I think Tucker, Joe Rogan, Kurt Metzger, Jimmy Dore, etc. all belong to this alarmingly growing cohort of people that are followers of this new "religion" that most people are not fully grasping. Followers of this religion believe there is an ominous "they" that controls everything and if "they" say there's no evidence of the claim, that by itself becomes the proof of that claim. This is how they process all information. There is an epidemic of these type of "religious" people and they are posing as normal, functioning members of our society. This is like a Scientology type cult that just keeps growing and growing. The far left and the far right are having a tug of war on the internet about who gets to mobilize this bloc of conspiratards for their cause. The nazis recruit these retards by saying that "they" are israel/jews/mossad and the commies recruit them by saying "they" are billionaires/multinational corporations and these 'tards just eat it up. We need to officially designate this as a religion and socially diagnose these believers as retards.
FWIW I think Dore is following clicks more than anything else. Metzger appears to have gone completely off the rails, Owen Benjamin-style almost, so I don't know what he actually thinks, or if he does anymore. Rogan just repeats what his producers give him.
I don't agree that Rogan just repeats what his producers give him. Here's a list (incomplete) of conspiracies Rogan believes in,
"they" ordered a hit on JFK, 9/11 was an inside job, we didn't really go to the moon, the government is hiding UFOs and aliens, Epstein was running child sex trafficking blackmail operation for mossad, pyramids were built by now-extinct super advanced globe spanning master civilization, covid vaccines kill more people than covid, etc.
This is not just repeating what his producers give him. Rogan is OT level 10 conspiracist 😂
People say about Rogan how can someone flip from bernie to trump like this. It's because he was a conspiracist the whole time. 2016-2020 the politician "they" didn't want you to notice was Bernie and Tulsi. After Covid and after Butler, PA, the politician that "they" didn't want you to notice was trump. (btw, not saying that this is how all people that voted for these think but I am 99.99% certain that this is how Rogan assesses political information.) This is how Rogan has been giving his endorsements. Before bernie and trump, the politician that "they" didn't want you to notice was Ron Paul and do you wanna guess what Rogan did? (hint: https://ibb.co/4Rw3zx76) Rogan has been in this cult since the 90s.
I wonder if anybody remembers chronology. Am I the only person who remembers Tucker Carlson originally said he didn't think we were talking Covid seriously enough, only to flip a while after and become a skeptic?
Similar to how Fauci originally said that masks don't really work.
Similar to how it was originally Democrats saying they wouldn't take "Trump's rushed vaccine."
All of this stuff is subversion. I don't know if there's some well organized thing that can easily be classified as "Active Measures," given how easy it is to stir up shit on social media, but Tucker Carlson, Jimmy Dore, et. al. are clearly in a group that aligns on basically everything.
They'll tell the truth about obvious mainstream media lies promoted by Democrat-controlled media in order to seem reasonable (the Kyle Rittenhouse case, Russiagate), but mix it with "akshulee, Ukraine is corrupt...they have some neo Nazis!" (as though that matters...every country is corrupt and has some neo Nazis), Israel Derangement Syndrome, and New Age quackery. They also worship Julian Assange (I don't really have a view on Assange, but he's their idol).
Tucker Carlson, Jimmy Dore, Kurt Metzger, Max Blumenthal, Aaron Mate, Glenn Greenwald, Anya Parampil, Scott Ritter...then you have certain politicians who are clearly part of the group such as Tulsi Gabbard.
There are also politicians who seem to align with them on everything except for Israel, such as Vivek Ramaswamy, RFK Jr, and J.D. Vance. They're like alt-conspiratard...the Israel-friendly version.
Unfortunately, Tracey is tangential to the anti-Israel version of this group, but for whatever reason, deviates from them on Epstein and is more willing to look at nuance. I don't know if it's because he has successfully alienated the Democrat-controlled media, as well as the trad con media, to where they're the only media who will talk to him...but at this point, I just sift through people's arguments, figuring that even though everybody you can think of is just a propagandist, you can still figure out which things propagandists say are true if you use some common sense.
I remember the chronology. As I recall, it was Tucker who reportedly went to the White House to warn Trump that Covid would ruin his Presidency. He turned out to be prescient about that. Fyi, Assange came out as pro-Palestinian after October 7 (I think he marched in some pro-Palestinian parade in Australia), so their worship of him is consistent with other views. At least 3 of the people you name -- Max Blumenthal, Aaron Mate, and Greenwald -- are Jews or of Jewish heritage, but that's an old story. I give Tracey more credit for his deviation on Epstein precisely because of his anti-Israel views. To me his willingness to be an outlier on the Epstein story is evidence that he is not motivated by Jew hatred in his views on Israel. The same goes for his criticism of the ludicrous argument that Netanyahu and Israel control Trump's Iran policy and Trump's Middle East policy more generally. I think the points he makes about the relationship between the US and Israel in this column are pretty reasonable. Note also the flack he is getting from some commenters for that argument. I might disagree with him on many issues, but I give him credit for having some integrity compared to 'influencers' like Tucker.
Tucker, Rogan, etc. blame "they" precisely because they know it's not real and there's no person that they are directly assigning blame to. They are avoiding blowback; they are not making an enemy. They talk about "they" because it's not actionable. It's like how when Greta Thunberg attacked global climate change - something that was so big, diffuse, and intractable that nothing could be done - she was applauded by all. Because there was no action that could be attached to it.
With this epistemic outlook, at a certain point, even flat earth theory becomes not only reasonable but probable.
I love conspiracy theories and speculations myself but they ought to be a playful space for weighing up various probabilistic possibilities, not a place where you construct foundational beliefs about the world based on a few signals that all is not what it seems.
Michael Tracey is a slovenly freak who slanders children who were proven in court to have been raped by Mossad. One day he WILL be beheaded, if he doesn’t die from a heart attack first.
