Hang tight while we fetch the video data and transcripts. This only takes a moment.
Connecting to YouTube player…
Fetching transcript data…
We’ll display the transcript, summary, and all view options as soon as everything loads.
Next steps
Loading transcript tools…
Tucker Carlson Reveals What Shocked Him While Making 9/11 Docuseries | Glenn Greenwald | YouTubeToText
YouTube Transcript: Tucker Carlson Reveals What Shocked Him While Making 9/11 Docuseries
Skip watching entire videos - get the full transcript, search for keywords, and copy with one click.
Share:
Video Transcript
Before [Music]
we get into the kind of news cycle
events I want to discuss with you, you
have a on the Tucker Carlson Network,
you have produced a five-part
documentary that re-examines some of the
questions about the 911 attack that have
never really been answered and even some
disturbing components of it in terms of
cover up of evidence and the
And we want to show a 30 second clip
just of the preview to encourage people
who are interested to to watch it. I
believe it's streaming on Tucker Carlson
networks and we'll put the links up for
those who want to watch it. But here's a
30 second clip for the I believe I don't
know if it's for the whole series or or
the first episode, but let's show it anyway.
The official 9/11 Commission report sold
to the American public and the world for
decades as the definitive account of
what happened that day is a lie. My name
is Mark Rossini. I'm a former FBI agent.
Before 9/11, there were no sources in al-Qaeda.
al-Qaeda.
And that is the truth. And no one has
ever answered those questions because
the house would come tumbling down. [Music]
[Music]
Now, it's so interesting because since
911, there's been this whole series of
embarrassing debacles on the part of our
power centers, the Iraq war and and the
2008 financial crisis and COVID and
Russia gate and so many more that have
really destroyed trust and faith in
Americans institution. But at the time
of 911, that really wasn't the case. I
think most people
roughly thought the official story
offered for how the 9/11 attack happened
was more or less accurate. I think most
people in mainstream circles, I would
include myself, I think you were among
them as well, kind of dismissed people
who are on the fringes saying, "No, we
need to look at this differently. The
official story doesn't make a lot of
sense." And obviously, you have decided
that there are things worth looking at
here. Why is that? What gave you this
kind of impetus to decide that you
wanted to delve into this?
>> Well, just to correct the record, I I
didn't dismiss people who had questions
about 911. I attacked them savagely uh
as lunatics and as people who were
soiling the memory of those killed on
911. Like a lot of people had a friend
killed on 911. Um and I was really angry
and sort of awful to people who asked
legitimate questions. I mean, almost all
questions are legitimate as far as I'm
concerned as long as they're offered in
good faith, and I think these were. Um,
so I, you know, I had atoning to do for
my own behavior, but I wanted to revisit
this for the same reason I think all of
us are revisiting a lot of assumptions
that we had. And it's the string of
disasters predicated on lies that you
just listed. And none of those disasters
has ever been followed by a reckoning.
And that's the most I think it's the
most frustrating part. It's not like I
haven't done dumb stuff. Well, I just
admitted it. Um, it's and you're a
father, you know, your kids routinely do
dumb stuff like about 15 times a day.
But there always has to be a point and
this is the point where you say to the
child, you know, please acknowledge what
you did. Maybe there's a punishment,
maybe there's not. Acknowledging it is
itself a punishment. And the reason you
go through that ritual, and it's the
most human of all rituals, is to teach
the wrongdoer something and to lower the
likelihood it'll happen again. and we
abandoned that ritual completely in this
country and instead the wrongdoers and
we identify a number of them in the in
the documentary series were rewarded for
their wrongdoing and that would include
George Tennant at CIA. It would include
John Brennan uh also at CIA. It would
include the entire CIA which saw it its
funding um dramatically increase after
allowing this disaster to happen.
