Tucker: Jeffrey Epstein / Attorney General cover-up? ⋆ Politicrossing
Connect with us

Tucker Carlson

Tucker: Jeffrey Epstein / Attorney General cover-up?

People shouldn’t be complacent with the fact that somebody was killed in a federal prison under federal protection.

Published

on

Tucker interviews Jeffrey Epstein’s brother on what doesn’t make sense about the reports of the man’s death and what the government seems to be hiding. Highlights include:

“It’s interesting to learn who Jeffrey Epstein hung around with while he was alive, people who flew on his airplane, people who stayed on his private island in the Caribbean, those who had dinner at his home on Fifth Avenue in New York. And to some extent, those names are coming out, not all of them, but we know a lot of the people who were in Jeffrey Epstein’s life, and we have for several years now. But on another level, that whole story seems like a bit of a sideshow, because it doesn’t answer the main mysteries surrounding Jeffrey Epstein’s life or death, and there are three of them… The first, who did Jeffrey Epstein work for? What did Jeffrey Epstein do for a living and on whose behalf ? We don’t know. The second question is, where did all the money come from?…And the third question, maybe the most pressing of all is, what happened to Jeffrey Epstein?…Well, the overwhelming evidence suggests that he was, in fact, murdered, and that the US government, including the attorney general of the United States covered up that murder.”

“When I first heard he was dead from suicide, I had no reason to doubt it. So I accepted that. But then, after the autopsy and after Bill Barr made that asinine statement, I said, this was not a suicide.”

“…there’s reasons why he wouldn’t kill himself then. He had a hearing scheduled to appeal the bail decision coming up in a few days… The bail was being increased, so there’s a chance he could’ve got bail, even as unpalatable as that might’ve been to some people, you know, in the United States you’re entitled to bail on certain conditions. So I could see if he went for the hearing for bail and it was denied, then I could see him taking himself out if he didn’t want to spend a year in jail waiting for a trial, but not a few days before, that makes no sense.”

“When I heard Barr’s statement that he said he personally saw the videotape and he concluded it was a suicide because nobody went in or out, that’s when it hit me that he’s covering this up, because there’s two sort of fallacies in that. One, I thought, why is the attorney general of the United States, who I imagine to be a busy guy, why is he personally watching the video tape?…And two, to assume that somebody could get to that door, go inside, you know, kill somebody, get out completely undetected is just ridiculous, because –I believe—there’s six levels of security before you get to that door. So to assume somebody could do it that way is crazy, and any third rate investigator will tell you that there was anywhere from 7 to 14 people on the other side of that door…that could have killed somebody.”

“I have never seen three fractures like this in a suicidal hanging. Going over… over 1000 jail hanging suicides in the New York City state prisons over the past 40, 50 years, no one had three fractures.”

“I’m still trying to find the information, I have voyeurs out to try to get the medical reports, try to get the 911 call, and just to get people thinking about this. People shouldn’t, like you said, people shouldn’t be complacent with the fact that somebody was killed in a federal prison under federal protection.”

You can find the links below and leave us your thoughts in the comments.

We'd love to hear your thoughts about this article. Please take a minute to share them in the comment section by clicking here. Or carry the conversation over on your favorite social network by clicking one of the share buttons below.



 
 
 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.



Tucker Carlson

Tucker: Ep. 73 The Vladimir Putin Interview

Our goal is to stop this war, and we did not start this war in 2022. This is an attempt to stop it.

Published

on

The interview that’s had most of your “legacy media’s” panties in a twist all week has finally happened.

I don’t remember anyone making a fuss when Dan Rather interviewed Saddam Hussein, just sayin’.

Tucker Carlson gets Vladimir Putin’s take on, among other things, the current situation in Ukraine, how it started and possible resolutions, Russia’s relationship with China,the world economy, and a look into the future. Highlights include:

“After 1991 when Russia expected that it would be welcomed into the brotherly family of civilized nations, nothing like this happened. You tricked us. I don’t mean you personally when I say you. Of course I’m talking about the United States. The promise was that NATO would not expand eastward. But it happened five times. There were five waves of expansion. We tolerated all that. We were trying to persuade them. We were saying, please don’t. We are as bourgeois now as you are. We are a market economy and there is no communist party power, let’s negotiate.

