112
posted ago by FractalizingIron ago by FractalizingIron +112 / -0

After some time, I thought I might listen to Tucker's interview of Joe Kent. I had the interview tab open in my browser for about a week, but didn't bother to get around to watching it. (So many things to do, right?)

https://youtu.be/1cbw1utqzHg?si=5fI6ObMXBdaf01j_

This was after a little bird suggested to me that Kent might perhaps be actually working with Trump to disclose Israel influence. The same bird suggested that potentially Trump is actually working with Iran to destroy Cabal Israel control.

Scenarios I thought worth considering, so I decided to give the Kent Tucker interview a go.

But Gee. Just the opening monologue by Tucker makes it hard for me to listen more. By 11 minutes in, Tucker is making all sorts of assertions that the Iran thing is exactly the same as the US Deep State Cabal (Bush etc) Iraq fake war and then using those assertions as established premises.

jeepers, Tucker. What happened, bro?

He makes one salient question:

"Why did Donald Trump, after ten years of saying one thing, do, in the pivotal act of his presidency, do exactly the opposite?"

But, is Trump doing 'the opposite'? Tucker doesn't seem to even ask that question. Also, he just says the Iran situation is exactly the same as the Iraq thing.

"It's not the first time the US has entered into 'this kind of war', against the wishes of its own population, and in clear contravention of its own interests...."

Wow. here's Tucker, convinced of his own injected premises, instead of truly questioning them. E.g. Is this the same thing? Are the motives the same? Is this actually against the US interests? Or is it wider thinking? A strategic move that ultimately will serve America's future?

"It's not good for us. No one has made the case that its good for us...."

Jeepers Tucker. What happened?

one underlying tucker premise: "when brother and sister are fighting, the one in charge is Dad, who comes in and settles the conflict".... Talking about China coming in and settling the 'conflict'. Tucker doesn't even think that Daddy Trump might be doing this for a reason. Trump isn't the Dad, in Tucker's book. He's just a squabbling kid fighting with a sibling. The Iran regime is just as legitimate as Trump administration, tucker?

What happened bro.

There is one point where Tucker almost chokes. I'd say its a tell. There is a part of Tucker's unconscious (or conscious) mind that knows, he's telling assertions that are not being honestly question by him. https://youtu.be/1cbw1utqzHg?si=t394JLubJbf_ZrHj&t=642

I'll try to watch more, but my critical analysis thinking makes it tough, because there are so many embedded premises already.... Embedded premises smuggled in as if facts are like the really lame set of circumstances in a soap opera that draws in those that indulge in soap operas, but which, if thought about critically, make the whole soap opera script just .... too convoluted and unrealistic.

I'm curious about whether other frogs have listened to the actual interview (partly or in whole) and what take-aways they found.

Tucker aside, what do people make of Kent? Are disinfo opps being thrown at him? Is Kent part of the (rather obvious) psyop attacks on Tulsi Gabbard as Trump's DNI?


OK, So I listened to the whole interview, by and large. A few points.

Firstly, I found Kent to come across as an entirely reasonable and credible interviewee. He didn’t appear to make any radical or emotionally charged assertions, wild claims, or to be anything but quite professional in his responses. Except, perhaps, for the part where he states as fact that there were people who had knowledge of the Kirk murder beforehand, people who posted on the net, etc. He offered no basis or reference points for that very wide claim whatsoever.

Oh, I guess there was the assertion that Trump might be compromised because of concern that ‘the enemy’ (aka Israel) might be able to harm his family. That was dark, imo. I don’t believe Trump could be coerced into actions or decisions that ‘protected’ his family at the cost of hurting America or betraying his oath of office. Maybe some people do….?

Secondly, as Carlson is at pains to point out, Kent spent 24 hours with Carlson before doing the interview. Very plausibly natural, to discuss, get on the same page about things, to walk into the interview on the basis of a good rapport and connection, BUT also plenty of time to discuss how we’re going to present the case’ and how we’re going to shape the narrative. A possibility worth considering.

Thirdly, regardless of how Kent comes cross, Tucker Carlson pretty much gave me the creeps. So very slick, so smooth in embedding assertions, presumptions, and leading towards a shaped conclusion (aka the story he wants to sell).

Anyone who has had substantial training in hypnosis or Neurolinguistic programming can spot the techniques. Methods for embedding ideas under the radar, slipping in presuppositions that lead to a predetermined conclusion, etc.

The Takewaways

So, I’ve come away from the interview wondering what the heck Kent is actually about. If he’s a disingenuous intel asset deployed to spin a narrative, he seems pretty darn good at it, as I couldn’t really pick up any tells about such a possible motive from his body language, expressions, tone or sentence construction.

In any case, its clear that from the outset, Tucker is spruiking the narrative that the War in Iran is being driven by Israel, not by President Trump, that it is against America’s interests, that it’s a mistake (that could destroy America, apparently). And, he's very smooth, quite slick perhaps, very 'reasonable' and persuasive, too. A little too much, for my liking.

He also touts lots of reasons to doubt and question Trump’s administration. Some of those questions re: the overall administration I would agree with, but I cannot also help but wonder how grand an operation the Cabal might be affecting to take down President Trump and His Agenda.

So, the question remains: whose agenda is Tucker Carlson serving?