe anything that comes out of his mouth (well, except for the bigoted parts). Tucker texted on Jan 4th, 2021 that he looked forward to FOX being able to ignore Trump and that he "hates him passionately."

But that hasn't stopped Tucker from being a talking head for Trump that panders to the MAGA base with thinly disguised reactionary propaganda because that's where the money is. Perhaps the right aren't the principled defenders of liberty that they pretend to be and are in reality a bunch of bigoted grifters screaming nonsense into the void.

Anyway, fuck Tucker Carlson and he's a new recurring character on this blog. God help us and let's get this over with.

00:00, Tucker Carlson: "It has been exactly three years since since January 6th. The events of January 6th, the racist insurrection that shocked this nation to it's core more profoundly than anything since Pearl Harbor plus the Civil War."

One of the things that Tucker does a lot is present this distorted and sarcastic picture of the left and well....facts in order to lend credibility to his points. Nobody is saying that January 6th is worse than Pearl Harbor plus the Civil War, that's a strawman.

00:16, Tucker Carlson: "And it has taken a while honestly, even for people who aren't on the side of the professional liars, to realize there's something amiss about what happened that day. Not just response; the largest law enforcement mobilization in the history of the United States, that was obviously disproportionate cause it wasn't the worst riot that year, not even close."

The only person I could find making that claim that the law enforcement response to January 6th was the largest mobilization in the history of the United States is Tucker. Surely if this claim was true there would be records saying just that outside of Tucker talking shit a couple days ago.

Unless Tucker provides some proof that January 6th was the largest law enforcement mobilization in the history of the United States we can just go ahead and call that a lie.

Also, I'm assuming he means the BLM protests when he refers to other "worse" riots and the difference between January 6th and the BLM protests is that they weren't trying to invade the goddamn Capitol Building. The scale difference couldn't be larger.

00:34, Tucker Carlson: "But the day itself, there was something about January 6th that didn't feel right and hovering over that day has remained the question; to what extent was it a setup?".

Answer; It wasn't. It was a group of lunatics, spurred on by an ideology you promoted, storming the Capitol and all this "the feds did it!" crap is just your pathetic way of covering your own ass.

00:47, Tucker Carlson: "But what's interesting is how few people have asked that entirely legitimate question and one of the very few, really one of the only in the United States Congress, is a member called Clay Higgins from Louisiana."

Well, let's talk about the guy Tucker is interviewing, Representative Clay Higgins. Clay Higgins is a MAGA nutjob who likes to make ads of him holding assault rifles, take extremely tasteless selfie videos INSIDE A GAS CHAMBER IN AUSCHWITZ to make a political point, arguing that we shouldn't wear masks because his wife had a vision (read: bad dream) that they will lead to American's freedom being taken away, and roughing up black people as a policeman then lying about it. In short, this guy is a real piece of work who in any reasonable society wouldn't be allowed anywhere near government. Yet here he is and the world is worse off for it.

So, Clay has recently decided to hang his hat on the notion that January 6th was an FBI operation. This led to Clay questioning FBI director Chris Wray, a guy who was appointed by the GOP might I add, in an unhinged and embarrassing rant that made him look like someone who might call into the Alex Jones Show. Clay grilled him about an FBI informant who testified that he was in the crowd during January 6th despite the fact that this informant was probably either there because he was already embedded within the Proud Boys or he was there because the FBI assigned him there because they knew from the multiple declarations from Trump supporters and Trump himself that shit was gonna go down at the capitol.

Clay then proceeded to make himself sound even more insane by accusing Chris of utilizing "ghost buses" which were actually just regular buses and then ending his questioning by declaring that the buses were "very sinister in nature". Naturally it makes sense that the FBI would have so few agents in the city that they are headquartered in that they would have to bus them in, these clearly aren't the rantings of someone who is clearly a complete lunatic.

