Latest / The Death Of Journalism / Episode One Hundred Seventy Two: There Will Be Blood

Transcript

Episode One Hundred Seventy Two: There Will Be Blood · The Death Of Journalism

0:00
Welcome to episode number one hundred and seventy two of the Death of Journalism podcast.
0:05
My name is John Zickler. I'm your host on today's show. Donald
0:08
Trump survives an assassination attempt and some of the news media coverage is very questionable,
0:15
while social media is birthing absurd conspiracy theories. What will be the political
0:21
impact of the latest scene in this seemingly fictional movie we're all living through.
0:27
Is Trump the luckiest man who ever lived? Or is God on his side?
0:33
And Bill Maher hosts a fascinating debate on the state of racism in America.
0:40
I'm going to begin this episode of the podcast, obviously with my reaction
0:43
to the attempted assassination. I'm former President Donald Trump, and I'm going to
0:47
begin with telling you my personal experience with watching it transpire on television, at
0:56
least the aftermath of it. Not because I'm so into where were you when
1:00
this happened, which seems to be almost a cliched thing to talk about in
1:04
any major event in American life, but because I think my experience is going
1:11
to give you a little bit of insight into what was really going on with
1:15
the news media and why some This is rare for me because I'm going to
1:22
be kind of defending the news media a little bit in some ways, where
1:26
some of the news media coverage has been unfairly criticized by conservatives, especially the
1:33
media coverage very very early on. So I'm hoping to kill a couple of
1:37
different birds with one stone in telling you how I learned about it and what
1:42
my original reaction to what I was seeing was. So I happened to be
1:47
watching golf coverage which was ending. I was channel surfing. I think I
1:53
caught wind of something having happened on Twitter, and I turned on the cable
1:57
news networks and I saw the aftermath of the replaying of the video of what
2:05
at that time appeared to be some sort of significant incident that occurred at a
2:10
Trump rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. Now there's been a lot, and I
2:16
mean a lot of criticism by conservatives of how the media originally reported what appeared
2:27
to happen. And I'm going to be a little bit defensive of the media
2:31
because I don't think it's fair to criticize the original reports in a situation like
2:38
this, because, based upon my experience, I was extremely confused as to
2:46
what we were actually seeing. Now in retrospect twenty twenty hindsight, it's obvious
2:53
that this was a JFK style shooting that thankfully did not resis in the death
3:00
of a former president, but unfortunately did result in the death of at least
3:05
one rally attendee. And this was obviously a tragedy. But in the first
3:10
half hour, even forty minutes, it is absolutely astonishing to me, in
3:16
this instant media information era, how little we knew and based upon what we
3:24
were seeing on television, it was not at all clear, at least not
3:30
to me and others that I interacted with, that this was for sure a
3:36
shooting. I know that sounds crazy in retrospect, but that's what it seemed
3:42
like. And the main reason that I was uncertain. I wasn't saying it
3:46
wasn't a shooting, But the reason I was uncertain that it was a shooting
3:53
that had caused this obviously very dramatic incident at a Trump rally was that what
4:00
the first thing that happens when a president is shot at We know this in
4:05
the modern era. We saw it obviously with Ronald Reagan being the last time
4:12
that this happened, but obviously there's going to be a massive Secret Service reaction
4:18
and the shooter is going to be instantly apprehended and probably killed because it's just
4:26
not possible to get close enough to the president. And we're going to get
4:30
to all the screw ups that allowed this to happen or to a major presidential
4:33
candidate without making yourself vulnerable to instant capture or being killed. And for thirty
4:44
five to forty minutes after this episode occurred, there was no indication, no
4:51
video, no reporting that a shooter had been taken out. In order for
4:59
there to be a shooting, this was my thinking, in order for there
5:01
to be a shooting of the president or former president presidential candidate Donald Trump,
5:08
there has to be a shooter. And if there's a shooter, that means
5:12
there's going to be a counter attack. There's going to be someone who's dead,
5:16
there's going to be someone who's apprehended. At the very least, that
5:20
has to be part of the equation and somehow, and in retrospect, it's
5:26
even more baffling to me than it was at the time. Given the circumstances
5:29
as we now know them, there was no reporting of this none was There
5:34
was on television. There was zero report of what instantaneously happened, which was
5:42
that a shooter was fired upon and had their head blown off. And apparently
5:47
lots and lots of people knew about the presidence of the shooter even before the
5:51
shooting ever happened. So it is absolutely baffling to me, especially in retrospect,
5:59
how in this instant media age, not just with television but social media,
6:03
that nobody instantaneously described what had happened to the shooter. And so until
6:10
you have information on the shooter, it's not possible to know for certain.
