Transcript [00:00] Hey everyone. So, I want to show you [00:03] something I saw on X. It's a [00:06] it's two clips both of Tucker Carlson [00:09] and they were they were released eight [00:11] days apart. And then I want to slow down [00:14] and show you exactly what's happening in [00:15] them. [00:17] I want to unpack what Tucker's doing. I [00:19] think it tells you more about how [00:20] conspiracy theories actually spread, why [00:23] they work. [00:24] And I think it tells you that better [00:26] than most things I've ever seen on the [00:28] subject. And of course it's one of our [00:31] favorite conspiracy theories, it's the [00:32] conspiracy theory about Israel being [00:34] involved in the murder of Charlie Kirk. [00:36] And now a few days ago [00:38] the first clip you're going to see is [00:40] from just a couple day just really a [00:41] couple days ago Alex Brusewitz sat down [00:44] with Tucker Carlson and asked him point [00:46] blank about something Tucker had [00:48] reportedly said [00:50] that was released eight days earlier [00:53] that Israel was responsible for killing [00:55] Charlie Kirk and and Tucker denies it [00:58] flat out. He says, "I did not say that." [00:59] Now, [01:02] uh [01:02] in the in the clip from eight days [01:04] earlier, which you're going to see at [01:06] the end after the Alex Brusewitz clip, [01:09] it that is from the Can't Be Censored [01:11] podcast, where Tucker says something [01:13] that sounds a whole lot like Israel was [01:16] involved in Charlie's murder. So, we're [01:18] going to watch them both and then we're [01:19] going to go through it and [01:21] and uh [01:22] I'll share my thoughts. Okay, so let's [01:25] pull this up on screen. [01:27] Here we go. [01:30] And let's go. [01:31] >> By the way, like I I did see something [01:34] that [01:35] uh you were on a podcast yesterday and [01:36] said you think Israel killed Charlie [01:38] Kirk. [01:38] >> I did not say that. [01:40] >> What was I did not say that. [01:41] >> Okay, what was the clip then? [01:41] >> I said, um I've never said that. [01:44] >> Okay. I know a lot of people including [01:46] in the Trump administration who think [01:47] that. However, [01:50] uh there's no proof of that. [01:51] >> Yeah. [01:52] >> What I said was [01:54] two things. One, I don't know when the [01:56] command came down and from whom that we [01:57] have to trust everything federal law [01:58] enforcement says, but I'm not obeying [02:00] that. We have a moral obligation to push [02:02] federal law enforcement to the job we [02:04] pay them to do, which is to investigate [02:05] the crime the crimes fully. [02:07] And so for example, if there are people [02:09] who predicted Charlie's death on [02:10] Twitter, [02:11] I think the rest of us can expect that [02:12] they've been hauled in by the FBI for [02:14] questioning. I don't think they have [02:14] been. [02:15] >> I I don't know about that, but I I do [02:17] know what the disco what you're talking [02:18] about, the Discord chats. [02:19] >> No, I'm talking Well, I'm specifically [02:20] talking [02:22] >> I'm talking about the Twitter posts. [02:23] >> Oh. [02:24] >> that seemed to predict Charlie's death. [02:26] Maybe that's [02:27] >> yeah. I would I I don't know if that's [02:28] been investigated. I'd love for that to [02:30] be [02:30] >> Yeah, so [02:31] so that's number one. Number two, [02:34] just because someone is shot by one [02:36] person doesn't mean others weren't [02:37] involved. And don't like berate me into [02:41] accepting that assumption because I [02:42] would never accept that. Why would I [02:43] assume that? [02:45] Um and three, to tell me that you know [02:48] the motive before the trial even starts [02:50] that he was killed for his views on [02:51] transgenderism. Maybe he was. Maybe it [02:53] was more complicated than that. How [02:55] would you know? You don't know. So, stop [02:57] yelling at me to accept a conclusion [02:58] that you can't prove. [02:59] >> I I hear you. I I [03:00] >> Why would you do that? This is my [03:02] friend. I'm not There's And by the way, [03:04] if I was murdered, I would expect people [03:06] who loved me not to jump to unwarranted [03:08] conclusions, but to press federal law [03:10] enforcement to do its freaking