Let's think about this critically for a second, what does the Democratic Party and the FBI have to gain from staging January 6th? They had already won the election and if they simply wanted to discredit Trump there are a lot easier ways to do it than staging an insurrection. There's absolutely zero reason for the Democrats to stage January 6th because they already won. The only reason Tucker could possibly have is that Democrats just like being evil for the sake of it.

Seemingly though, Tucker found this all very intelligent and thought provoking (or like something he could get attention from covering) and decided to have Clay on to spew more inane vocal garbage, great.

Tucker plays a clip from Clay grilling Chris. It should be noted that the insane rant about ghost buses is mysteriously absent. Even without the buses, to me it makes Clay look like a complete moron who's rambling about his bizarre fantasy that he's the star of the Bourne Identity. To Tucker on the other hand....

02:08, Tucker Carlson: "What a sleazy repulsive little authoritarian liar Chris Wray is. It's obvious when you watch that tape."

How is it obvious? The guy was clearly a bit cagey but he's the Director of The FBI, he can't just reveal classified information to satisfy Clay's insane conspiracy theories. Plus, no truthful answer he could give would satisfy Clay because he thinks that January 6th consisted almost entirely of FBI Agents which is demonstrably false.

"Sleazy repulsive little authoritarian liar", that's funny because that's exactly how I view Tucker!

02:23, Tucker Carlson: "The sad part is so few tapes like that exist because so few have confronted him directly and asked questions to which the entire country has a right to know the answer, like that one."

Ok, lets say for a minute that Tucker is correct and the FBI staged January 6th, does he think that Chris is going to tell people that if they question him?

Of course he isn't, what these guys need is some evidence and there is none because you can't have evidence for a lie that isn't disprovable in some way!

Clay and Tucker say hi and the interview starts

02:40, Tucker Carlson: "So that was over a year ago that you asked that question, which is a central question, and you asked it as I think is appropriate; without any embarrassment at all on behalf of your constituents and the rest of the country. Are you any closer to the answer now?"

Clay Higgins: "Well we're closer to being in a position where we can reveal the answers that we already have. Much of the evidence that we have compiled from investigative efforts and over the course of the last couple of years some offices like my own that would have operated in silos of investigative endeavor have now been able to come together now that we have a Republican majority and we have access to the staffs of the appropriate investigative committees and so I sit on the oversight committee and Republicans control that committee now, therefor we control the staff. So when you can magnify the efforts that individual members of Congress have pushed in our own offices, when you can magnify those efforts by the skill and the numbers of staff from the committees, you get a lot of evidence reviewed professionally, and aligned, and assembled into essentially a casefile. And in this case, this is a big file-"

He keeps going and we'll pick up right where he left off but man, Clay is great at saying absolutely nothing. For a bombshell interview with a guy who allegedly has proof that elements within the FBI staged the January 6th insurrection, this is extremely boring.

The truth is that Clay has no evidence outside of ridiculous claims of "ghost buses" so all he's got is mumbling incoherently about staff and committees.

Anyway, carry on Clay.

04:11, Clay Higgins: "Because the involvement of certain actors, you could say Deep State actors within the Federal Government to set the stage for what happened on J 4, 5, and 6 and to entrap thousands of American's from across the country and lure them into this set stage on J 4, 5, and 6."

Did the Deep State force Donald Trump to falsely claim that the election was stolen and rally his followers at the United States Capitol? Absolutely not. The only person who set the stage for what happened on J6 was Donald Trump.

If what Clay is saying is true and they have all this evidence that the FBI set up January 6th, why haven't they released it? Show it to me and if it checks out I'll believe you.

I hate how much I have to say this but "just trust me bro" is not a valid journalistic source.

04:53, Clay Higgins: "And we're gradually, professionally, rolling that evidence out."

Let's see it then.

Anyway, here's Tuckers response to that word salad. Even he seems baffled by what he just heard.

05:00, Tucker Carlson: "So you sort of answered the question right there in larger terms. You just said that elements within the federal government, I assume; law enforcement, intel, and military and I'm using your words 'lured' American's to Washington into what you called a trap?"