6:16
Now you can certainly surmise certainly that was a very likely scenario that there was
6:24
a shooting. All we knew for sure was that Trump had grabbed the side
6:28
of his head and was bleeding. Now, there's all sorts of reasons why
6:32
that theoretically could happen. Being hit with a bullet is certainly one of them,
6:36
but it's not the only theoretical scenario that would cause that. And so
6:43
there was a lot of attention and focus and criticism of initial media reports,
6:48
and I just want to quickly address at the start of the podcast episode,
6:53
let me just give you an example of many of these. Washington Post headline,
6:57
Trump escorted away after loud noises at PA rally. ABC Donald Trump escorted
7:03
off stage by Secret Service during rally after loud noises ring out in crowd.
7:09
NBC secret Service rushes Trump off stage after popping noises heard at his Pennsylvania rally.
7:15
Newsweek Maga responds with outrage after Donald Trump injured at Pennsylvania rally. I'll
7:21
acknowledge that one's weird. And then we have USA today, Trump removed from
7:26
stage by Secret Service after loud noises startles former president and crowd. Then CNN
7:33
they got the worst one. I will acknowledge this. This takes the cake.
7:38
This is the worst headline of the initial reports. Secret Service rush's Trump
7:44
off stage after falls at rally. Now, that was ludicrous, That was
7:48
ridiculous. That deserves to be mocked. I'm not going to defend that one
7:54
at all, and it was roundly mocked and rightfully so. I mean,
7:58
just to repeat it, it's just that a secret service Russia's Trump off stage
8:01
actually falls at rally. Even in the initial reports, the fog of war.
8:07
There's no possible way to justify that particular headline. It's just it's just
8:13
ridiculous, it's absurd. However, some of the others in the initial aftermath
8:20
the fog of war, making sure you don't report something that turns out to
8:26
be false. I completely understand and actually support what the news media did,
8:33
because once you start reporting things that you don't know to be one hundred percent
8:37
true in a situation situation like that, and narratives start to take hold,
8:43
it's very difficult to spin them back. And so I have no problem with
8:50
news media outlets being very conservative quote unquote in what they report early on.
8:54
And remember, we're in an era where these news outlets have to put something
9:00
out instantaneously. When JFK was assassinated, the Dallas Morning News the next day,
9:07
which is a remarkable journalistic document that I've talked about many times before.
9:11
It's just an amazing piece of journalism that could never be duplicated today. That
9:16
they didn't put out a newspaper till the next day. Okay, they didn't
9:20
have to put something out in ten minutes. And so it's obvious that if
9:24
something this big happens, you have to let your readers know about it,
9:31
and in order to do that, you have to be rather conservative about it,
9:35
because you don't want to report something that is false, even if it
9:39
seems like the most likely scenario. And I was not the only person who
9:43
was experiencing this level of confusion. Kind of weirdly, although typical of my
9:50
life. The first person I spoke to after learning of this was former NBC
9:54
Today Show host Matt Lower. He had texted me about this event, and
10:01
I called him and we talked about it, and we were both confused.
10:05
And Matt, who obviously has a lot more experience in this situation than I
10:11
do, he was on the air during nine to eleven, among other situations,
10:16
he made the point that he thought that part of the problem here was
10:20
that this was a Saturday, and then on the weekends you have the B
10:24
and the C team come in to do the work. And not only do
10:30
you have the B or C team, but we're in an era of cutbacks,
10:31
so weekends have really been slashed so that the people that were both on
10:37
the ground and back in the studio on television were not the top people,
10:43
at least not at first. And I think that that may have played a
10:46
role in this, but I'm still stunned. I mean, thirty five forty
10:50
minutes into this. The people at the scene who were reporting didn't know that
10:56
a shooter had been killed. They didn't know that a rally attendee had been
11:03
very very seriously wounded, and there was confusion as to how many people were
11:09
hit and who was killed. That's understandable in the fog of war, but
11:15
and it was still not one hundred percent certain what it actually had happened to
11:18
Trump other than clearly from his reaction, he seemed to be just fine.