Epstein was convicted of procuring a child for prostitution in 2008(9?) in a sweet heart deal and was later arrested again for raping dozens of children.
Why are you still talking when you know nothing about the case? A one year sentence for raping a child where you get to leave the prison and have phone privileges is defacto not a punishment.
Weird, I was walking my dog this arvo & questioning...censorship. Australia going nuts on laws cracking down on free speech. Arrests in Qld recently under new legislation for "From River to Sea" protests. I am vehemently against this legislation law despite having concerns about people chanting it.
I heard Dershowitz( trigger alert ⚠️ Filers) say he was a free speech absolutist. To the extent that he saya its acceptable for Nazis rally through a Jewish hood. I pondered my stance on it.
What you wrote sounds like a threat of actual violence. I find that concerning, given its over difference of option. AND yeah I get ideological about stuff too, while never resorting to threats. Get a grip man.
1 saying he'll be beheaded is protected speech as it is, 2 he slanders children who were proven in court to have been raped which in most countries is not protected speech and depending on your view of free speech may not be protected, 3 any just people would behead for this.
Your use of emotive language is tiring. And also incorrect. The word "children" is plural. Epstein CONVICTED of 1 sexual offence against a minor (ofc you opt to say child). Making threats against person in most jurisdictions is either a terrorist/ criminal threat. Tracey doesn't seem the least litigious.
You're correct to say that hate speech against "pedos" doesn't exist. And the fact it doesn't exist shows how governments are willing to legitimise things that are obviously harmful but have consensus in the popular imagination. Weak spineless & amoral governance is what we have across the Global North. Maybe waging war is, IN PART, a cover for not growing a backbone.
Buddy I'm not debating you, Tracey is going to die and deserves it for slandering children, he would have no grounds to sue as there's no details for it to be a threat, he'd get counter sued for slandering children (plural, keep yapping when you don't know anything, Maxwell was successfully sued by a victim for the same defamation Tracey pushes and Epstein certainly would have been reconvicted in his second trial, plus the first trial dropped the other 35 victims as part of the sweat heart deal, also his conviction still listed two victims), and Tracey's dumb ass has already been convicted for being a disgusting retard.
I guess posting comments cheering for violent death makes you feel better about yourself. Pat yourself on the back and go about your day. You are a good person.
I guess sucking the micro dick of a guy who crassly slanders children who were proven to have been raped makes you a person, go ahead and keep PAYING Michael Tracey.
It's 2026, I'm guess you're older than 18 but younger than 70, why don't you already know? Epstein was proven in court to have "solicited a minor (technically two although he claimed he didn't know the second one's age) for prostitution" or since the girls were kidnapped, raped, as well as at least another 30 minimum as Epstein was let off so easily it prompted a second trial at the time. Per the Epstein files Epstein was Mossad. Michael Tracey claims this kids were just whores who lied about being raped as kids, again despite being proven in court.
Nothing was ever proven in court. Learn how a plea bargain works, you retarded piece of shit.
Nobody was kidnapped. Nobody alleged that in the Florida case. All the girls went there willingly.
All of the idiots claiming they were kidnapped now were adults at the time of their alleged victimization and believe they were abducted by aliens and things of that nature. They weren't victims and have no credibility. You'd know that if you actually read Tracey's writing on this.
The Bret Weinstein clip should be stored in the Museum of Addled Brain Podcasts in the particularly addled 2016-2028 Section.
So many podcasts are chock full of banal prattling and absurdities from guests, with various "mm hms" and nods of agreement and "amens" in response from the hosts.
I'm a Christian, and I believe in demons. But I tend to believe they would be pleased if we are neurotic, vague, delusional, condemning, demon-obsessed, and self-centered (apocalyptic) in our thinking. Which is what overindulging in today's podcasts can foster.
I saw someone note once that it is interesting that Carlson's claim of religious experience was completely negative. Not an encounter with God or angels, not even ambiguous like an encounter with a ghost, but a direct attack by evil demons.
Beautifully written, Michael. I'm reminded how Tucker often publicly apologizes for having been a very active supporter of the 2003 Iraq War. Tucker often says he is "so sorry" about that.
Perhaps in ten or twenty years, if we are all here we will be treated to Tucker explaining how he was wrong about Trump and is "so sorry" that he did not speak up sooner before the final expression of Trump's megalomania became a mushroom cloud.
Tucker's journalism has always taken a back seat to audience capture. He might say that unless he panders to his audience they will stop paying attention. That's an explanation, not an expiation.
Is Tucker a uniquely terrible journalist? I don't think so, but he could do better and I think he knows it.
Yes, Tucker is human, he has his bias, and maybe some prejudices too , who does not?
Your criticisms are not devastating , some are debatable. Tucker is patriotic to a fault, but you now what his faults are visible but do not diminish that fact that he is contributing to the discourse, a hell of a lot more truthfully than the talking heads at CNN, MSNC .
Part of the problem is that Carlson (not "Tucker" - this first-name basis bullshit is part of the overarching problem) is "patriotic to a fault." Actually, that likely is the main problem. Trump is considered a great patriot by many of his admirers, when in fact he's an uncommonly stupid and immoral New York real-estate swindler who is now showing the world what a world-class criminal and gangster he is. In other words, another Ruling Class stooge. That Carlson STILL thinks well of Trump tells us all we need to know about him.
Your point on names is so true, forgive me for using such a common echo technique in my comment.
Let me ask you this, is Trump really stupid, is Tucker Carlson really blind, are not both men not products of a decades of propaganda, outright lies, products of a society with corrupted morality, a society with questionable ethics, the layers of hypocrisy are many, They Trump and Carlson are both symptoms of a very sick society. The illness which put Trump in to White House in 2015 has become much more malignant , but even though be may still be partially blind, Carlson at least became aware that he was ill, no he is not yet cured , but I appreciate his new found awareness, even if he hasn't got prefect clarity.
