I suspect Tucker is a soft psyop -- meaning he knows about things well in advance of when he "breaks" them - like a calculated delay in putting critical issues on a big platform after "fringe" knowledge has already started becoming "common" knowledge when it no longer can be denied. But also when it starts to no longer matter except to demoralize the audience. The window of time already passed when an uninformed public could have made better decisions or effected more change than they are now able to or motivated to.
Of course he doesn't always do this, or his credibility would be seriously questioned by more. But it's been noticeable enough, he gets some sort of green light to move forward with certain topics. The vaccine injuries are the most obvious example, the Gaza genocide being another.
I suspect Tucker is a soft psyop -- meaning he knows about things well in advance of when he "breaks" them - like a calculated delay in putting critical issues on a big platform after "fringe" knowledge has already started becoming "common" knowledge when it no longer can be denied. But also when it starts to no longer matter except to demoralize the audience. The window of time already passed when an uninformed public could have made better decisions or effected more change than they are now able to or motivated to.
Of course he doesn't always do this, or his credibility would be seriously questioned by more. But it's been noticeable enough, he gets some sort of green light to move forward with certain topics. The vaccine injuries are the most obvious example, the Gaza genocide being another.
Pressure valve that makes people think something is getting done.
The same could be said about at least 17 other things...but let's give them the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.
This is a good point. Who should we trust more, Kansas or Tucker?