Clay Higgins; "Yes sir."

See, if Tucker was a real journalist the most obvious follow-up question is "can I see that evidence?" but he isn't, he's a bullshit artist pretending to be a journalist who knows that there is no evidence so he just lets Clay's claim that he has all this evidence that January 6th was a massive conspiracy stand unchallenged.

This entire interview is just Tucker and Clay talking about supposed evidence that January 6th was staged, not citing any examples of this evidence, and then acting as if January 6th being staged was proven to be a fact because of this uncited nonexistent evidence. It's total bullshit and both of these men know it.

05:17, Tucker Carlson: "So that would, I mean that's a shocking, and I assume that's a sober conclusion based on the evidence. That's what you're saying?"

WHERE'S THE GODDAMN EVIDENCE TUCK?!

05:25, Clay Higgins: "That would be my sober assessment as an investigator and you know I'm quite a (we never learn what he's quite a), I love my country and I've always been a staunch defender of the thin blue line and I would proudly count the FBI amongst that number, they're like brothers to me. So to find that level of conspiratorial corruption at the highest levels of the FBI has been very troubling to me, as a man as a cop. And yet you follow the evidence wherever it leads and-

Tucker Carlson (being a great journalist and interrupting his source): "Yes"

Clay Higgins: "this is what investigators do."

Tuckterruption aside, neither Tucker nor Clay have shown me the "evidence" that the FBI was involved in January 6th yet. These two have essentially made up evidence and are talking about it as if I'm immediately supposed to know about the evidence as well and agree with them.

The evidence could be literally anything that Tuckers audience has been told by other right-wing grifters about January 6th and that's the intention.

And again, what's in it for the FBI to do this?!

06:07, Clay Higgins: "When I asked Christopher Wray that question for instance I already knew the answer, I had reviewed compelling evidence that the FBI had assets, human assets, dressed as Trump supporters inside the Capitol prior to the doors being opened and the masses being allowed in."

You can't just say "I have evidence" and then not show it, that's terrible journalism. I get that the congressman isn't a journalist, although he seems to fancy himself some kind of bizarre "investigator", but Tucker sure as hell is one and if he had any journalistic integrity whatsoever he'd be demanding to see this evidence!

06:34, Clay Higgins: "I knew that the FBI was deeply involved. I'd seen evidence, even at that time that the FBI had embedded themselves into various groups online across the country of Americans who were essentially voicing their concerns and airing their grievances with each other about COVID oppression."

Clay probably blames the FBI when he stubs his toe in the morning.

And if I was Tucker and I was trying to be a journalist instead of a right-wing fraud I'd start asking this guy whether or not the fact that he thinks COVID mandates are "COVID oppression" might have biased his viewpoint when performing the so-called investigation into January 6th and start figuring what else Clay believes. But if I was Tucker this interview wouldn't have happened because it's so obvious that this guy is full of shit looking at his track record.

07:22, Clay Higgins: "When you dig into the evidence that we've had revealed through some criminal cases that I've followed and worked with the families of J6 political detainees and American's that have been persecuted for their involvement in the Capitol that day, some of that evidence shockingly reveals that the FBI agents that were operating undercover within the online groups across the country were the first ones to plant the seeds of, uh, suggestions of a more radical occupation of the Capitol."

This has got to be one of the most frustrating things I have covered for this blog. It's not the most disgusting by a long shot but it's one of the most frustrating. The reason that this frustrates me is that I am currently pursuing a degree in journalism and this entire interview flies in the face of the most basic rule of the job: don't say something without proof.

You can't just say you have evidence of something and then proceed to not show any of it. Otherwise anyone can do it for literally any claim. See, I can do it.

Hey guys, I have evidence that Clay Higgins and Tucker Carlson are a duo of mouth-breathing slimy grifters who will say literally anything for attention and money.

Actually, that doesn't work because this interview is the evidence of that but you get what I'm saying.