Carlson is contradictory, genuinely courageous at times, reckless at others, sometimes in the same week. But consider what he has actually done: broke the Western media wall by interviewing Putin, spent three hours pressing Huckabee on questions no mainstream journalist dared ask, challenged Ted Cruz on whether he even knew the population of the country he wanted to bomb. That's not nothing.
Yes, he has real blind spots: the Israel fixation, the Epstein rabbit holes, the lingering Trump loyalty. But CNN and MSNBC spent years selling Russiagate and cheerleading Iraq with zero accountability.
At least Carlson's faults are visible and should be called out, He is a symptom of a sick media ecosystem, not its cause. And a partially awakened voice reaching millions of MAGA voters is arguably more valuable and more dangerous to the status quo than a perfectly consistent critic preaching to an audience that already agrees.
I'll take imperfect and reaching the unconverted over pristine and irrelevant
Well, I always take imperfect, since no one or anything is perfect. Carlson is a very wealthy member of the media class, who doesn't have to worry about making a car payment or putting food on the table, or having to spend a fortune getting a tooth pulled. One of the most pressing matters for tens of millions of Americans is health care, and the fact that the US doesn't have universal free medical coverage is a moral catastrophe of the first order.
I mention this because its all of a piece--the endless war, the lack of affordable housing, decaying infrastructure, homelessness, and generally bad outcomes and circumstances for ten of millions of us. Is Carlson troubled by any of this? Probably not, no more than someone like Stephen Colbert or Jimmy Kimmel or your average talking head on "news" shows.
All so true, ... I try not to totally condemn anyone, people change, I remember when Carlson was on CNN show, Crossfire, and how the show was mortally wounded after having Jon Stewart on as a quest. 20 years latter, I find Carlson is more honest than Stewart https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE
No doubt, but both of them are well-heeled performers; Stewart works for the Dem Party's entertainment wing, and Carlson for the Republican's entertainment wing. The Dem Party has the edge insofar as their entertainment wing goes.
Tracey isn't calling for Tucker to shut down his podcast, he's just saying that Tucker's unwillingness to squarely criticize Trump has reached a head. Tucker hates the Iran war, but loves the man who created that war. He refuses to blame Trump for the war, instead blaming Israel. But that makes no sense - even though Israel has blame, clearly this war would not have occurred if Trump didn't sign off on it. This deflection encourages his audience to take no steps to stop the war.
By pretending like Trump isn't to blame, Tucker is doing propaganda for the war effort... a war that he strongly opposes. It's absurd.
Hi Michael, would you be able to recommend some experts on the US/Israel - Iran war that you think are worthwhile?
I watched a few appearences by Douglas MacGregor of late and found him to be making some sound points about how you can never win a war with just an air force bombing campaign and stuff like that. Other than endorsing Trump as a peace condidate, what else has he been so catastrophically wrong about?
And who to listen to? I am not in the US, so I don't even really have the ability to watch american msm, even If I wanted to. John Mearsheimer and Jeffrey Sachs seem like reasonabke voices as far as I am able to tell.
I know you were asking Michael, not the peanut gallery, but you might want to check out Glenn Diesen’s Substack. He has both Mearsheimer and Sachs in the rotation for interviews, and Glenn himself is an almost ostentatiously reasonable guy (though from his occasional mentions of Epstein, I gather he does not read Michael Tracy).
I also strongly endorse Diesen. He has a Scandi calmness that most other online academics lack. He handles his guests well and gets the best out of them.
Diesen is good. The fact that he is not an American helps too. And regarding MacGregor, he does have some useful insights as a former military man, but I picked up on his right-wing nativist beliefs very early on. I mean, I'm a Socialist, so he and I are miles apart on almost everything, but he has knowledge on military matters I don't have, and he does have insider information which is valuable. For instance, barely twenty-four hours after Trump kidnapped Maduro, MacGregor declared (on Judge Nap's podcast, I think) that the reason for the success of the crime is that the US paid "ungodly" amounts of money to certain actors in the Venezuelan military or government. This turned out to be true, as we are now finding out. MacGregor gets things wrong, for sure, but his analysis can be useful.
Yes, underneath his ostentatiously reasonable guy/Scandi calmness exterior, Glenn Diesen peddles the same anti-American crap as Wright, Neapolitano, Macgregor and so forth. Jeff Sachs is a globalist shill for the UN and an apologist for authoritarian regimes like China, Russia and Iran. For example, in an interview with Tucker, Sachs characterized Iran as a 'great civilization,' overlooking the squads that go around harassing women who fail to cover their hair. Great civilization my ass. Criticizing the bombing campaign against Iran is perfectly valid, but you don't have to defend tyrannical regimes to make your point. As for Mearsheimer, he's in the same boat as Macgregor with respect to his analysis of the Russian-Ukraine war -- calling the Russian military strategy a 'war of attrition' loses credibility after 4 years of war. Maybe Putin's 'special military operation' is just as big a blunder as our wars have been.
Cucker Qatarlson has always hated Trump. He clung to Trump coattails for his own narcissistic audience capture purposes, a scam many fell for (full disclosure, I am ashamed to admit it, but I was one), but here is his text re Trump : "We are very, very close to being able to ignore Trump most nights," Tucker wrote in a text sent on 4 January 2021. "I truly can't wait."
His current love affair is the wealthy islamo/commie media funding & fueling & bot farming support of his hatred of US, of Western freedom & liberty, which provides for his lux lifestyle, exotic homes, travel, etc., but he's clearly a liar & fraud. The contents of the 'nicotine' patches he sells from India should be investigated since he also claims he was mauled by a demon. I suspect his brain worms will eventually take him out.
So in effect Tucker should be more like Nick Fuentes: make his support HIGHLY conditional and be willing to spank POTUS in public whenever he strays from the path. Alas, Tucker has become captured by his audience and unwilling to alienate any of them with hard truths. Such as that the God-Emperor is parading around in his underpants.