Whether they did it on purpose or not, I
I can't say. There's no question they
allowed it. And to see the worst people,
Condandy Rice, uh, for example, George
W. Bush got reelected after this again
and again and again and again, um,
thrive is too much. And actually, if
that continues over time, your country
falls apart because it eliminates, not
only does it eliminate trust, it also
stokes revolutionary levels of
resentment. So, you can't actually keep
doing that without killing yourself. Um,
and that we're there and we're at that
point now. And that's part of the reason
people are so I think spun up about the
Charlie Kirk assassination investigation
because this is just the point where
there has to be honesty or else you know
people could get unruly. Anyway, I just
thought we we should start at the
beginning. I agree with your assessment
completely. 911 was the beginning of
this kind of event. I mean you could say
that Pearl Harbor and the Kennedy
assassination. I would agree with both.
But this was the first time millions of
people saw something happen live on
television and then within a decade or
two began to reassess like what is it?
Um so that's the reason just because I
want the country to continue.
>> You know it's funny I was thinking about
uh the JFK assassination because of
course when I was growing up I thought
that case had been solved like the RFK
killing and the you know this the
iconography that we're taught. And I
remember the first time I went back and
and looked at the JFK assassination in
my early 20s, I was shocked. Not
necessarily because I concluded that the
official story was wrong and I knew who
did it. But there was so much done as
part of the attempt to tell the American
people that it was just a single uh
gunman that was so blatantly corrupting
and should have destroyed trust in the
process. beginning with the fact that
obviously the CIA was a suspect and yet
they took the person who was the
dominant figure of the CIA for decade
and even once he he was fired by by JFK
for the Bay of Pigs
was Alan Dulles was still very closely
tied to the CIA and they made him like
the most influential person on the
Warren Commission. So you had like a
major suspect with this incredible
influence. And what what I want to ask
you is, you know, between that kind of
thing and all the errors that we've come
to learn are in the 9/11 report, if you
want to be generous about it, do you
think that sometimes governments are
actually engaged in some like malicious
coverup where there was some very
disruptive and dangerous and evil plot
that was behind it and they're just
trying to do their best to hide it and
make sure that the culprits are never
caught? Or is it more like we don't
really trust the public and if we allow
too many things that can might that
might create some suspicions or
questions the public is never going to
believe in. It's almost like
patronizingly trying to protect the
public from their own inability to
grapple with hard questions.
I think it's a combination of those two
things and a third which I think
actually speaks to good faith which is
you know boy if we admit enough then all
faith will collapse and this is a
voluntary system all governments even dictatorships
dictatorships
continue with the complicity and the
acceptance of their populations I mean
it's a numbers game if people actually
rose up against any leader no matter how
totalitarian they could take him but
they don't because there is a tac
passive agreement and especially in a
democracy, democratic republic like ours
between the public and the government
that hey, we're doing this because we
think it's the right thing. And if you
were to admit that something really big,
the moonlanding for example, was fake
that it would shake people's faith to
the point where they became nihilistic
and the republic couldn't continue. I
mean, there is that I know there's that
concern because I've talked to people
about it and I think that's a a good
reason to lie, but it doesn't justify
the lie and actually it simply compounds
the damage. That's exactly what you've
seen. But just to go back to your
original question in one sentence, are
there are there retroactive plots to
hide incompetence? Yes, of course. It's
probably the majority of these examples.
Are there malicious plots that are
obscured by cover-ups? I I think I think
there are. You know, I do actually. I
know there are. So,
>> yeah. You know, you know what's so
interesting? I remember in real time the
911 commission was really not considered
to be a particularly credible body.
There were all sorts of mainstream
voices like in the Senate and stuff who
were angry about the material that was
omitted, the material that was
suppressed, the leads weren't followed
up upon. Um, and just as an aside when
when you said, you know, people allowed
911 to happen, I remember I debated
General Michael Hayden, who was the head
of the NSA at the time of the 911 attack
under the Bush administration. So his
job was basically to, you know, he has
the NSA. The only point of that is to
detect ostensibly terrorist attacks on
our country and it was his agency and he
was leading it that failed to to detect
that attack notwithstanding how many
pieces of evidence there were in the
system that could have alerted him. And
I remember one time thinking like, god,
that's a really heavy, you know, sort of
thing to take to your grave and is going
to be the first paragraph in in in in
your obituary. But what they did then
was they turned around and they said,
"Oh, because of how many clues we
missed, it means that we now need to
make sure to expand the surveillance
system and remove any safeguards so that
the next time, you know, even though it
was our fault, we have a much greater
system of authoritarian surveillance
that will allow us to spy on people and
and, you know, I guess protect prevent
these kind of future events. Do you
think there's a lot going on there in
terms of seizing on these events to kind
of justify a whole wide range of authoritarian
authoritarian
uh projects that
need a kind of version of events offered
by the government that may not be true?