job. [03:12] >> Yeah. [03:12] >> And stop calling people names because [03:14] they're asking you to do your job. [03:15] >> a lot of people did jump to unwarranted [03:18] conclusions. So [03:18] >> Maybe. [03:19] >> I don't know if they warranted it or [03:20] not. And [03:21] um you know, right after the [03:23] assassination, many people were [03:25] with big plat big platforms, not you, [03:27] were saying that Israel was behind it. [03:29] And there's [03:30] >> with big platforms were saying that he [03:31] was killed for his views on [03:32] transgenderism. And we don't know that, [03:34] actually. We don't know anything. [03:36] >> But Charlie was killed as he was talking [03:38] about transgender. And this guy, Tyler [03:41] Robinson, seems to be in love with [03:43] transgender people. [03:44] >> That may be absolutely true. [03:45] >> For me, and I think a lot of Americans, [03:48] that seems like the most plausible [03:50] situation. [03:51] >> If Charlie Kirk was murdered, [03:52] >> Yeah. [03:53] >> Um and he was not murdered for his [03:55] opinions on transgenderism, [03:58] obviously. He was, I believe, and most [04:01] people who knew him well, as I did and [04:03] was friends with him as I was, believe [04:05] he was most likely murdered for his [04:07] evolving views on Israel. [04:10] >> Did you catch what happened there? [04:13] Sorry, I was just my mic was muted for a [04:14] sec. [04:16] In the earlier clip [04:18] in the in meaning [04:20] in the clip that was recorded earlier, [04:21] the the the clip you saw last, the older [04:24] clip. [04:25] He says, and I'm reading it back [04:27] exactly, I believe and most people who [04:29] knew him well, as I did, believe he was [04:33] most likely murdered for his evolving [04:35] views on Israel. [04:37] And then [04:39] a week later, we have Bruce Witz asking [04:41] him directly, "Did you say Israel killed [04:43] Charlie Kirk?" And he said, "I did not [04:45] say that." Now, technically, he's right. [04:46] He never used those four words in that [04:48] order. [04:49] But watch what the sentence is actually [04:52] built to do. I believe and most people [04:55] who knew him well believe. [04:59] So, he says it as a belief. It's not a [05:01] claim, which means that you you can't [05:03] really check it. You can't really be [05:04] wrong. It's what he believes. You can't [05:06] argue with that. And it borrows the [05:08] weight of a whole group of unnamed [05:09] people, right? The people who knew [05:11] Charlie Most of the people who knew [05:12] Charlie [05:14] best. [05:15] Right? So, now it's not just Tucker's [05:16] opinion anymore. It's like there's a [05:17] consensus, a quiet, you know, on the [05:20] down low consensus inside inside [05:22] Charlie's inner circle, except no one [05:24] can verify it because there's no names [05:26] here. [05:29] No one can verify that they said any [05:31] such thing. So, you put these things [05:32] together, you get this accusation that [05:33] gets planted in millions of minds [05:36] by Tucker [05:39] who and he never has to technically [05:41] defend it because technically he never [05:42] made the claim. [05:44] So, when it comes back to bite him, his [05:46] off-ramp, his deniability is built in. [05:48] He just as well he's just something, you [05:50] know, uh [05:51] I never said that that Israel killed [05:52] him, you know, I never made such an [05:53] accusation. [05:56] But let's actually test the claim [05:57] itself. [05:58] Not just the mechanics of how he made [05:59] it. Like most people who knew him well, [06:03] who specifically knew Charlie Kirk [06:04] better than Tucker Carlson did. So there [06:06] were a lot of people who knew him very [06:08] well, I should say up front, and this [06:09] isn't second-hand for me. I know a [06:11] number of the people who were closest to [06:13] Charlie, [06:14] not from reading about them, but I these [06:16] that I knew um in the months before and [06:19] after Charlie was killed. I had a lot of [06:21] interactions with many people who were [06:22] very close to Charlie. [06:25] Uh so when I tell you what they've said, [06:26] I'm not relaying a headline. I'm talking [06:28] to you about conversations I had with [06:29] people. I was [06:31] I was part of and specifically when [06:33] you're