08:35, Clay Higgins: "Months later; on January 4th, 5th, and 6th, many of those American's met for the first time in person when they gathered for the massive rally where American patriots assembled to object to everything that happened in 2020, the COVID oppression and the stunning results of what we believed to have been a compromised election cycle in November 2020 so American's gathered at their own Capitol to appropriately air grievances and protest at their Capitol but embedded amongst their number was an FBI asset that had been working from within their group online for many months. So this was the level of manipulative effort that the FBI invested into American citizenry and our assembly online, to exercise our rights under the First Amendment to talk to each other about whatever we wanna talk about."

Again, so let's say I'm FBI Director Chris Wray. I've been appointed by Donald Trump yet for whatever reason I want to betray him. So instead of discrediting him through hundreds of other avenues available; exposing his sketchy business practices, investigating his ties with Epstein, looking into his allegations of sexual assault, none of that. Nope, I decide I'm going to stage a fake insurrection when the Democrats win, which I apparently know is a certainty, by embedding FBI Agents into pro-Trump groups online to provoke them into storming the Capitol.

Then when Trump organizes the rally at the Capitol I decide it's time to strike and I send my instigators into the crowd to rile them up. And then when all is said and done I gain absolutely nothing and have my plan exposed by a random congressman from Louisiana who claimed that the reason we shouldn't follow COVID mandates is because his wife had a nightmare and a right-wing talk show host who claimed a crisis in masculinity is occurring and the answer to that is to tan your balls.

Christopher Wray is a truly terrible planner in right-wing fantasyland.

10:19, Tucker Carlson: "Lets go back to something you said in the first sentence which is; you have seen evidence, and that spurred your questions to Chris Wray, that there were FBI assets dressed as Trump supporters within the Capitol. So, that is proof of entrapment because of course the federal government could have prevented entry into the Capitol Building, there aren't that many doors, you work there you know. But they allowed people in on purpose to entrap them, that's what that proves I think, does it not?"

"Hey there guy who hasn't provided any evidence to the claims he is making, I'm just going to assume those claims are true without pushing back on you at all and ask you if what the fantasy version of the FBI did in your fantasy world would classify as entrapment."

Notice how Tucker hasn't asked Clay about his more insane theories like the "FBI Ghost Buses" that supposedly bussed in hundreds of FBI agents to the Capitol the day of January 6th, probably because it would make Clay look like the complete lunatic that he is.

12:10, Clay Higgins: "On the inside, you had FBI assets dressed as Trump supporters who knew their way around the Capitol."

Tucker Carlson: "Before the doors even opened."

Clay Higgins: "Before the doors opened, how else are you gonna get around the Capitol? You've been there many times, you need a guide to get from whatever door you go in-"

Tucker Carlson: "It's a labyrinth"

Clay Higgins: "It's a maze inside there, that's right. So there's no way that Americans, most of which have never been to the Capitol, there's no way they can come in some random door that gets opened and then get their way directly to the statuary or the house chamber or the senate chamber, it's just not possible."

First of all, I don't think those rioters had a particular set destination in place, they just wanted to overturn the "stolen" election and were just going to wander around until they figured it out. Nobodies saying these morons were masterminds.

Second of all, do Tucker and Clay Higgins not realize that Google exists? In a five second Google search for "US Capitol map" I found multiple maps and floorplans of the Capitol. And since I'm not Clay or Tucker, here they are;

(Source: Pinterest)

(Source: US Capitol Visitor Centre)

Hell, Google Maps even says which side of the building the House of Representatives is on. Could it be that these guys used a map? It makes a lot more sense than saying that the FBI somehow managed to guide a riled up mob of people who really don't like listening to directions throughout the Capitol. Also, I'd bet you that your average FBI agent has the same knowledge of the layout of the Capitol as your average civilian. Working for the FBI doesn't automatically make you an expert in the layout of the Capitol Building.

14:57, Tucker Carlson: "It's such a crime, who planned this do you think?"