Well, there's literally no question of
course and every government does that. I
mean, the outbreak of the Second World
War allowed the British government to
put its political opponents in prison
with their wives without charges for the
duration of the war. and like you're not
allowed to know that cuz they were bad.
But you know that's totalitarian
behavior. That's what we were supposed
to be fighting against. Every
government, Israel after October 7th,
the United States after Pearl Harbor,
the Japanese internment, and the United
States again, and again, every country
um at war in the wake of a national
trauma. So, of course, it was seized
upon immediately. What makes this a
little bit different and maybe more
sinister and more troubling, and I don't
have the answer, just to be clear, um,
is that within hours, the buildings were
still burning, there were people in
Washington discussing and pushing a war
against Iraq, which I don't think any
smart person ever believed had any
connection to 9/11. There was a lot of
reason to believe that having Saddam in
power was probably good for the United
States as a counterbalance against Iran,
as the protector of, you know, millions
of Christians. There a lot of reasons
that Saddam wasn't the worst and
certainly much better than what we got
after. But nevertheless, at the behest
of a foreign government, Israel, the
United States began preparing for war
against Iraq immediately after the
attacks on 9/11. Now, you know, I'm not saying
saying
I I don't know more than that, so you
can draw your own conclusions. And I'm
not suggesting, you know, that they
staged 911 for that purpose. But I am
saying unequivocally they use 911 for
that purpose. We know that that's not a
conspiracy theory. Um and it's
appalling. It's disgusting.
>> And of course you know as well as
anybody that well before 911 there were
all sorts of growing calls and the you
know usual suspects within Washington to
try and demand that we engage in regime
change in in Iraq and and remove Saddam
Hussein. was, you know, the sort of uh
great aspiration of of neocons, not just
in in Washington, but also in Israel and
then 911 immediately got seized on uh
for that. All right, let me move to uh
all of the issues surrounding Charlie Kirk.
Kirk.
>> And before I get to that,
>> wait, may I say one one last May I say
one last thing that I think is
important. So the question about 9/11,
the reason people have debated it for 25
years is the question of fornowledge. Do
people know this was coming? And and
then it's question of like did they know
it and allow it unintentionally or
intentionally or did they stage it? I
can't answer those questions. But we
conclusively answered the larger
question which is oh yeah there was
fornowledge of it. There's no question
about it. CIA knew the hijackers were
here. They knew they were terrorists and
they were here to commit acts of terror
against the United States. And
critically, and this is the fact that
somehow blew my mind the most, people
bet in the public financial markets, the
equity markets against the airlines
involved in 911 and the banks in the
buildings that were taken down on 9/11
and they bet big. They shorted them and
they made a lot of money. This has been
sort of known. What I didn't know is
that the US government found the
identities of the people who did that
and they withheld them and to this day
they've never been revealed. So, this is
a publicly traded series of trades and
in public markets and we can't know who
made those trades. Whoever made those
trades clearly knew 9/11 was coming and
the government has protected the
identity of those people for 24 years.
And I just have to ask like what could
Thanks for watching this clip from
System Update, our live show that airs
every Monday through Friday at 700 p.m.
Eastern exclusively on Rumble. You can
catch the full nightly shows live or
view the backlog of episodes for free on
our Rumble page. You can also find full
episodes the morning after they air
across all major podcasting platforms
including Spotify and Apple. All the
information you need is linked below. We
Click on any text or timestamp to jump to that moment in the video
Share:
Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds
One-Click Copy125+ LanguagesSearch ContentJump to Timestamps
Paste YouTube URL
Enter any YouTube video link to get the full transcript
Transcript Extraction Form
Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds
Get Our Chrome Extension
Get transcripts instantly without leaving YouTube. Install our Chrome extension for one-click access to any video's transcript directly on the watch page.
Chrome Extension