Protecting Tucker’s Source

[Benjamin Cole]

6 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

Jim- another equivocal response to two important programs by Tucker.  The parsing of his words is so suspicious and unnecessary. When Carlson said the CIA was "involved" or had a "hand", I think that he was referring to a plot was hatched at the operational level and not in the executive suites. 

Given how loosely the case managers had to supervise the exile groups to preserve deniability and that it is hard to determine where the former mafia allies ended and the exile groups began, it is quite possible one of these groups pulled this off and the CIA s hiding as an organization how it let this happen. Especially if management may have been aware of  rumors of such plots and didnt do any ground truthing ...  just like how Hoover ignored field reports of alleged threats from Hoffa, Trafficante and Marcello.   

anyway, I will see what further I can learn from carlson's chief researcher. 

      

L. Schnapf: I appreciate your efforts and circumspect approach. 

I wish life was a cakewalk, and all goodness and light, and camaraderie with high-principled friends and allies.

But sometimes you have to made do with what is presented in the real world. The best of options available. 

Too bad left-wing outfits (evidently the preferred slant by many) have treated the JFKA as radioactive for 60 years. I can't explain it, but who can deny it? 

Anger should be directed at those left-wing news organizations, President Joe Biden and NSA Director Paul Nakasone, in the context of this forum. 

Tucker Carlson reported hard and hit hard. Frankly, he could be Attila the Hun and I think in this case an alliance or coordination is advisable. 

 

 

 

 

[Lori Spencer]

On 12/26/2022 at 4:07 PM, Lawrence Schnapf said:

Mark Zaid is not part of the MFF legal team. Bill Simpich and I are co-counsel. no one else.

Mark is my attorney on my FOIA lawsuit against NARA for the underlying documents associated with the Trump 2017 and 2018 postponements. This is a separate lawsuit where I am the plaintiff. 

Thank you for clarifying that. 
 

Relieved to hear he’s not on the MFF team. As Jim correctly stated earlier in this thread Zaid is a problematic guy — for oh so many reasons… (already detailed in this long thread!) 

[Lori Spencer]

On 12/26/2022 at 7:58 PM, James DiEugenio said:

ook, about Mark Zaid, just ask John Kirakou.  Who was a former CIA agent.  Ask him what Zaid did for him.  Look it up.

And then you are going to tell me that a CIA deep source should feel comfortable with Zaid???  😗 

He screwed Kiriakou six ways from Sunday — and that’s exactly why Tucker’s source should stay as far away from Zaid as possible. 
 

If Zaid learns this person’s identity, the source would likely be charged with violating the Espionage Act and wind up facing 175 years in prison… 

[Joe Bauer]

The Tucker Carlson bombshell story is completely out of the mainstream media national news loop now.

Sure didn't last long.

A one week shelf life.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 4, 2023 by Joe Bauer

[Matthew Koch]

57 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

The Tucker Carlson bombshell story is completely out of the mainstream media national news loop now.

Sure didn't last long.

A one week shelf life.

 

What did we get from MSNBC Joe? Less than what Tucker did.. 

[Joe Bauer]

1. LARRY KING'S INTERVIEW WITH MARK LANE …

    
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8zqsC6PrLo

   

    

   36:26

    

    

[Ron Bulman]

Transparency, tc and fox.  Not exactly.

TUCKER CARLSON: Transparency is the only solution for Jan. 6 (msn.com)

The J-6 Committee was quite transparent. 

Edited January 14, 2023 by Ron Bulman

[Kirk Gallaway]

On 1/4/2023 at 8:12 AM, Joe Bauer said:

The Tucker Carlson bombshell story is completely out of the mainstream media national news loop now.

Sure didn't last long.

A one week shelf life.

 

 

 

 

 

That's right Joe, and now it's over a month!

Joe's completely right. It's this same old, "Low hanging fruit"  "Low bar of evidence" that we continually fall into. There was so much hoopla here about this, and just general noise on social media.

We've been Tucked! (away)  heh heh

 

To everybody who was praising Carlson as this being a seismic JFKA event.  Didn't you have much greater expectation of some followup from Carlson in this last month?
 

Kirk:Yeah As I say, the story sounds novice. I suppose he might not say another word about it, but when related news comes up, say something like"Of course we have an inside source who says he believes the CIA was behind the assassination!"and just moves on , Will that be  enough for you?

I'm not familiar enough with his show to know what he routinely can get way with.

But it doesn't matter what we think. All that matters is if this story goes somewhere, and Carlson doesn't end up damaging us.

 

Of course,  Larry seems confident in talking with I believe Carlson's producers that he's going to be given more air time. It's possible the least substantive Carlson's claims are, the more they may give a nod to honest researchers and the ongoing litigation to give Carlson's claims more foundation even though they're not following up on them.