11:22
And we're going to get to that reaction later on in this episode, but
11:26
you know, Matt was confused. Lizabe, my former co host on this
11:31
podcast, and with the benefit of hindsight, you know, obviously former news
11:37
anchor herself, her boyfriend is a very very long time news photographer and actually
11:45
has experience in law enforcement. She said that he thought it was a pellet
11:48
gun based upon the sounds, and the sounds on television were muffled, they
11:56
were not particularly loud, they were very quick, and so I didn't know.
12:01
I'm not a gun expert. I didn't know what those sounds meant.
12:05
For sure. They could have been firecrackers. A lot of people even described
12:09
them as being firecrackers from the crowd. The way Trump reacted looked more like
12:15
he was hit with a maybe a BB gun or something. And so I
12:20
think there are all sorts of very legitimate reasons to have solid questions about what
12:26
really transpired here, and to criticize the news media in their initial reports,
12:31
I think is wrongheaded and counter productive. I do understand, obviously the conservatives
12:37
have no trust in the news media, and you know, the CNN headline
12:41
with Trump falling clearly does look like it's biased and ridiculous and absurd, and
12:48
as I've already stated, much worthy or very worthy of being mocked, and
12:52
was rightfully mocked. But I just think that from a media standpoint, and
12:58
maybe in a weird way, I'm both defending the media and criticizing the media,
13:03
because it was the media on the ground that did such a terrible job
13:09
of relaying information that the media back at the studio or back in the outlets
13:16
where they were writing the articles just didn't have any good information and it seemed
13:22
like it took way way longer than you would have expected in this day and
13:26
age to get basic facts. And the number one fact is there was a
13:31
shooter who was taken out, Because once you know there was a shooter that
13:37
was taken out, then everything else falls into place, and we did not
13:41
know that for about thirty five or forty minutes. Now, once that piece
13:46
of information is out there, and once time goes by, the excuses for
13:52
the bad media coverage go away, because once you have a shooter that's dead.
13:56
Now you know what happened. Now you know, especially when you know
14:01
the nature of the gun, which was also known fairly quickly, you know
14:05
that this was a legitimate assassination attempt. This was a shooting. This is
14:09
a miracle, either literally or figuratively, that Donald Trump survived this. And
14:16
so there are no more excuses. And there were a lot of examples of
14:20
the news media really showing their ass when it came to their anti Trump bias,
14:26
anti conservative bias in their analysis of the situation. Now, again,
14:31
I'm going to put out one caveat. Whenever these circumstances happen, huge stories,
14:37
there's a huge vacuum of information, but there's a lot of time to
14:41
fill. People are going to say stupid things and their biases are going to
14:46
come out. And that's what happened, not once, but twice on CBS
14:50
News, where Margaret Brennan, an anchorwoman, was involved in two separate clips
14:56
that are going to play for you that were very dubious under the circumstances.
15:01
The first one, Margaret Brennan is talking with Samantha Viennagrad and they are very
15:07
concerned. This is very early on in the aftermath of the shooting. They're
15:11
very concerned that the real problem here is going to be retaliatory violence from Trump
15:18
supporters against what happened here, which is just looney tunes. And it got
15:24
a lot of negative attention, and rightfully so. And here's what that sounded
15:28
like. And then the biggest threat that officials they're telling me tonight is in
15:33
the form of retaliatory violence. You're taking me to exactly what I've been underscoring,
15:39
and is frankly very concerning in the rhetoric we are seeing at this hour.