Clay Higgins: "Well I think factions planned this, I wouldn't say who Tucker because I don't think there was one person that planned this. But I believe the faction of establishment liberals within the FBI and the Democrat Party and our intelligence services to another extent used their massive powers of surveillance and investigative assets that they have across the country. Confidential informants, registered informants, non-registered informants, voluntary informants. It's a complex web of FBI assets across the country that can be activated, so if you have authority at some of the highest levels in the FBI -- doesn't take much."

Again, let's pause for a second and think about this critically. The Democrats and the FBI have absolutely nothing to gain from staging January 6th.

They wanted to arrest Trump supporters? Not every Trump supporter was there and nobody who is important in the MAGA movement like Alex Jones was arrested.

They wanted to make the MAGA movement look bad? Most people hated the MAGA movement already and the people who don't probably weren't phased by January 6th because they believe Tucker's debunked insanity about it being staged by the feds.

The Democrats already won the election. Hiring a bunch of rioters to try to overturn it is like me winning a new car on a game show and hiring a mob to try to take the car from me when I go to collect the prize. And again, you can talk all you want about a complex web of every single type of informant under the sun being involved in January 6th but until you provide evidence of it you are just another idiot with a conspiracy board.

16:10, Clay Higgins: "The faction within the FBI and within our intelligence services that would coordinate with the most extreme liberal factions within the Democrat Party that were desperate to keep Trump out of office and had worked within the theatre of operations, shall we say, that had been set by the COVID alleged medical emergencies nationwide and millions and millions of mail in ballots."

"Desperate to keep Trump out of office"? He had already lost. Although Clay, as you can see here, is an election truther so I guess in his world he hadn't already lost.

It's really rich for a guy who got COVID twice to refer to COVID as an "alleged medical emergency". The hard data and just general history show that COVID was a legitimate crisis. Notice how Tucker also doesn't ask Clay if he still believes that his wife having a nightmare is evidence that the whole pandemic was a charade. Naturally we can't delve into that part of Clay's past because it would throw absolutely everything he says into question.

As for the mail in ballots, that theory has been widely discredited as false. For starters, mail in ballots aren't a new thing created by Democrats during COVID to steal the election, as a matter of fact they have actually been used since the Civil War so that soldiers could vote from the front lines. Mail in ballots also have numerous safeguards on them such as specialized envelopes and checks from the postal service to prevent fraud.

17:31, Tucker Carlson: "Can -- when you say that there were FBI assets in the crowd, in the building beforehand, and certainly outside, what's the scale of this? You talking like 10? 20?"

Clay Higgins: "No, um. Based upon some very conservative but, like, hard investigative effort, evaluation of the numbers. Putting together eye-witnesses, and videos, and affadavid statement, and whistleblower statement, and court records that have been revealed through criminal cases where J6 defendants have been prosecuted and smart attorney's have forced admissions by the DOJ and the FBI but those admissions have been sealed within the parameter of that criminal case by protective order, by the judge, so I can't share them but I've seen them-"

Wait, pause for a second. So if I'm hearing correctly, the FBI has admitted to sending agents into the January 6th insurrection in court cases but since the judges have sealed the court records Clay can't show them but he's seen them, really he has.

This is literally using just trust me bro as a source. These two are total lying goons. Anyway, let's carry on.

18:41, Clay Higgins: "So real hard objective and conservative estimates would put the number of FBI assets in the crowd outside and working inside at well over 200."

This claim is completely batshit insane! If there were over 200 FBI assets at January 6th, you'd think someone would have recognized ID'd one of them by now. After all, it would be extremely hard to hide well over 200 FBI assets goading a group on. This is completely ridiculous and a product of Clay's clearly overactive imagination.

Naturally, Tucker doesn't push back on this and ask why what Clay is saying should be trusted. Instead he lets the entire thing go unchallenged.

20:04, Clay Higgins: "The objective was to destroy the entire MAGA movement. To forever stain the patriotic fervor that was associated with the America First MAGA movement that had won in 2016 and we believe won in 2020."