Also Tucker seems to be contractually obliged to run a “UFOs are real and piloted by demons” segment 6 times a year, just to ensure he lacks the credibility to be an actual threat to The Regime. Otherwise they might have to martyr him like Charlie.
I recall a podcast Tucker did with Gavin McIness some time ago, when Tucker was a Fox contributor / fill-in host but before he got his show, and he said he never criticizes Fox News. I forget the justification he gave but it came across to me with having to do with his bottom line.
Mickey Kaus wrote that his short-lived tenure at the Daily Caller ended when he wrote something critical of Fox and Tucker spiked the story. Kaus resigned right after. So there's precedent of Carlson putting the bottom line at the top of the list.
Good article and overall I think accurate. Tucker and most alt-media function as a pressure release valve for the Trump admin, and at this time Israel is the obvious choice for blame.
I have a question for you, Mr. Tracey, considering the room for debate about how large Israel’s role in this war actually is exists in plenty -
If this war is mainly a result of Trump and his personal quest for global domination, why exactly did he stop the first 12 day war instead of continuing it to the point it’s at now? Trump and Bibi launched the war using negotiations as cover for strike preparations. But Trump ended that war only to find himself back in it later. Why? It’s very clear that Iran wasn’t attempting to close the Strait of Hormuz then, and they were arguably weaker and caught totally off-guard. The costs for the U.S. were low. But the costs for Israel were growing daily.
I believe it is proven beyond any serious argument that war with Iran was a long term policy goal of the US and Israeli governments both. Trump himself was the one who, for whatever set of reasons, decided to launch it. Not once, but twice. I think it can be reasonably argued that he stopped the 12 day war in the name of Israeli interests.
All this is to say - while Trump has absolute responsibility and accountability for US government actions, it is perhaps a different and more subtle thing to argue that Trump puts Israeli interests before America’s, and at times, seemingly his own.
Again, if his own crazed fantasy of world domination was the driving and deciding factor for his acts up until now, I don’t see why he wouldn’t have continued the war until the “end” or at least escalated it to this point then. Our bases weren’t being hit. Israel was.
"Why exactly did he stop the first 12 day war instead of continuing it to the point it’s at now?" -- because he had three and a half years left to fulfill his longstanding quest of imposing regime change in Iran. The UN "snapback" sanctions hadn't taken effect yet in June; that came in September, at US direction. At which time, the Iranian economy continued to collapse. Setting the stage for renewed regime change attempts, through the still-ambiguous protests in December/January. I always viewed the June war as one "phase" in a larger regime change initiative.
I appreciate the response. I guess the potential disagreement I have regards the question - why did they end phase one?
You are suggesting it was because they still had time and wanted further sanctions to kick in to weaken them further before trying to fully dislodge the IRGC with military force. These sanctions did not cripple the IRGC but did enough economic damage to spur protests against the economic management of Iran by the IRGC which was then leveraged as pretext for regime change war. Interestingly enough though, the U.S. did not launch the operation at that time, instead waiting to build up military assets in the region by using fake diplomacy as a cover to buy time and to justify the buildup as ostensibly “leverage” in the “negotiation.”
I find it unlikely that those sanctions were so impactful that they made a serious material difference between when they kicked in and when we launched “phase two.”
I suggest this - phase one was a “recon by fire” in order to test Iranian offensive capabilities against US/Israeli defensive systems, and that we quickly realized that our defensive systems were allowing too many hits from the IRGC through. At the time those were all directed at Israel.
We were also testing how Iran would react in terms of retaliatory escalation in order to see how passive they would be in the face of aggression. I believe the US government came away with the (now obviously false) impression that Iran will not escalate to certain points like closing the Strait of Hormuz even if we launched a full regime change.
The goal was obviously a quick operation which they believed would be both successful and manageable.
Both of those things proved false.
I believe the military planners saw the math and came to the conclusion based on phase one that, while Iran can penetrate our defensive systems, we will prevent that from happening by way of speedily collapsing the IRGC. US had to end phase one because it was harming Israel and the U.S. determined it was severely underprepared for a lengthy engagement.
"On the matter of the Middle East war that Tucker is (justifiably!) exercised about right now, there’s a number of things that could conceivably be done to constrain Trump’s war-making powers. But they’re all things that if Tucker ever publicly advocated, Trump would freak out — just like he always does whenever anyone tries to constrain his power. Legislatively, Congress could pass a War Powers Resolution; they could restrict funding for the war;"
Or how about we just admit that presidents had this power since the cold war. Vietnam wasn't declared by Congress.
None were since ww2.
It's by design and by the people that do run the world.
After all, we aren't seeing China or Russia defend Iran or use their UN security council positions.
After all, they both went along with the COVID hype.
I think Tucker, Joe Rogan, Kurt Metzger, Jimmy Dore, etc. all belong to this alarmingly growing cohort of people that are followers of this new "religion" that most people are not fully grasping. Followers of this religion believe there is an ominous "they" that controls everything and if "they" say there's no evidence of the claim, that by itself becomes the proof of that claim. This is how they process all information. There is an epidemic of these type of "religious" people and they are posing as normal, functioning members of our society. This is like a Scientology type cult that just keeps growing and growing. The far left and the far right are having a tug of war on the internet about who gets to mobilize this bloc of conspiratards for their cause. The nazis recruit these retards by saying that "they" are israel/jews/mossad and the commies recruit them by saying "they" are billionaires/multinational corporations and these 'tards just eat it up. We need to officially designate this as a religion and socially diagnose these believers as retards.
It's a default epistemology of aimless conspiracism. Which, incredibly enough, was effectively harnessed by the Republican campaign apparatus in 2024.
FWIW I think Dore is following clicks more than anything else. Metzger appears to have gone completely off the rails, Owen Benjamin-style almost, so I don't know what he actually thinks, or if he does anymore. Rogan just repeats what his producers give him.