15:45
Already, we are seeing some Republican lawmakers come out with statements directly drawing
15:50
a line between the shooter, whose name we do not know, we do
15:52
not know if he's a loan actor or with somebody else, but drawing some
15:56
connection to the government thing to base that on at this hour, At this
16:02
hour, leading officials within the US government still don't know what transpired, and
16:06
it is frankly unpatriotic at this moment to be soaking the flames when we know
16:10
that we are sitting on a cauldron of tensions. We know that tensions were
16:15
already high before this incident, and the counter terrorism officials and homeland security officials
16:18
that I've spoken to in the last few hours are deeply concerned that this event
16:22
will be used as a rallying cry to launch attacks against individuals associated with the
16:27
Biden campaign and lead to broader domestic distress. So right now, the goals
16:33
are to investigate the incident, both the perpetrator and the security failures, as
16:37
well as to try to tamp down any tensions that may arise coming out of
16:41
it. Now in this country, there is the First Amendment, and what
16:45
we're seeing on Twitter, while it is First Amendment protected activity, I will
16:48
say again, is unpatriotic in the sense that we know that this kind of
16:51
rhetoric has a nexus to violence. We saw that on January sixth, we
16:55
saw that in the attack against Nancy Pelosi's husband in multiple other instances. Now,
17:00
as bad as that was. Brennan was not done there. She then
17:03
engaged in some I guess you would call it analysis with a male anchor who
17:11
tried his best to keep things within the rails. Here is Brennan's exchange with
17:18
him on this issue of Trump not calling for there to be a lowering of
17:25
the temperature immediately after being hit in the head with a bullet and bleeding and
17:32
being taken away by Secret Service agents. As insane as that is, but
17:37
here's what that sounded like on CBS. And he closes with God Bless America,
17:41
and we saw him raise his hand in the air defiantly, blood on
17:45
his face as he left the stage. He is recovering from these injuries.
17:48
Now, this was a traumatic event, no doubt for him. But I
17:52
did notice there was no call for lowering the temperature, condemning all political violence,
17:57
and really trying to signal to his supporters as well not to retaliate or
18:04
to have any kind of escalation. Here. I just am looking at these
18:08
there's a belief in his inner circle that he's under siege. I understand.
18:12
I attracted his rally, and so there's a lot of every exactly digestive like
18:18
you're saying, I mean every single text message, literally every single one from
18:22
Trump sources is outraged and shocked, and so that is certainly the mood inside
18:27
the highest ranks of the Republican Party. Speaking to CBS News tonight, now
18:32
similar to that absurdity is something to that hapen a little bit later on CNN
18:36
from Jamie Gangel. Now, Jamie Gngel is somebody who normally is fairly rational
18:41
and not that liberally biased. She's actually pretty well known for being close to
18:47
the Bush family, which doesn't get you very far in the media age in
18:52
twenty twenty four. I'm not sure why she still has a job because she
18:55
doesn't have a whole lot of relevance because that was a huge part of her
18:57
whole persona, being connect to the Bush family. But she similarly criticized Donald
19:04
Trump for his fight fight fight reaction in Defiance having been shot as he urges
19:14
the crowd to keep up the fight. And here's what that sounded like on
19:18
CNN. I do want to say there was one thing that when I watched
19:22
the tape I found odd because of all of the heated rhetoric, and that
19:29
is that after he was hit, former President Trump got up and said fight,
19:34
fight fight. I think what we're hearing from people is that's not the
19:40
message that we want to be sented right now. We want to tamp it
19:44
down now. Once again, that's ridiculous given the circumstances of the situation,
19:48
especially what we know now where Trump had just been hit in the head with
19:52
a bullet. And I do think some of this, I think some of
19:56
what's happening here is that instantaneous the media was recognizing that Trump's defiant reaction was
20:04
going to be very very helpful to him politically, and that that was upsetting
20:10
them at some level, either conscious or subconsciously, and that that had an
20:14
impact on a lot of liberal media members' reaction to what they were seeing,
20:18
and they were grasping onto anything they could possibly find. In my view,
20:23
the worst example of a media reporter reacting to the assassination attempt on Donald Trump
20:32
was from ABC News, as Martha raddits, and this was actually the morning
20:36
after, so there's very little excuse for this at all. But here she
20:41
basically appears to blame the attempt on Donald Trump's life on Trump himself and his
20:48
supporters, and in doing so flat out lies about the entire bloodshed controversy where
20:56
Trump said, as we dictated and documented this extensively on this podcast, Trump