Again, the MAGA movement was already highly discredited in most non-extremist circles. I doubt you'd find someone who is moderate who likes or is at least indifferent towards Trump. Since Trump is who he is, he naturally inspires strong opinions.

Also January 6th wasn't the straw that broke the camels back for people who support MAGA, they're all still there lapping up the bullshit about the entire thing being staged by the FBI.

The MAGA movement is still a powerful force in America to this day and January 6th hasn't changed that. It's just given grifters like Tucker Carlson a new toy to play with.

22:32, Tucker Carlson: "It's shocking what you're saying and confirms everyones worst suspicions about this, it's clearly true. Um, did you come across any evidence that the DOD, the military, either defense intelligence agency or national guard or any part of the US military played any part in this at all."

Before we get to Clay's answer (spoiler alert: It's no, probably because he doesn't want to piss off the army) let's take a look at how Tucker's framing of this is an example of terrible journalism.

Instead of asking "Hey, you say you have seen this evidence but also say you can't show it to us and have a track record of lying. Why should we trust you?", Tucker says it confirms everyones suspicions.

Naturally if everyone was suspicious of federal involvement in January 6th, this isn't that huge of a revelation and you the audience member shouldn't question any of the claims that Clay is making even though they aren't backed up by any non-imaginary evidence and stop making sense after you think about them for more than five seconds. These claims are "clearly true" and you shouldn't stop to think about them, no siree!

22:51, Clay Higgins: "I have not seen that. I've heard the echoes of that suspicion and I have observed circumstantial evidence that has been presented to me that I have reviewed but to me it does not rise to the level that I'd call actionable from an investigative perspective."

I decided to do a little research into the district Clay serves and as it turns out it has a lot of veterans in it. Now, this isn't a bad thing by itself but I feel like it sheds light into why Clay is so reluctant to pull the US military into his nonsensical conspiracy version of what happened on January 6th.

If he pulls the military into January 6th, he's going to risk alienating every veteran in his district and that doesn't fare well during the next election. It's all a grift for these guys.

26:17, Clay Higgins: "We have the responsibility to investigate objectively and anyone that knows me knows that's exactly what I'm pursuing."

Clay is so objective.

Clay is so objective that he meets with Donald Trump at Mar-A-Lago whilst referring to him as president even though he lost the election in 2020. Clay is clearly a MAGA politician and that makes him a biased source. This is total bullshit to anyone who thinks about this using the pure facts.

28:09, Tucker Carlson: "I'm a little surpri--and I don't expect to be critical of your colleagues in the Republican conference but they do control the house, impeachment is a thing, Chris Wray is still the FBI director, I watch Republicans, some of whom I know, cheer the murder of Ashli Babbitt who was an unarmed woman, less than 5'5."

Let's talk about Ashli Babbitt.

What you have to understand is that Ashli Babbitt wasn't standing around innocently, she was trying to crawl through a window in the goddamn Capitol Building. Ashli was participating in an insurrection and that opens the door to violent response from the police if they feel like you are a threat.

Babbitt also had a history of violent behavior in the past. She once rammed her SUV into another woman's car three times and repeatedly challenged her to "fight" (this was due to some prior bad blood between the two women regarding an affair). My point is that this was a violent woman with a prior history of violent behavior engaging in an insurrection and attempting to trespass on government property. What happened here was entirely her fault.

Also, I love how the only pushback Tucker gives Clay is "why haven't the Republicans acted on your insane conspiracy theories?"

28:54, Clay Higgins: "There's a great responsibility when you wear a badge in America. I mean, think about it, to be the designated servant of your community that has the authority to deny the freedom of a fellow American in the land of the free, that's a heavy responsibility. So the escalation of force must be appropriate in order to affect a lawful arrest."

Since Clay is such a staunch advocate against police brutality, I'm sure he's talked about George Floyd and the countless African American's that have been brutally murdered by the police....oh wait he hasn't because they aren't white, got it!