talking about Charlie's views on [06:34] Israel. And yeah, Charlie's views were [06:36] evolving on Israel, his views on [06:37] everything were evolving. [06:39] And [06:40] you know, he he had his questions and [06:42] his criticisms for Israel. [06:44] We'll get to that in a bit. But let's [06:46] just talk about whether the people [06:47] closest to Charlie are in consensus that [06:51] Israel [06:52] had something to do with it or it was [06:53] because of his evolving views on Israel [06:55] that he was killed. That's what Charlie [06:56] That's what that That's what Tucker [06:57] says. So you have Andrew Kolb it, who's [07:00] his co-host and producer, who [07:02] who was with him daily for years. You [07:04] have Blake Neff, who was also one of the [07:06] producers and like uh [07:09] he worked with Charlie very closely. He [07:11] worked out a lot of Charlie's arguments [07:12] with him on many issues. [07:15] You have Rob McCoy, Charlie's pastor, [07:17] who traveled with Charlie, was one of [07:18] the the closest people to him. You have [07:19] Erica, his wife. [07:22] Now none of them is vague on this issue. [07:24] None of them has said [07:26] uh that they [07:27] you know, [07:29] that they that they buy this. In fact, [07:30] every single one of the people I just [07:31] mentioned have are on the record [07:34] repeatedly saying that they do not [07:35] believe this Israel angle. They're not [07:37] They don't say I'm not sure or I'd [07:38] rather not speculate. They just reject [07:40] it. [07:42] Okay, so this isn't a case where you [07:43] know, where what Tucker is saying is [07:44] like just un-verifiable and I'm [07:47] skeptical of it. [07:48] Um the actual people he's citing, most [07:51] people who knew him well, and of course [07:53] he's appealing to authority. He'd say, [07:55] "Well, you know, it's all on the down [07:56] low and you'll never get them to admit [07:57] it." And it's most people who knew him [07:59] well. [08:00] But most people who knew him well have [08:01] gone on record saying the opposite of [08:03] what he claims he claims they believe. [08:06] So [08:08] there's no basis to trust what Tucker is [08:10] saying here. [08:14] And I want to I want to point something [08:16] else out here. [08:18] The the move that Tucker's making [08:21] to state a suspicion [08:23] as a personal belief [08:25] and attribute it to this vague unnamed [08:28] community of insiders [08:32] who are insiders, right? You know, they [08:33] have authority. [08:34] And then [08:36] and then technically you leave the claim [08:38] deniable because you just say that it's [08:39] kind of like a hunch or a belief or a [08:41] suspicion. [08:43] That's how Joe Kent, remember Joe Kent, [08:46] that's how he operated when he resigned [08:49] from his position [08:51] and then went on Tucker Carlson's show [08:53] where he didn't say Israel was involved. [08:55] He said, "Oh, there's linkage for us to [08:57] investigate." [08:58] And then he pointed at a private at the [09:00] private group chat that I was in with [09:02] Charlie as if as if that settled [09:04] something because Charlie had was upset [09:06] about about some pro-Israel donors who [09:09] were abandoning him. [09:12] And of course Joe Kent resigned from his [09:14] position shortly after The New York [09:16] Times reported that he'd been digging [09:17] through FBI files looking for um [09:21] looking for foreign involvement in [09:22] Charlie's death. [09:23] And the FBI director was having none of [09:25] it because there was nothing, you know, [09:27] he thought it was it was nonsense. [09:31] So when people So when Joe Kent goes on [09:32] Tucker's podcast or Tucker in these in [09:34] in in clip, when you raise a question, [09:39] it makes it sound like you're giving [09:41] plausibility [09:42] to a certain accusation, [09:45] but you don't have to burden of any [09:47] evidence whatsoever cuz you're just [09:48] asking a question. [09:51] And then you have this built-in [09:52] deniability cuz you were just asking a [09:53] question, you weren't raising an [09:54] accusation, but you're but it does the [09:56] work of an accusation. [09:59] See, that's how this is part of the [10:01] I'm trying to unpack here is like the [10:03] the the mechanics of of conspiracy [10:06] theory psychology here. [10:08] So, like [10:09] let me put it this way. Why does this [10:11] work? [10:12] Why does this sound convincing? [10:15] Because when you say, "I don't buy the [10:18] official story. [10:19] I think it's really about Israel." [10:22] The way it feels, [10:24] and this is like the culture of the [10:25] conspiracy theory world, it's the [10:27] psychology of it, right? The way it [10:29] feels is [10:31] it's like you're seeing something that [10:32] other people aren't seeing. It's like [10:33] you get this kind of pleasure, this rush [10:36] of being you're you're one of the sharp [10:39] ones, you're one of the people who's not [10:40] getting fooled. [10:43] And you can and and you and you support [10:45] that by saying things like, "I knew him [10:46] well. I was his friend." [10:49] And knowing him well and being his [10:50] friend has nothing to do with [10:52] understanding the circumstances of his [10:54] assassination. [10:57] So, I knew him well, I was his friend, [10:58] it sounds like a credential, right? It [11:00] sound it it it it's not evidence of [11:02] anything. [11:04] It just tells you I had access you [11:05] didn't have. [11:07] And that's the bait to make the [11:08] conspiracy theory work. [11:12] Not the theory itself, but you feel like [11:13] you're getting insider information from [11:16] a from an authority. You're you're being [11:17] led in [11:19] to something that no one else was you [11:20] you know, that no one else knows. No one [11:22] else realizes cuz they didn't know [11:24] Charlie as well. [11:26] And there's no cost to Tucker being [11:28] wrong because he never claimed anything. [11:30] He just stated his belief. [11:35] Right like with Tucker when Tucker says [11:38] to Bruce with I would never accept that [11:40] assumption. [11:41] And he was talking about [11:44] those people who say who who who believe [11:46] that Tyler Robinson acted alone out of [11:48] his own motives. Right Tyler Robinson we [11:50] have text messages from him to his trans [11:52] lover talking about Charlie Kirk. We he [11:54] said things about wanting to kill him. [11:57] Right but but when Tucker says I would [11:58] never accept that assumption. Okay, [12:00] fine. It's good to be a skeptic that you [12:02] never accept assumptions. [12:04] Even though there's a lot to go on to [12:05] make that assumption work. But when [12:07] Tucker says to Bruce with I would never [12:09] accept that assumption about people [12:10] concluding that that Tyler Robinson [12:12] acted alone. [12:15] Remember he's saying that he would never [12:17] accept what is the most plausible [12:19] explanation on the table. [12:21] That because Charlie was shot while [12:23] talking about transgenderism by someone [12:24] connected to that community who had [12:26] expressed that motive and expressed that [12:28] hatred for Charlie over that issue. [12:30] You don't need a hidden hand from a [12:32] foreign country for that story to make [12:34] sense. [12:36] And and Tucker views this the [12:39] straightforwardness of that as a reason [12:41] for suspicion. [12:44] And he says I'm not going to just [12:45] embrace that assumption. What was it [12:47] right? I'm not going I would never [12:48] accept that assumption. I'm not going to [12:49] jump to conclusions. [12:52] I'm not going to I'm not going to close [12:53] off other possibilities. [12:56] Okay, so you're a skeptic. [12:58] But when when you get to the less [13:00] plausible explanation that Charlie was [13:03] killed over his views of Israel. [13:09] Right by people who would have to see [13:11] him as a threat coordinate an operation [13:14] and execute it without leaving a trace [13:16] while framing up this this pro-trans [13:18] kid. [13:19] Right? That theory that has no evidence [13:21] to back it up. Tucker doesn't say I [13:23] would never accept that assumption. [13:26] I would never right? I would never just [13:28] Yeah, I would never just accept that [13:29] assumption. He doesn't say it about that [13:30] theory. About that one, he just says [13:33] that he believes it. [13:35] He just states it, right? [13:37] And he backs it up by saying that this [13:39] unnamed group of people who are very [13:41] close to Charlie [13:43] agree. [13:45] See, that's