 

But right now, Aren't we just Tucker roadkill?

To Ron's point, doesn't he owe us something? Or are we just like young kid fanboys. Grateful for Tucker's autograph!?

Don't you think he should have given us a much better effort?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Don't you think he should have given us a much better effort?

Tough crowd. 🙂 

He inferred that the Central Intelligence Agency were involved in the killing of a US President. 
 

The truth is, Kirk; you’d have rather someone you actually like had been brave enough to say it live on air, instead of Tucker. 
 

Our feelings on Tucker don’t matter in this case, we just need the truth out there and public support for that truth to be spoken. 

[Joe Bauer]

My point was ...

If nothing more comes out to bolster TC's bombshell claim...what is it's value?

Heck, the "UFO's are real" bombshell main stream media reported story started a couple years ago with Luis Elizondo as the point man "is still" in the MSM news cycle!

Yesterday's new bombshell ( the Pentagon says another 500 reports are truly unidentified ) is another seemingly high level bolstering of it.

If nothing more comes out regards the Tucker Carlson JFK story...one must accept the integrity destroying truth reality here.

Tucker's frequent overblown bombshell news pronouncements are too often nothing more than puckish ruckus inciting and shameless higher rating agenda gibberish imo.

Part of his never ending, obsessive and hyperventilated OMG THE DEMS ARE EVIL "Wag The Dog" style shtick.

I long ago got "Tuckered out" on this Dem demonizing shock jock as many more certainly will also if his "heroic" JFK claim peters out.

 

 

 

Edited January 14, 2023 by Joe Bauer

[Guest]

32 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

If nothing more comes out to bolster TC's bombshell claim...what is it's value?

This is certainly one for debate. 
 

Audiences are predictable in terms of them having a herd mentality, and a cultish loyalty to their idealogical heroes. Tucker, as many of you have pointed out, is a poster boy for the right (or conservatives). The audience tunes in for their daily dose of confirmation bias (some would strongly argue truth). If TC is suggesting the CIA killed JFK, you’ll get a large percentage of his huge audience accepting whatever he says as truth, unquestioningly. The average FOX watcher also assumes TC is smarter and better informed than them, so they outsource their critical thinking to TC (the common trend amongst the masses). TV puts the brain into the Alpha waves condition, the state commonly associated with hypnosis. The watchers will take the message that the state (CIA) killed JFK, subconsciously. 
 

These individuals of the 3.5 million + regular watchers, then talk to their work colleagues, or friends in the bar, wives, brothers, sisters etc and say “did you watch TC on Fox, he has only gone and said the CIA were involved in the killing of President Kennedy.” And the idea enters the minds of significant numbers within the population, who are Republican voters, as people tend to mix with people ideologically similar. Its a huge multiplication affect. 
 

JFK is/was the darling of the left, originally there would have been a much greater supporter base for JFKA conspiracy within Democrat voters. It was the Republicans who hated JFK (crude generalisation, some liked him), and would have preferred to believe the state narrative. TC just gave you access to a new supporters/believers. 

 

The maths is that you simply have to end up better than you started, unless of course Tucker goes on air and apologises, stating he was misled by a source. Do you think thats likely? 
 

 

[Joe Bauer]

56 minutes ago, Chris Barnard said:

This is certainly one for debate. 
 

Audiences are predictable in terms of them having a herd mentality, and a cultish loyalty to their idealogical heroes. Tucker, as many of you have pointed out, is a poster boy for the right (or conservatives). The audience tunes in for their daily dose of confirmation bias (some would strongly argue truth). If TC is suggesting the CIA killed JFK, you’ll get a large percentage of his huge audience accepting whatever he says as truth, unquestioningly. The average FOX watcher also assumes TC is smarter and better informed than them, so they outsource their critical thinking to TC (the common trend amongst the masses). TV puts the brain into the Alpha waves condition, the state commonly associated with hypnosis. The watchers will take the message that the state (CIA) killed JFK, subconsciously. 
 

These individuals of the 3.5 million + regular watchers, then talk to their work colleagues, or friends in the bar, wives, brothers, sisters etc and say “did you watch TC on Fox, he has only gone and said the CIA were involved in the killing of President Kennedy.” And the idea enters the minds of significant numbers within the population, who are Republican voters, as people tend to mix with people ideologically similar. Its a huge multiplication affect. 
 

JFK is/was the darling of the left, originally there would have been a much greater supporter base for JFKA conspiracy within Democrat voters. It was the Republicans who hated JFK (crude generalisation, some liked him), and would have preferred to believe the state narrative. TC just gave you access to a new supporters/believers. 

 

The maths is that you simply have to end up better than you started, unless of course Tucker goes on air and apologises, stating he was misled by a source. Do you think thats likely? 
 

 

Well said!