Let's not forget Clay's own history of police brutality from when he was in the force, something that Clay has lied about constantly. As a matter of fact, Clay is a pretty violent guy. In 2020, Clay threatened to have BLM protestors in his state shot by the police. So he is the LAST guy who should be giving the speech about police brutality.

33:03, Tucker Carlson: "And if you do (shoot someone as a cop) there's an investigation."

There was genius.

Conclusion:

Well, that's enough of Clay Higgins and Tucker Carlson for today. No they don't reveal the evidence in the last five minutes of the episode. Clay basically says that we are never going to see the evidence and the show ends.

So, what have learnt today? We've learnt that the evidence exists because....well you've just got to trust me and that Clay Higgins is a liar who engaged in police brutality and thinks his wife having nightmares is akin to her having "visions". This entire interview is extremely embarrassing for Tucker from a journalistic standpoint but I'm sure he doesn't care as long as the check cleared.

#politics #us politics #january 6 #right wing bullshit #tucker carlson #fuck tucker carlson #journalism #conservative bullshit #fact checking #conservatives #bad takes #disinformation #debunking #clay higgins #fuck the gop

0 notes

96thdayofrage · 6 years

Text

undefined

youtube

Joe Holsinger (Fmr. Aide to Leo J. Ryan): The gist to what I'm getting to is this: I received a lot of documentation, which I'll provide you here today, that indicates the strong possibility that Jonestown and the People's Temple, was in reality, a mass mind control experiment conducted by the CIA as a follow-up to something called MKULTRA which they conducted from the early 50s through 1974. They used to use the VA hospitals and state hospitals. They used the federal and state penitentiaries for their experiment.

Joe Holsinger (former aide to Congressman Leo J. Ryan):

... I had appeared on a public television several months ago, with a group of Black professionals, mostly psychologists and doctors. They invited me to appear today, to provide information that they thought... I might be able to help with the forum today, with their research. I appeared in Washington in February before the International Relations Committee and they made some statements, some charges, and documentation, which resulted in the Foreign Relations -- Foreign Affairs Committee, or International Relations Committee whichever they call it today. They voted to ask the House of that Committee and Intelligence to investigate my charges. They are currently investigating those charges by the House for that Committee on Intelligence.

Interviewer:

Can you tell us what the charges are?

Joe Holsinger:

The charges basically amounted to CIA contact with both the Burnham government there and with the People's Temple. That originally, it was my belief at the time I went to Washington that the purpose of our involvement there was to support the government of Burnham for commercial reasons and they use the People's Temple almost as enforcers to help support an unpopular government there, to keep control of the government Guyana.

There had been an article in the San Mateo Times in December of '79, which indicated that the Deputy Chief of Mission there, Richard Dwyer, was in fact the CIA Station Chief. He was the one that went to Jonestown with Leo’s party and he claimed to be slightly wounded, but there was a tape made at the time of the murders and suicides there with Jones yelling, “Get Dwyer out of here! Get Dwyer out of here!” The indications are that with Dwyer went back into Jonestown after Leo was murdered and was there at the time. There's great questions as to who shot Jim Jones and why? Wether Jones shot to shut him up?

The question also as to how all these people died and just when they died, which is all documented here. As soon as I came back from Washington because of my testimony, I started getting documentation from Berkeley psychologists called 'The Penal Colony' here. Then from the Alliance for Preservation Religious Liberty in Washington, which indicated other things. One of which was that George Phillip Blakey, was a top Jones aid and he was the man who arranged the purchase or the lease of the land in Guyana, provided the money, arranged the lease down in 1974. He is also now tracked as being CIA operative in Angola in 1975 with UNITA. He's also the same guy who was a top aide, who arranged all this purchasing and finances, is also the husband of Deborah Layton Blakey, who fled Jonestown and made those charges.

He's the brother in law of Larry Layton who was acquitted yesterday. And it is interesting to note that the Presidential Times Tribune says, yesterday, in an acquitting the jury appeared to have agreed with the defense contention that Layton was brainwashed and drugged at the time of the shootings and could not be held criminally responsible.