21:03
said nothing about there being a bloodshed in this country if he lost. He
21:07
said there would be a bloodshed in the auto industry if he lost Rabbits completely
21:12
bastardizes that and tries to somehow make that the justification or the explanation for why
21:19
there was an assassination attempt. So, for my money, this is the
21:23
worst example of medemalpractice in the aftermath of the assassination attempt. Also, George,
21:29
we have to point out, no matter who the shooter, what the
21:32
shooter's motives were, no matter who the shooter is, you are going to
21:37
hear conspiracy theories going forward, No no question about that. But as you
21:41
pointed those statements from Jade Vance and Vivek rob Miswami, of course, President
21:45
Trump and his supporters have contributed to this violent rhetoric as well well. Absolutely,
21:51
George, we were just looking back this morning as some of the things
21:53
that former President Trump has said. He warned last March of potential death and
21:59
destruction if you were charged by the Manhattan District Attorney. Our country is being
22:03
destroyed, as they tell us to be peaceful. Trump January warned of bedlam
22:08
in the country if the criminal charges against him succeeded, and of course in
22:12
March he said, now if I don't get elected, it's going to be
22:15
a bloodbath for the whole that's going to be the least of it. It's
22:18
going to be a bloodbath for the country. That will be the least of
22:22
it. He said he was partly joking and that that was taken out of
22:25
context, but those are indeed his words, and you have heard it from
22:30
supporters as well. And supporters are certainly in some parts angry. And let's
22:34
remember January sixth in so many ways for the campaign. January sixth will probably
22:41
be in the background after yesterday's event. This is a very difficult time for
22:47
this campaign. I'm sure this week in Milwaukee that President Trump will highlight this
22:52
and President Biden is going to have to figure out how to go forward with
22:56
his campaign and what exactly they say. One other example of bad media coverage,
23:02
or at least coverage, it was proceived as being so bad that it
23:07
got retracted and deleted Forbes. I guess you'd call it a magazine, but
23:11
this was their their on their Internet and Twitter outlets. Forbes put out an
23:18
article by a self proclaimed DEI expert named Sean Harper, a Forbes contributor,
23:26
and then he'd referred to himself as a diversity, equity and inclusion expert in
23:32
his byline. But the headline for this Sean Harper column was will surviving gunfire
23:40
be Donald Trump's next appeal to Black voters? Now, this happened right after
23:47
the assassination attempt and was roundly mocked, very much like the CNN headline with
23:55
Trump falling down on the stage, But this one was deleted. This one
24:00
apparently was removed from all public platforms, and I understand why it was.
24:07
I think it was too early. It's also from a liberal, This feels
24:12
racist, right, I mean because the implication based upon liberal rules. The
24:18
implication of this as well, Trump is going to appeal to black voters because
24:22
he's been shot and that somehow, you know, because black people get shot
24:27
more often, this is going to create more of a connection between Trump and
24:32
black voters. Well, I think probably because it got so much negative reaction,
24:37
it was deleted or pulled. However, I actually think there's some evidence
24:45
there's that there's something to this particular article I posted on Twitter this morning a
24:52
routine from comedian Cam Patterson, who's a you know, fairly prominent black comedian,
24:57
where he goes off on the shooting, says he had no intention of
25:03
voting before this, but now for sure he's voting for Trump, that Trump
25:07
is gangster, Trump's the N word, and that Trump's got it one.
25:14
Basically, it was his reaction in a fairly funny routine where the audience is
25:18
laughing along with him. I realized it's a comedy routine. But that's an
25:22
indication that there's something to this idea, whether it's racist perception or not.
25:30
But perhaps Forbes actually accidentally hit on a truthful column by a DEI expert and
25:37
they were forced or felt forced to remove it because of the negative reaction to
25:42
it. But that's going to happen in the midst of a big story.
25:45
I mean, I've always said that it's not a big story in modern media
25:52
America unless somebody gets fired or somebody gets taken off the air. By the
25:57
way, I'm going to get to meet Brazinski and Joe Scarborough being taken off
26:02
the air on MSNBC this morning. A little bit later on, but or
26:07
something being retracted, somebody getting canceled. You know, when the story is
26:11
this hot, all the rules tend to change. And that's seemingly what happened
26:15
with Forbes and this issue of black voters responding to Donald Trump getting shot.
26:22
Now there have been a ton and this is the part that probably bothers me
26:26
more than anything else when it comes to the reaction to the Trump assassination attempt.