the asymmetry I'm pointing [13:47] out here. I hope you get my point. [13:49] It's the whole game he's playing. The [13:50] simple plausible story [13:54] Tyler Robinson [13:56] assassinated Charlie Kirk gets treated [13:58] as unproven and premature. Oh, we don't [14:00] have evidence for that. We don't know [14:01] for sure that it was over [14:02] transgenderism. Right, that's the So, [14:04] the most plausible story [14:07] and the one that the evidence is [14:08] pointing to gets treated as unproven. [14:12] Like as jumping to conclusions, but the [14:15] very complicated far less plausible [14:18] story gets treated as something that [14:20] he's comfortable asserting outright that [14:22] he believes. [14:24] There he's not being careful about [14:25] needing evidence. [14:27] Right? He's [14:29] He's He's [14:31] He's being careful about which [14:33] conclusion he's willing to embrace. And [14:35] he's choosing the harder one, the the [14:37] less plausible one, not the easier to [14:40] believe one. That's [14:41] Does this make sense? [14:45] Look, I've said this this before. It [14:48] The absurdity of this is as follows. [14:52] Let's take this [14:53] Let's take the theory seriously. Let's [14:55] Let's grant the premise. Let's say [14:56] Israel wanted to get rid of Charlie [14:58] Kirk. Israel did it. Okay. Now, I know [15:01] the obvious comeback to what I'm about [15:02] to do. I'm I'm about to ask whether this [15:04] worked, right? And someone watching is [15:07] already thinking, "So, what if it [15:08] backfired? Intelligence services [15:10] miscalculate all the time." Right? A [15:13] failed operation is not proof that there [15:15] was no operation. But, hear me out. [15:18] That's That's a fair point. [15:20] But, there's a difference between an [15:21] operation that produces an unintended [15:24] side effect [15:26] and an intelligence operation that [15:28] requires you to believe that Israel [15:31] looked directly at one of its most [15:33] valuable assets in American conservative [15:36] media and culture and politics [15:41] and decided that they had to get rid of [15:43] him. [15:47] Okay. It was let me [15:49] let me drill down on this a little [15:50] further. [15:51] Were Charlie's views on Israel evolving? [15:52] Yes. Did he have criticized criticisms [15:54] of Israel? Yes. [15:56] Were there some anti-Israel positions he [15:58] held? Yes, absolutely. And I've been [15:59] very clear about that. This claim, this [16:01] is another straw man, the claim by [16:03] Candace and others that like the [16:04] pro-Israel side, you know, is denying [16:07] that Charlie had had criticisms for [16:09] Israel. [16:10] Of course he had criticisms for Israel, [16:12] but [16:13] let's look at some facts. [16:15] The final guest, I believe, [16:18] he was definitely on the on the show [16:20] that day that the day before Charlie was [16:22] killed. [16:23] The last show Charlie did, he was on. [16:24] The final guest, I believe, on Charlie's [16:26] show ever was Ben Shapiro. [16:28] Now, we didn't know he was going to be [16:29] final. I'm just saying that if we want [16:30] to get to proximity of Charlie's murder [16:33] and where he stood on Israel, [16:35] he had Ben Shapiro on, very pro-Israel [16:37] segment. [16:39] When all of media, left and right, was [16:41] embracing the narrative that Israel was [16:44] starving the population in Gaza, [16:49] Charlie [16:50] went against the grain and took a lot of [16:52] heat [16:53] for [16:55] doing a whole segment and then tweeting [16:56] out that segment, sharing it on X, [16:58] whatever it's called. I don't know what [16:59] the verb is for an X post. [17:02] Tweeting out the segment [17:04] where he had me on [17:06] and we went through [17:08] the argument that it is a hoax and that [17:10] the people of Gaza were being provided [17:13] with enough food, that there was no [17:14] starvation in Gaza. And he got lambasted [17:17] by the entire anti-Israel crowd. He went [17:19] against the grain [17:21] on that and defended Israel. Not to [17:23] defend Israel, but because as he opened [17:26] that segment that day that he said, "I [17:28] don't like being lied to." [17:30] And he talked and he embraced the [17:31] position that the Gaza starvation was a [17:33] hoax, a