The gist to what I'm getting to is this: I received a lot of documentation, which I'll provide you here today, that indicates the strong possibility that Jonestown and the People's Temple, was in reality, a mass mind control experiment conducted by the CIA as a follow-up to something called MKULTRA which they conducted from the early 50s through 1974. They used to use the VA hospitals and state hospitals. They used the federal and state penitentiaries for their experiment.

Interviewer:

Do you think that Jim Jones was actively involved with the CIA?

Joe Holsinger:

I do now.

Interviewer:

Do you have any conclusions as to how the people died in Jonestown?

Joe Holsinger:

Yes, I have part of our documentation here is a report from - which is attached here. The Chief Medical Examiner in Guyana, Dr. Leslie Moto. He reported - and this is attached here - his opinion was that more than 700 of those bodies found in Jonestown were not suicide victims, but were murdered. They have based this on the injection marker in the upper arm. Page four of my statement here.

Interviewer:

By injection they died?

Joe Holsinger:

Yes, and by gunfire. There were a lot more people killed by gunfire than they've ever admitted so far. We even heard reports that there were about 50 men with guns ringing around there, so people couldn't get out. And very few of them did get out. According to the Chief Medical Officer in Guyana, most the people down there were murdered rather than suicide.

Interviewer:

Who is suppressing all of this? Are you implying the CIA was active in this suppression?

Joe Holsinger:

Yes. I am suggesting to you that a lot of things that don't make sense here -- I'm suggesting that the long delay in anyone getting in, the press getting in there, or anyone at all getting in there for several days, was caused by a deliberate attempt to manufacture the story, which has now been accepted and sold successfully to the American people.

Interviewer:

What is that story do you think the people are falsely accepting?

Joe Holsinger:

That in effect, this was a large group of disillusioned or rather, disoriented Black people who went down to Guyana and who turned their backs on this country, committed suicide, and we mine as well get rid of them. It's an aberration type of thing. I think that's the story that's been peddled. When you see the documentation here, you'll begin to wonder yourselves why the first reports report are 350 people died or 400 people died, and for several days that was report and then they started finding of more bodies when the first reports were that 500 fled in the jungle. The people examined the bodies the first time and counted them. Counted them by name, the types of people, men, women, and children. Turned them over.

Then a few days in they claimed to have found two or three stacks of bodies underneath those. It boggles the mind, the stories that were passed out. But they have apparently gotten away with, I think, with one of the greatest fabrications of recent years.

Interviewer:

What significance do you attach to the fact that the leadership of the Temple was largely white and the membership of the temple was largely black?

Joe Holsinger:

I mentioned that in here. I think that that's in part and parcel for the whole thing. I think it's what got me very suspicious about this whole experiment about the possibilities here, the cadre was all white. And yet, we think of Jonestown as a bunch of Black people who were committing suicide without mentioning the white cadre and that doesn't quite add up. I think there are racist overtones to the whole thing.

Interviewer:

What kind of racist overtones? What are you exactly alleging?

Joe Holsinger:

I'm alleging that the media picture was printed, or was painted rather. Then brought out in print and so on, was that you have to worry about these people because they're crazy, they'll do anything, they're not like us.

It's my impression at this time that they were conducting some sort of mind control experiment. For example, they had a very modern hospital down there, which they bragged about. So modern that that population, they had medical checkups for everyone, every day. There's no need for that unless you're conducting experiments where you having control groups and you're giving people their "vitamins" every day.

It's my guess that they were just using them as guinea pigs to see what they could do under isolated circumstances. They'd take them off to a jungle some place far away from everybody and get them there somehow. Then they were able to see how these various drugs worked on different groups.

Written by OurHiddenHistory on Thursday February 23, 2017

Permalink -

Recent PagesNo recent Page.

Pages overview »

Recent Entries'Operation Carlota' by Gabriel García Márquez (1977)JFK Assassination-era Dallas, JD Tippit, and George HW Bush and the CIA

with Joseph McBride