26:33
I have defended some of the mainstream media coverage. I've criticized other elements
26:38
of it. It's a mixed bag. Generally, I think it was bad
26:44
because I don't think the information flowed nearly as quickly or as seamlessly, or
26:49
as truthfully as it should have early on, given all the advantages of modern
26:55
technology. I just think it's amazing. I just want to reiterate that one
26:59
more time, that it took forty minutes or so to find out that there
27:03
was a shooter that had been taken out. It's just it's incomprehensible to me
27:07
in this day and age. But as bad as some of the news media
27:11
coverage was, I actually think and this is not surprising given the nature of
27:18
modern media, but it's the social media reaction that I am most enraged by,
27:26
and that is because it is on social media where the conspiracy theories absolutely
27:32
explode, and they have exploded in every possible direction, without any factual basis,
27:40
without any real basis in logic or an alternative theory that makes any damn
27:45
sense. They basically break down into two different groups. You know, liberals
27:52
who are so enraged that Trump looked great in response to this, that they
27:59
somehow think this staged, even though there were several innocent bystanders who were seriously
28:06
injured and at least in one case were murdered, which of course makes the
28:10
entire theory completely and utterly ridiculous on its face. That seems to be the
28:15
left wing conspiracy theory. Meanwhile, the right wing conspiracy theory is that this
28:22
was an inside job, that somehow the government either tried to get Donald Trump
28:27
or they were so incompetent on purpose as to allow Donald Trump to be taken
28:34
out, and that he just survived this through an act of extraordinary luck or
28:40
an act of God's another thing I'm going to get to a little bit later
28:44
on in the podcast. That whole concept now a part of what's driving the
28:49
conspiracy theories on the right here and there are a lot of thanks driving the
28:53
conspiracy theories on the right. I've talked constantly about how right wing media is
28:59
now basically dominated by conspiracy theories of all sorts, and the lead conspiracy theorists
29:07
is Tucker Carlson, and Tucker Carlson had rather famously or infamously months before this
29:15
predicted quote unquote that Trump was going to be assassinated. Now, it's important
29:22
to point out, and this is a little bit like, you know,
29:23
Alex Jones getting credit and you know, right when conspiracy nut job Alex Jones
29:29
getting credit by Carlson for having predicted nine to eleven. We went through on
29:33
this podcast how that did not happen. That Alex Jones threw out a couple
29:38
of words that in retrospect seem a little bit pressient, but he in no
29:42
way, shape or form predicted nine to eleven, even though Carlson and others
29:48
in response have given him credit for that. Well, Tucker Carlson's prediction,
29:52
if you will, about what was going to happen to Donald Trump was very
29:57
very clearly then the idea that the establishment, the government has been going after
30:06
Trump in every way possible and has been failing. So what's the logical next
30:11
step. Well, if law fair and everything else doesn't work, they're gonna
30:17
He's so dangerous that they're going to take him out by killing him. And
30:22
it was very clear from Carlson's quote unquote prediction that he was very strongly implying,
30:29
I think that's actually putting it mildly, that it was the government that
30:33
was going to take out Donald Trump. He did not predict a lone nut
30:38
job getting lucky or in this case, unlucky in their attempt to kill Donald
30:45
Trump in a one man, seemingly assassination attempt that had nothing to do with
30:51
the government. And yet there were people that were claiming that, Aha,
30:53
here we have it, Tucker Carlson, the great Tucker Carlson, who now
30:59
bizarrely is going to be speaking at the Republican Convention, even though just a
31:04
couple of years ago he was on record saying that he hates Donald Trump and
31:07
can't wait to never talk about him again in the aftermath of the twenty twenty
31:12
election. Here he is now the MVP of the Donald Trump primary process.
31:18
As I referred to him many times before, and he's getting a prominent speaking
31:22
role at the Republican Convention. We're living in a completely bizarro, upside down
31:27
world where nothing makes sense, and Tucker Carlson is a perfect example of that.
31:33
But Tucker Carlson did not predict what happened on Saturday. However, his
31:37
prediction influenced I think a lot of people and certainly helped pave the way for
31:44
a lot of people to erroneously conclude without any facts, evidence or logic,
31:48
that, aha, this was an inside job. Carlson was right. They
31:55
couldn't take out Trump in other ways, so now they've tried to do it
31:57
this way. And you know, obviously the secret Service production was so bad,
32:02
the local law enforcement production was so bad that they at the very least
32:07
they purposely allowed this guy to take a shot at Trump before they took him
32:15
out. That they there's even theories that, you know, the sniper team
32:19
knew that the gunman was there and just waited and waited until he took his
32:23
shot. Of course, that makes no fucking sense, because why would you
32:28
do that, first of all, when there's cameras everywhere, But why would
32:30
you immediately take him out if the point was to allow him to take Trump
32:35
out. Why would you kill him instantaneously? Why would you do that makes
32:39
None of this makes any goddamn sense, But these conspiracy theories never do.