I don't agree that Rogan just repeats what his producers give him. Here's a list (incomplete) of conspiracies Rogan believes in,
"they" ordered a hit on JFK, 9/11 was an inside job, we didn't really go to the moon, the government is hiding UFOs and aliens, Epstein was running child sex trafficking blackmail operation for mossad, pyramids were built by now-extinct super advanced globe spanning master civilization, covid vaccines kill more people than covid, etc.
This is not just repeating what his producers give him. Rogan is OT level 10 conspiracist 😂
People say about Rogan how can someone flip from bernie to trump like this. It's because he was a conspiracist the whole time. 2016-2020 the politician "they" didn't want you to notice was Bernie and Tulsi. After Covid and after Butler, PA, the politician that "they" didn't want you to notice was trump. (btw, not saying that this is how all people that voted for these think but I am 99.99% certain that this is how Rogan assesses political information.) This is how Rogan has been giving his endorsements. Before bernie and trump, the politician that "they" didn't want you to notice was Ron Paul and do you wanna guess what Rogan did? (hint: https://ibb.co/4Rw3zx76) Rogan has been in this cult since the 90s.
I wonder if anybody remembers chronology. Am I the only person who remembers Tucker Carlson originally said he didn't think we were talking Covid seriously enough, only to flip a while after and become a skeptic?
Similar to how Fauci originally said that masks don't really work.
Similar to how it was originally Democrats saying they wouldn't take "Trump's rushed vaccine."
All of this stuff is subversion. I don't know if there's some well organized thing that can easily be classified as "Active Measures," given how easy it is to stir up shit on social media, but Tucker Carlson, Jimmy Dore, et. al. are clearly in a group that aligns on basically everything.
They'll tell the truth about obvious mainstream media lies promoted by Democrat-controlled media in order to seem reasonable (the Kyle Rittenhouse case, Russiagate), but mix it with "akshulee, Ukraine is corrupt...they have some neo Nazis!" (as though that matters...every country is corrupt and has some neo Nazis), Israel Derangement Syndrome, and New Age quackery. They also worship Julian Assange (I don't really have a view on Assange, but he's their idol).
Tucker Carlson, Jimmy Dore, Kurt Metzger, Max Blumenthal, Aaron Mate, Glenn Greenwald, Anya Parampil, Scott Ritter...then you have certain politicians who are clearly part of the group such as Tulsi Gabbard.
There are also politicians who seem to align with them on everything except for Israel, such as Vivek Ramaswamy, RFK Jr, and J.D. Vance. They're like alt-conspiratard...the Israel-friendly version.
Unfortunately, Tracey is tangential to the anti-Israel version of this group, but for whatever reason, deviates from them on Epstein and is more willing to look at nuance. I don't know if it's because he has successfully alienated the Democrat-controlled media, as well as the trad con media, to where they're the only media who will talk to him...but at this point, I just sift through people's arguments, figuring that even though everybody you can think of is just a propagandist, you can still figure out which things propagandists say are true if you use some common sense.
I remember the chronology. As I recall, it was Tucker who reportedly went to the White House to warn Trump that Covid would ruin his Presidency. He turned out to be prescient about that. Fyi, Assange came out as pro-Palestinian after October 7 (I think he marched in some pro-Palestinian parade in Australia), so their worship of him is consistent with other views. At least 3 of the people you name -- Max Blumenthal, Aaron Mate, and Greenwald -- are Jews or of Jewish heritage, but that's an old story. I give Tracey more credit for his deviation on Epstein precisely because of his anti-Israel views. To me his willingness to be an outlier on the Epstein story is evidence that he is not motivated by Jew hatred in his views on Israel. The same goes for his criticism of the ludicrous argument that Netanyahu and Israel control Trump's Iran policy and Trump's Middle East policy more generally. I think the points he makes about the relationship between the US and Israel in this column are pretty reasonable. Note also the flack he is getting from some commenters for that argument. I might disagree with him on many issues, but I give him credit for having some integrity compared to 'influencers' like Tucker.
Tucker, Rogan, etc. blame "they" precisely because they know it's not real and there's no person that they are directly assigning blame to. They are avoiding blowback; they are not making an enemy. They talk about "they" because it's not actionable. It's like how when Greta Thunberg attacked global climate change - something that was so big, diffuse, and intractable that nothing could be done - she was applauded by all. Because there was no action that could be attached to it.
With this epistemic outlook, at a certain point, even flat earth theory becomes not only reasonable but probable.
I love conspiracy theories and speculations myself but they ought to be a playful space for weighing up various probabilistic possibilities, not a place where you construct foundational beliefs about the world based on a few signals that all is not what it seems.
Fair and eloquent assessment but don’t conflate the preachers with the congregation.
When it comes to corrupt preachers, it’s always the $$$.
I’m off topic here, but your writing is gorgeous.
Now kindly write a piece titled “The Problem with Michael Tracey”
Btw, how much did it cost your handlers to buy your soul?
I'd sell my soul for a bag of Ruffles Sour Cream & Onion potato chips.
And it shows 🤣
Get help.
Michael Tracey is a slovenly freak who slanders children who were proven in court to have been raped by Mossad. One day he WILL be beheaded, if he doesn’t die from a heart attack first.
Keep kissing radfem feet...they'll let you see their ankles one day, hopefully.
>Paid subscriber to Michael Tracey
😆 🏅
Where is this proof you speak of?
Epstein was convicted of procuring a child for prostitution in 2008(9?) in a sweet heart deal and was later arrested again for raping dozens of children.
You do know that in Australia around 98% of criminal cases end in PLEA deals? In US it's higher.
Why are you still talking when you know nothing about the case? A one year sentence for raping a child where you get to leave the prison and have phone privileges is defacto not a punishment.
Who will do the beheading? You?
Immaterial.