“The events in the Middle East, in Iraq, we were building relations with the United States in a very soft, prudent, cautious manner. I repeatedly raised the issue that the United States should not support separatism or terrorism in the North Caucasus, but they continued to do it anyway. And political support, information support, financial support, even military support came from the United States and its satellites for terrorist groups in the Caucasus. I once raised this issue with my colleague, also the president of the United States. He says it’s impossible, do you have proof? I said yes, I was prepared for this conversation, and I gave him that proof. He looked at it, and you know what he said? I apologize, but that’s what happened. I’ll quote, “Well, I’m gonna kick their ass.” We waited and waited for some response…The CIA replied, “We have been working with the opposition in Russia. We believe that this is the thing to do and we will on doing it.”

“…In 2008, the doors of NATO were opened for Ukraine. In 2014, there was a coup. They started persecuting those who did not accept the coup, and it was indeed a coup. They created a threat to Crimea, which we had to take under our protection. They launched the war in Donbas in 2014 with the use of aircraft and artillery against civilians. This is when it all started… They launched a large scale military operation, then another one. When they failed, they started to prepare the next one. All this against the background of military development of this territory and opening of NATO’s doors. How could we not express concern over what was happening?”

“Our goal is to stop this war, and we did not start this war in 2022. This is an attempt to stop it… No, we haven’t achieved our aims yet because one of them is de-nazification. This means the prohibition of all kinds of neo-Nazi movements. This is one of the problems that we discussed during the negotiation process, which ended in Istanbul early this year…and it was not our initiative, because we were told, by the Europeans in particular, that it was necessary to create conditions for the final signing of the documents.”

“Further on, the president of Ukraine issued a decree prohibiting negotiations with us. Let him cancel that decree, and that’s it. We have never refused negotiations, indeed. We hear all the time, is Russia ready? Yes. We have not refused. It was them who publicly refused. Well, let him cancel his decree and enter into negotiations. We have never refused.”

Check out the interview for yourself and give us your thoughts in the comments.

Continue Reading

Tucker Carlson

Tucker: Fossil Fuels in Space?

The IPCC and all these so-called scientists from NASA, NOAA, and all of them are not doing their due diligence.

Published

on

If fossil fuels come from fossils, why is there oil and natural gas on other planets? Tucker interviews Dr. Willie Soon on the climate, sun activity, and the current state of science. Highlights include:

“In the United States, we often refer to our main sources of energy as ‘fossil fuels’. Oil, natural gas, coal, they’re ‘fossil fuels’ because they come form fossils, ancient organic material, forests, jungles, plankton, dinosaurs. Held under the ground for millennia, they transform into oil, gas and coal. Everybody thinks that’s true. On the other hand, there’s evidence that maybe it’s not the whole story. If that’s where fossil fuels come from, if that’s how hydrocarbons are made, then how come they’re found so deep under the oceans and at the top of the Earth? How come one of Saturn’s moons, according to scientists, has more oil and natural gas than Earth? Were there dinosaurs and planktons and forests at one point on one of Saturn’s moons? Probably not. So, if all hydrocarbons aren’t from fossils, where are they from and why isn’t this commonly known, and what are the implications of it, and what does it tell us about our modern climate change policy?”

“It’s the sun, actually, that does a lot of this. The glacial, like, this period called Little Ice Age from about 1300 to 1900, you know, very cool, and then there’s a bit of a warm period from 880 to about 1200, you know, it was warm. I mean, you can grow wine in England, right? And now you cannot grow wine, right? /Things like that. I mean, Greenland was green back then, but now it’s full of glaciers, ice is coming in, so what are you talking about exactly?”

“There’s another effect that is very, very important. It’s basically because the sun, the earth is forced to go around the sun, and then the orbit changes ever so slightly because of perturbation from all the other planets… Jupiter, Saturn, and even Venus, and Mars, they are actually controlling what we do. And the moon as well is very important. But that other factors [sic], the orbits plus the changes of the sun by itself, between how bright, how dim it is. These two factors can explain just about everything that we know.”

“This year, just two months ago, we published two more papers, convincingly show that even the thermometer data that they show you is not what it is. It’s actually not measuring ‘climate’, it’s measuring urban heat and island changes…If you go to the inner part of the big city…You go to inner cities, much warmer than outside because of concrete retaining all the heat, or you change all the surfaces, the surface becomes impervious, which means there’s no breathing, no water going in and out… What we show is that it’s not a phenomenon just on local signs. You average over this, you can see the effect all over the northern hemisphere.. And they tell you this is global temperature.”

“The IPCC and all these so-called scientists from NASA, NOAA, and all of them are not doing their due diligence. They are putting you…very bad quality data products. Not only that, they hide it. Some of them it’s so difficult to get the data.”

You can find the links below and leave us your thoughts in the comments:

Continue Reading

 

Our Newsletter

Become a Politicrossing insider: Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Sites We Like

Our Newsletter

Become a PolitiCrossing insider: Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Trending