32:44
But this is clearly very popular, and in fact, I'm seeing it on
32:49
social media from people who follow me that seemingly are irrational people. These aren't
32:53
even like super Trumpers and complete nutshobs. These are people that these seemly,
33:00
you know, are normal humans functioning in society, and they are at the
33:06
very least seriously considering this. Now. I get that part of it is
33:12
just how much Trump has faced over the last eight years, some of it
33:16
justified, some of it not justified, some of it truthful, some of
33:20
it erroneous. I've tried to do my best in separating fact in fiction when
33:24
it comes to the attacks on Donald Trump, and I think I've done a
33:28
pretty darn good job. But there's a perception among right wingers, conservatives,
33:34
Republicans, mag of people, whatever you want to call them these days,
33:37
that they're so out to get Trump, that there's this deep state, that
33:42
you know, this incredibly all powerful deep state that's out to get him,
33:45
that anything bad that happens to him is easily interpreted as evidence of this vast
33:53
conspiracy to get Donald Trump, and there is no evidence of this. And
34:00
the reason why there is no evidence in this particular case is because the nature
34:04
of the shooter. There is nothing about this shooter at all, a twenty
34:08
year old loan loser nutjob, that is in any way, shape or form
34:15
connected to a vast government conspiracy. And frankly, I would like to believe
34:23
that Donald Trump is going to address this because this is the part of the
34:27
conspiracy theory that makes the least amount of sense in my view. I mean,
34:30
Trump has already made numerous statements about what transpired, numerous and in no
34:37
way, shape or form has he even remotely implied any sort of government role
34:44
or some sort of plot against him. He's not done it. And this
34:50
is a guy who's not at all shy about claiming that things are rigged against
34:55
him or citing conspiracy theories, even whether they're not true, especially when they
35:00
fit his agenda. So this is not a guy who's going to be hesitant
35:05
to claim that there was an assassination conspiracy that was involved with the government.
35:13
My god, I mean, if he could connect this to the Biden administration
35:15
in some way, shape or form, there's zero chance that he would hesitate
35:20
to do so. But he's done nothing of the sort, and yet a
35:24
lot of his fans on their own are concluding that, Yep, there's got
35:30
to be something to this now. Some of them are hiding behind I'm just
35:32
asking questions, and look, I'm all for asking questions, but I think
35:37
we have enough answers at this point to know, barring some sort of bombshell
35:43
piece of actual evidence connecting any of this to something larger than one loan nut,
35:49
that that's what this is. It's quite obvious that that's what this is,
35:54
but people don't want to believe that. And you know, I can
35:58
understand why people don't want to believe it. They want to believe that there's
36:01
this evil, shadowy force out there that's maybe the reason why they're not a
36:07
big success in life. It's an excuse for the failings in their own life
36:13
and career. But also, for some weird reason, it's comforting to a
36:17
lot of people to believe that these kinds of things happen, especially when,
36:22
like for instance, JFK being the ultimate example, we can't wrap our brains
36:28
around the idea that so much damage could be done by one loan nuts,
36:32
so we decide that it's much larger than that, and then over time it
36:37
grows and grows and grows. And by the way, I don't think that
36:40
is a coincidence at all. I mean, is a clear direct thread between
36:45
JFK conspiracy theories, which Tucker Carlson has latched onto absurdly and without of the
36:52
evidence, saying that the CIA killed Kennedy. If you believe that, it's
36:57
hardly a stretch to believe that the Biden administration or the Deep State or whatever
37:02
it was, has decided to try to take out Donald Trump and he's just
37:07
too crafty for him. He's just too slick, he's just too touched by
37:12
the hand of God. He's just too lucky. They couldn't get him.
37:15
He slithered out again. Every single time they try to go after him.
37:20
He gets out of it. He's the road runner. They're wildly coyote.
37:24
I get that that is a very enticing narrative to a lot of people who
37:30
are fans of Tucker Carlson or are in the realm of fans of Tucker Carlson.