Weird, I was walking my dog this arvo & questioning...censorship. Australia going nuts on laws cracking down on free speech. Arrests in Qld recently under new legislation for "From River to Sea" protests. I am vehemently against this legislation law despite having concerns about people chanting it.
I heard Dershowitz( trigger alert ⚠️ Filers) say he was a free speech absolutist. To the extent that he saya its acceptable for Nazis rally through a Jewish hood. I pondered my stance on it.
What you wrote sounds like a threat of actual violence. I find that concerning, given its over difference of option. AND yeah I get ideological about stuff too, while never resorting to threats. Get a grip man.
1 saying he'll be beheaded is protected speech as it is, 2 he slanders children who were proven in court to have been raped which in most countries is not protected speech and depending on your view of free speech may not be protected, 3 any just people would behead for this.
Literally no "children" have ever been proven in court to have been raped. You're a lying piece of shit and you will be skinned alive.
You're going to be skinned alive.
Your use of emotive language is tiring. And also incorrect. The word "children" is plural. Epstein CONVICTED of 1 sexual offence against a minor (ofc you opt to say child). Making threats against person in most jurisdictions is either a terrorist/ criminal threat. Tracey doesn't seem the least litigious.
You're correct to say that hate speech against "pedos" doesn't exist. And the fact it doesn't exist shows how governments are willing to legitimise things that are obviously harmful but have consensus in the popular imagination. Weak spineless & amoral governance is what we have across the Global North. Maybe waging war is, IN PART, a cover for not growing a backbone.
Who is your paid subscription?
Buddy I'm not debating you, Tracey is going to die and deserves it for slandering children, he would have no grounds to sue as there's no details for it to be a threat, he'd get counter sued for slandering children (plural, keep yapping when you don't know anything, Maxwell was successfully sued by a victim for the same defamation Tracey pushes and Epstein certainly would have been reconvicted in his second trial, plus the first trial dropped the other 35 victims as part of the sweat heart deal, also his conviction still listed two victims), and Tracey's dumb ass has already been convicted for being a disgusting retard.
🤔 amoral while maintaining a guise of hypermorality ie doing what works to appease the masses. IDK
I guess posting comments cheering for violent death makes you feel better about yourself. Pat yourself on the back and go about your day. You are a good person.
I guess sucking the micro dick of a guy who crassly slanders children who were proven to have been raped makes you a person, go ahead and keep PAYING Michael Tracey.
“… who slanders children who were proven in court to have been raped by Mossad. “
Could you drop here evidence supporting your claim, please?
It's 2026, I'm guess you're older than 18 but younger than 70, why don't you already know? Epstein was proven in court to have "solicited a minor (technically two although he claimed he didn't know the second one's age) for prostitution" or since the girls were kidnapped, raped, as well as at least another 30 minimum as Epstein was let off so easily it prompted a second trial at the time. Per the Epstein files Epstein was Mossad. Michael Tracey claims this kids were just whores who lied about being raped as kids, again despite being proven in court.
Nothing was ever proven in court. Learn how a plea bargain works, you retarded piece of shit.
Nobody was kidnapped. Nobody alleged that in the Florida case. All the girls went there willingly.
All of the idiots claiming they were kidnapped now were adults at the time of their alleged victimization and believe they were abducted by aliens and things of that nature. They weren't victims and have no credibility. You'd know that if you actually read Tracey's writing on this.
"Epstein was Mossad." No.
It’s hard to take any of his work seriously if this is the level that he will stoop to.
The Bret Weinstein clip should be stored in the Museum of Addled Brain Podcasts in the particularly addled 2016-2028 Section.
So many podcasts are chock full of banal prattling and absurdities from guests, with various "mm hms" and nods of agreement and "amens" in response from the hosts.
I'm a Christian, and I believe in demons. But I tend to believe they would be pleased if we are neurotic, vague, delusional, condemning, demon-obsessed, and self-centered (apocalyptic) in our thinking. Which is what overindulging in today's podcasts can foster.
I saw someone note once that it is interesting that Carlson's claim of religious experience was completely negative. Not an encounter with God or angels, not even ambiguous like an encounter with a ghost, but a direct attack by evil demons.
I wonder how the demons describe the experience of encountering Tucker Carlson? I can't imagine it was positive for them
Beautifully written, Michael. I'm reminded how Tucker often publicly apologizes for having been a very active supporter of the 2003 Iraq War. Tucker often says he is "so sorry" about that.
Perhaps in ten or twenty years, if we are all here we will be treated to Tucker explaining how he was wrong about Trump and is "so sorry" that he did not speak up sooner before the final expression of Trump's megalomania became a mushroom cloud.
Tucker's journalism has always taken a back seat to audience capture. He might say that unless he panders to his audience they will stop paying attention. That's an explanation, not an expiation.
Is Tucker a uniquely terrible journalist? I don't think so, but he could do better and I think he knows it.
Commentators , commenting on commentators.
Yes, Tucker is human, he has his bias, and maybe some prejudices too , who does not?
Your criticisms are not devastating , some are debatable. Tucker is patriotic to a fault, but you now what his faults are visible but do not diminish that fact that he is contributing to the discourse, a hell of a lot more truthfully than the talking heads at CNN, MSNC .
Part of the problem is that Carlson (not "Tucker" - this first-name basis bullshit is part of the overarching problem) is "patriotic to a fault." Actually, that likely is the main problem. Trump is considered a great patriot by many of his admirers, when in fact he's an uncommonly stupid and immoral New York real-estate swindler who is now showing the world what a world-class criminal and gangster he is. In other words, another Ruling Class stooge. That Carlson STILL thinks well of Trump tells us all we need to know about him.
Your point on names is so true, forgive me for using such a common echo technique in my comment.