very pro-Israel position. [17:36] Um and also around in the summer before [17:38] he just in the months before he was [17:40] killed, there was a massacre of Druze [17:43] going on in Syria [17:45] that was not being covered by American [17:47] mainstream media, uh especially because [17:49] President Trump was [17:51] was kind of uh embracing [17:53] uh [17:54] the president of Syria, al-Julani at the [17:56] time, and no one was really willing to [17:58] cover the massacre of Druze, [18:01] the Druze who wanted Israel to step in [18:04] and help them. [18:06] And it was only the Charlie Kirk Show [18:08] that had on an Israeli Druze spokesman [18:12] to talk about the Druze community, a [18:15] very pro-Israel segment. I mean, these [18:17] are just a few segments that Charlie did [18:20] not need to do if he was not willing to [18:23] to have pro-Israel pushback against uh [18:28] anti-Israel narratives that were [18:29] prevailing in the media. [18:31] He wouldn't have had these people on, [18:33] and this is all in the I'm talking about [18:35] in the last couple of last month or two [18:38] before he was killed. [18:41] What's my point? My point is yes, [18:43] Charlie, his views on Israel were [18:45] evolving on his views on a lot of things [18:46] were evolving. [18:48] But he was still from from the [18:50] perspective here here's my point. From [18:52] the perspective of the Israeli [18:55] uh of the Israeli people, of people who [18:57] care about Israel's image, of the [18:58] Israeli government, if you will. [19:03] And the concern about what was happening [19:05] on the American right and where are the [19:06] platforms where we can get a pro-Israel [19:09] message, where we can push back on the [19:11] lies about Israel. Where do we have [19:13] access where we can actually state our [19:16] case? [19:17] One of the most positive, if not the [19:19] most positive [19:23] people and context was Charlie Kirk and [19:25] the Charlie Kirk Show allowing the [19:27] pro-Israel narratives to be stated. He [19:29] He Again, he shared different [19:31] narratives, but it was it was very [19:33] important access. [19:35] Why on earth [19:37] would the state of Israel want to get [19:38] rid of [19:40] its greatest asset [19:43] in the America First movement, which was [19:45] access to Charlie Kirk and his audience? [19:48] That was actually working. Charlie was [19:50] pushing back against anti-Israel [19:51] narratives all the time. [19:56] Right? And there was What do you [19:57] believe? You believe that Israel was [20:00] wanted to get rid of Charlie [20:03] because they thought it was [20:04] irredeemable, [20:06] but like meanwhile he's still having [20:07] pro-Israel guests on all the way down to [20:09] the end. Like he was having them on [20:11] all the time. [20:14] And they wanted to kill him? [20:17] Understand, he was one of the most [20:18] effective pro-Israel voices in the [20:20] American right. On his college tours, [20:23] according to the his people, this was [20:25] told to me by the people very close to [20:27] him. This was the whole This was very [20:29] This was This was our relationship was [20:30] about talking about Israel. So I mean he [20:32] he shared this. [20:33] That close to half the questions he [20:35] fielded were about Israel. [20:37] And he defended Israel. [20:39] The whole point of the private WhatsApp [20:41] group that I was in was was for him to [20:43] talk through Israel issues with a group [20:45] of pro-Israel people who knew the [20:47] issues. That was it. And Charlie put [20:48] that group together. [20:54] Again, the entire So why would Charlie [20:56] be doing that? [20:58] Or let's say let's say even if he was [21:00] turning on Israel, he was struggling [21:01] with it. [21:03] There was still access to Charlie Kirk [21:06] and and and an ability to state our case [21:08] on his platform that was a massive asset [21:11] to Israel. [21:13] And you're saying that Israel wanted to [21:16] get rid of that? [21:22] So, [21:24] it just doesn't make any It just doesn't [21:25] make any sense. Look, he he was he was [21:28] an asset to Israel. So, again, you have [21:30] to believe that if Israel killed him, [21:32] Israel gained Israel wanted to gain [21:34] something from that. So, what did Israel [21:36] get [21:37] from killing Charlie Kirk if they did [21:38] it? Right? It got Candace Owens with [21:41] months of [21:42] rocket fuel for her anti-Israel content [21:45] and her conspiracy theories. It got [21:47] Tucker Carlson, [21:49] who [21:50] here we have him [21:52] denying on camera that he said Israel [21:54] had anything to do with it, where 8 days [21:57] earlier he says that Israel that it was [21:58] because of Israel. [22:00] So, Tucker Carlson is handed the this [22:02] explosive conspiracy theory also. [22:06] Um and then you got Joe Kent, the former [22:07] head of national counterterrorism with [22:09] the with his legitimacy of having served [22:11] in the administration [22:13] legitimizing the theory to one of the [22:15] largest audiences in conservative media. [22:17] Uh so, we have this conspiracy theory [22:20] about Israel assassinating [22:23] Charlie Kirk injected into the [22:24] bloodstream of the America First [22:27] movement that is wavering on Israel as a [22:29] movement. [22:31] Walk through the results of this [22:34] operation by Israel if they did it. [22:40] Right? So, you have to believe that [22:42] Israel are geniuses who were supposedly [22:44] capable of this very [22:48] very carefully done political [22:50] assassination to make it look like he [22:52] was killed by a trans activist [22:54] and and and and to get rid of their most [22:56] valuable advocate [22:58] in the in in you know, speaking to that [23:00] speaks to the next generation of [23:02] American conservatives [23:03] and they decided that the rational move [23:05] was to kill him [23:06] and [23:08] it ended up creating all this whole [23:11] poison this anti-Israel [23:14] narrative that went viral in the America [23:17] First movement. [23:19] And has made more anti-Israel sentiment [23:23] in that movement than ever before. That [23:25] was the result of them doing this. So [23:27] you're saying that So this I mean it [23:31] Are are are are [23:32] Are are they [23:34] Are they bumbling idiots the Israeli [23:35] intelligence? [23:38] This is not a [23:39] This is This is like the dumbest plan of [23:42] all time. [23:44] So are are the Israelis geniuses or are [23:47] they fools? [23:50] Look, the simpler explanation is the one [23:52] that doesn't require Israel to [23:55] shoot itself in the foot. [23:57] That a trans [23:59] a pro-trans kid who hated Charlie's [24:02] politics shot him. [24:05] And everything since has been people [24:06] building a story [24:08] about Israel because that story kind of [24:11] is much more interesting than the actual [24:13] simplest explanation. [24:20] Look, it it if if Israel acted and and [24:23] in the process of acting handed their [24:25] enemies their best weapon in years [24:28] that's not just a fail. It's the most [24:30] It's the most basic failure there could [24:32] possibly be. [24:33] It's It's It's absurd. It looks Listen, [24:35] let's go back to where we started. You [24:37] have Tucker saying when when Alex Bruce [24:39] Willis asks him, "Did you say that [24:40] Israel killed Charlie Kirk?" He said, "I [24:42] did not say that." And then you hold it [24:44] up against everything else he said 8 [24:46] days earlier [24:49] with no one pushing back saying, "Of [24:50] course, it's obvious." He says it's [24:52] obvious that he wasn't killed for his [24:53] views on [24:54] on transgenderism that it's you know [24:57] everyone you know all the people around [24:59] him said that he was killed about what [25:00] he said about Israel. [25:03] This is Tucker [25:05] This is how a conspiracy theory spreads. [25:09] Um, anyway, I don't know how much longer [25:12] we're going to be talking about this [25:13] one, but he keeps bringing it up and I [25:14] keep feeling the need uh to push back. I [25:17] feel like it's my responsibility having [25:18] been [25:19] in the position that I was in in this [25:21] story. [25:22] So, [25:23] um, I'm sorry if you have fatigue from [25:26] this story, but it's important to [25:28] identify the div- [25:29] the devices [25:31] that uh Tucker and his ilk use when [25:33] they're spreading these things. That's [25:35] what I was hoping to accomplish here. [25:36] Thanks for watching. [25:37] Please like, share, subscribe, all that [25:39] good stuff.