37:36
Well, that doesn't make it true, and I would like to believe
37:38
that Donald Trump. I doubt he will, but I would like to believe
37:42
that Donald Trump is going to set the record straight on this. If he's
37:45
really talking about unity, this would be a good opportunity for him to actually
37:51
show some leadership and try to tamp down this bullshit. Because it did not
37:57
happen this way. There's no evidence did it happen this way. Now,
38:00
that doesn't mean there aren't legitimate questions about what the fuck did happen? Because
38:05
how this was allowed to occur is mind blowing. It's astonishing, it's absolutely
38:13
insane. Based upon what we think we currently know, and I'm sure there
38:16
are things that we do not yet know, and I'm sure there are things
38:20
that we think we know they're probably not actually true. But based upon the
38:23
current factual record on Monday morning, it certainly looks like there was a massive
38:30
fuck up by everybody involved in this. Local law enforcement seems to be the
38:37
first culprit. There are legitimate, credible reports that a local policeman actually confronted
38:45
this shooter before the shooting, and the shooter pointed their rifle at him,
38:52
and the policeman apparently chickened out. Now, how that happens. I have
38:57
no idea. Presumably the policeman will be armed himself. I mean, who
39:04
knows how anyone's going to react when they have a rifle pointed at them by
39:07
a nutjob. But the part of this that I would want to know more
39:09
about is, Okay, after you chicking out, how do you not start
39:15
screaming bloody murder? How do you not like at least fire your gun in
39:19
the air or something, just to alert everyone that there is a major,
39:23
major problem going on. Could there be some theoretical explanation I guess so,
39:30
but it's hard to imagine one at this point. And it wasn't just a
39:35
police officer. There are multiple videos from bystanders of the gunmen before he fired
39:44
the shots at Trump that you were the result of his assassination attempt and ended
39:50
up hitting three bystanders and killing at least one. Now, these videos are
39:54
interesting. There's no question whatsoever that there was plenty of time and plenty of
40:02
notification if things were working properly, for this whole situation to be averted,
40:08
because this shooter was not in a situation where they could not have been apprehended
40:15
or at least pointed out to the people that mattered well before he got any
40:22
shots off. You know, Lee Harvey Oswald was on the sixth floor of
40:25
the school book Depository building, and no one saw him, certainly not any
40:30
law enforcement before the shooting actually occurred. That's not what happened here. And
40:37
so these videos are in one way, they're damning because clearly somebody at the
40:44
very least should have been able to alert everybody at the event to get the
40:49
hell down, get the president out of there. I mean, there should
40:52
have been enough time seemingly to do that. However, and this is where
40:57
I look at things a little bit differently than most people. Almost all of
41:01
these videos, and the one that's gotten the most attention in particular, end
41:07
before the shooting actually transpires. Now, what does that tell you? It
41:14
doesn't prove what I'm about to say, but it certainly is a strong indication
41:19
that what I'm about to say has some merit, and that is that it's
41:23
only in retrospect that the people who saw this shooter had an extreme level of
41:32
urgency. Now I'm open to why these videos seemingly all end before the shooting,
41:39
at least the versions that I've seen, and I've done some research trying
41:43
to find Okay, is this the original version of the video itself? To
41:47
me, if you're really really of the belief that this person is a major
41:53
danger, why are you stopping the video? I mean there might be an
41:58
exploition for that. That's I think a legitimate question. And I think where
42:01
I'm going with this. I know where I'm going with this is that it's
42:05
possible that a lot of what we're seeing is hey, that's weird. Why
42:10
is anyone doing anything about that? And not an indication of holy fucking shit,
42:15
there's a shooter that's gonna kill Trump up on top of the roof.
42:19
Those are two different levels of urgency, and I think that goes to what
42:25
might have been the way that this shooter got away with this. Again,
42:31
we know very little this point, but it certainly seems to me as the
42:37
superpower, if you will, of this shooter was the shooter's abject brazenness that
42:45
there was nothing clandestine about this. And I think it's human nature when you
42:52
see somebody who is doing something out in the open that seems completely insane,
43:00
that's so unbelievably brazen that they could not I think your natural inclination is to
43:05
think they've got to have a good reason for why where they're doing this.
43:07
They must be authorized to be doing this, they must be some sort of
43:13
law enforcement. There's no way that this could be happening as part of,
43:17
for instance, an assassination at them. It's very, very difficult for people
43:22
to wrap their brains around this. Thanks for listening to today's free drop of
43:27
the abbreviated show. If you're interested in listening to the entire show, you
43:30
must become a patron. Please go to Patreon. That's p A T R
43:37
e O N dot com. Patreon dot com Slash the Death of Journalism with
43:45
John Ziggler. My name is j hn z I E G L e R.
43:50
That's patreon dot com. Slash the Death of Journalism with John Ziggler.
43:58
Good luck to you on that. But that's how you can subscribe.