Let me ask you this, is Trump really stupid, is Tucker Carlson really blind, are not both men not products of a decades of propaganda, outright lies, products of a society with corrupted morality, a society with questionable ethics, the layers of hypocrisy are many, They Trump and Carlson are both symptoms of a very sick society. The illness which put Trump in to White House in 2015 has become much more malignant , but even though be may still be partially blind, Carlson at least became aware that he was ill, no he is not yet cured , but I appreciate his new found awareness, even if he hasn't got prefect clarity.
Carlson is contradictory, genuinely courageous at times, reckless at others, sometimes in the same week. But consider what he has actually done: broke the Western media wall by interviewing Putin, spent three hours pressing Huckabee on questions no mainstream journalist dared ask, challenged Ted Cruz on whether he even knew the population of the country he wanted to bomb. That's not nothing.
Yes, he has real blind spots: the Israel fixation, the Epstein rabbit holes, the lingering Trump loyalty. But CNN and MSNBC spent years selling Russiagate and cheerleading Iraq with zero accountability.
At least Carlson's faults are visible and should be called out, He is a symptom of a sick media ecosystem, not its cause. And a partially awakened voice reaching millions of MAGA voters is arguably more valuable and more dangerous to the status quo than a perfectly consistent critic preaching to an audience that already agrees.
I'll take imperfect and reaching the unconverted over pristine and irrelevant
Well, I always take imperfect, since no one or anything is perfect. Carlson is a very wealthy member of the media class, who doesn't have to worry about making a car payment or putting food on the table, or having to spend a fortune getting a tooth pulled. One of the most pressing matters for tens of millions of Americans is health care, and the fact that the US doesn't have universal free medical coverage is a moral catastrophe of the first order.
I mention this because its all of a piece--the endless war, the lack of affordable housing, decaying infrastructure, homelessness, and generally bad outcomes and circumstances for ten of millions of us. Is Carlson troubled by any of this? Probably not, no more than someone like Stephen Colbert or Jimmy Kimmel or your average talking head on "news" shows.
All so true, ... I try not to totally condemn anyone, people change, I remember when Carlson was on CNN show, Crossfire, and how the show was mortally wounded after having Jon Stewart on as a quest. 20 years latter, I find Carlson is more honest than Stewart https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE
No doubt, but both of them are well-heeled performers; Stewart works for the Dem Party's entertainment wing, and Carlson for the Republican's entertainment wing. The Dem Party has the edge insofar as their entertainment wing goes.
Tracey isn't calling for Tucker to shut down his podcast, he's just saying that Tucker's unwillingness to squarely criticize Trump has reached a head. Tucker hates the Iran war, but loves the man who created that war. He refuses to blame Trump for the war, instead blaming Israel. But that makes no sense - even though Israel has blame, clearly this war would not have occurred if Trump didn't sign off on it. This deflection encourages his audience to take no steps to stop the war.
By pretending like Trump isn't to blame, Tucker is doing propaganda for the war effort... a war that he strongly opposes. It's absurd.
Yes. Michael Tracey flailed trying to argue this isn’t Israel’s war…
Hi Michael, would you be able to recommend some experts on the US/Israel - Iran war that you think are worthwhile?
I watched a few appearences by Douglas MacGregor of late and found him to be making some sound points about how you can never win a war with just an air force bombing campaign and stuff like that. Other than endorsing Trump as a peace condidate, what else has he been so catastrophically wrong about?
And who to listen to? I am not in the US, so I don't even really have the ability to watch american msm, even If I wanted to. John Mearsheimer and Jeffrey Sachs seem like reasonabke voices as far as I am able to tell.
I link to examples of how "notoriously discredited" he is in the piece: https://x.com/mtracey/status/1784773446079049853
My bad, you did in fact link it. I only noticed the one where he speaks at the Trump rally. Thank you
I know you were asking Michael, not the peanut gallery, but you might want to check out Glenn Diesen’s Substack. He has both Mearsheimer and Sachs in the rotation for interviews, and Glenn himself is an almost ostentatiously reasonable guy (though from his occasional mentions of Epstein, I gather he does not read Michael Tracy).
https://glenndiesen.substack.com/
I also strongly endorse Diesen. He has a Scandi calmness that most other online academics lack. He handles his guests well and gets the best out of them.
Diesen is good. The fact that he is not an American helps too. And regarding MacGregor, he does have some useful insights as a former military man, but I picked up on his right-wing nativist beliefs very early on. I mean, I'm a Socialist, so he and I are miles apart on almost everything, but he has knowledge on military matters I don't have, and he does have insider information which is valuable. For instance, barely twenty-four hours after Trump kidnapped Maduro, MacGregor declared (on Judge Nap's podcast, I think) that the reason for the success of the crime is that the US paid "ungodly" amounts of money to certain actors in the Venezuelan military or government. This turned out to be true, as we are now finding out. MacGregor gets things wrong, for sure, but his analysis can be useful.
Yes, underneath his ostentatiously reasonable guy/Scandi calmness exterior, Glenn Diesen peddles the same anti-American crap as Wright, Neapolitano, Macgregor and so forth. Jeff Sachs is a globalist shill for the UN and an apologist for authoritarian regimes like China, Russia and Iran. For example, in an interview with Tucker, Sachs characterized Iran as a 'great civilization,' overlooking the squads that go around harassing women who fail to cover their hair. Great civilization my ass. Criticizing the bombing campaign against Iran is perfectly valid, but you don't have to defend tyrannical regimes to make your point. As for Mearsheimer, he's in the same boat as Macgregor with respect to his analysis of the Russian-Ukraine war -- calling the Russian military strategy a 'war of attrition' loses credibility after 4 years of war. Maybe Putin's 'special military operation' is just as big a blunder as our wars have been.
Cucker Qatarlson has always hated Trump. He clung to Trump coattails for his own narcissistic audience capture purposes, a scam many fell for (full disclosure, I am ashamed to admit it, but I was one), but here is his text re Trump : "We are very, very close to being able to ignore Trump most nights," Tucker wrote in a text sent on 4 January 2021. "I truly can't wait."
"I hate him passionately," he added. ~ Tucker Carlson said he hates Trump 'passionately', lawsuit reveals https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64886188
His current love affair is the wealthy islamo/commie media funding & fueling & bot farming support of his hatred of US, of Western freedom & liberty, which provides for his lux lifestyle, exotic homes, travel, etc., but he's clearly a liar & fraud. The contents of the 'nicotine' patches he sells from India should be investigated since he also claims he was mauled by a demon. I suspect his brain worms will eventually take him out.
So in effect Tucker should be more like Nick Fuentes: make his support HIGHLY conditional and be willing to spank POTUS in public whenever he strays from the path. Alas, Tucker has become captured by his audience and unwilling to alienate any of them with hard truths. Such as that the God-Emperor is parading around in his underpants.
Also Tucker seems to be contractually obliged to run a “UFOs are real and piloted by demons” segment 6 times a year, just to ensure he lacks the credibility to be an actual threat to The Regime. Otherwise they might have to martyr him like Charlie.
Doubtful. There are far more worse things in life than getting squibbed.
I recall a podcast Tucker did with Gavin McIness some time ago, when Tucker was a Fox contributor / fill-in host but before he got his show, and he said he never criticizes Fox News. I forget the justification he gave but it came across to me with having to do with his bottom line.
Mickey Kaus wrote that his short-lived tenure at the Daily Caller ended when he wrote something critical of Fox and Tucker spiked the story. Kaus resigned right after. So there's precedent of Carlson putting the bottom line at the top of the list.
Good article and overall I think accurate. Tucker and most alt-media function as a pressure release valve for the Trump admin, and at this time Israel is the obvious choice for blame.
I have a question for you, Mr. Tracey, considering the room for debate about how large Israel’s role in this war actually is exists in plenty -
If this war is mainly a result of Trump and his personal quest for global domination, why exactly did he stop the first 12 day war instead of continuing it to the point it’s at now? Trump and Bibi launched the war using negotiations as cover for strike preparations. But Trump ended that war only to find himself back in it later. Why? It’s very clear that Iran wasn’t attempting to close the Strait of Hormuz then, and they were arguably weaker and caught totally off-guard. The costs for the U.S. were low. But the costs for Israel were growing daily.
I believe it is proven beyond any serious argument that war with Iran was a long term policy goal of the US and Israeli governments both. Trump himself was the one who, for whatever set of reasons, decided to launch it. Not once, but twice. I think it can be reasonably argued that he stopped the 12 day war in the name of Israeli interests.
All this is to say - while Trump has absolute responsibility and accountability for US government actions, it is perhaps a different and more subtle thing to argue that Trump puts Israeli interests before America’s, and at times, seemingly his own.
Again, if his own crazed fantasy of world domination was the driving and deciding factor for his acts up until now, I don’t see why he wouldn’t have continued the war until the “end” or at least escalated it to this point then. Our bases weren’t being hit. Israel was.
"Why exactly did he stop the first 12 day war instead of continuing it to the point it’s at now?" -- because he had three and a half years left to fulfill his longstanding quest of imposing regime change in Iran. The UN "snapback" sanctions hadn't taken effect yet in June; that came in September, at US direction. At which time, the Iranian economy continued to collapse. Setting the stage for renewed regime change attempts, through the still-ambiguous protests in December/January. I always viewed the June war as one "phase" in a larger regime change initiative.
I appreciate the response. I guess the potential disagreement I have regards the question - why did they end phase one?
You are suggesting it was because they still had time and wanted further sanctions to kick in to weaken them further before trying to fully dislodge the IRGC with military force. These sanctions did not cripple the IRGC but did enough economic damage to spur protests against the economic management of Iran by the IRGC which was then leveraged as pretext for regime change war. Interestingly enough though, the U.S. did not launch the operation at that time, instead waiting to build up military assets in the region by using fake diplomacy as a cover to buy time and to justify the buildup as ostensibly “leverage” in the “negotiation.”
I find it unlikely that those sanctions were so impactful that they made a serious material difference between when they kicked in and when we launched “phase two.”
I suggest this - phase one was a “recon by fire” in order to test Iranian offensive capabilities against US/Israeli defensive systems, and that we quickly realized that our defensive systems were allowing too many hits from the IRGC through. At the time those were all directed at Israel.
We were also testing how Iran would react in terms of retaliatory escalation in order to see how passive they would be in the face of aggression. I believe the US government came away with the (now obviously false) impression that Iran will not escalate to certain points like closing the Strait of Hormuz even if we launched a full regime change.
The goal was obviously a quick operation which they believed would be both successful and manageable.
Both of those things proved false.
I believe the military planners saw the math and came to the conclusion based on phase one that, while Iran can penetrate our defensive systems, we will prevent that from happening by way of speedily collapsing the IRGC. US had to end phase one because it was harming Israel and the U.S. determined it was severely underprepared for a lengthy engagement.
Michael Tracy is being paid by the CIA or Mossad in whores who wouldn’t normally fuck him.
"On the matter of the Middle East war that Tucker is (justifiably!) exercised about right now, there’s a number of things that could conceivably be done to constrain Trump’s war-making powers. But they’re all things that if Tucker ever publicly advocated, Trump would freak out — just like he always does whenever anyone tries to constrain his power. Legislatively, Congress could pass a War Powers Resolution; they could restrict funding for the war;"
Or how about we just admit that presidents had this power since the cold war. Vietnam wasn't declared by Congress.
None were since ww2.
It's by design and by the people that do run the world.
After all, we aren't seeing China or Russia defend Iran or use their UN security council positions.
After all, they both went along with the COVID hype.
Michael, with all due respect, please hire an editor. Thank you.
Yawn…
Lol. False, he wasn't arrested again for raping dozens of children. Why are you just making shit up? 😆 🤣