The Return of Tucker Carlson

by Karl Haemers

WHY DID Fox News and Tucker Carlson “part ways” recently? Carlson was Fox News’ most popular and most watched newscaster, indeed the most popular of all cable news hosts. Speculation abounds. Most is based on an article by Los Angeles Times staff writer Stephen Battaglio, published on 23 April titled “Tucker Carlson departs Fox News, pushed out by Rupert Murdoch.” Battaglio claims insider information, and states:

…people familiar with the situation who were not authorized to comment publicly said the decision to fire Carlson came straight from Fox Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch with input from board members and other Fox Corp. executives.

According to one person familiar with the discussions, Murdoch’s son Lachlan, executive chairman of Fox Corp., and Suzanne Scott, chief executive of Fox News Media, decided late Friday that Carlson had to go.

Significantly, “‘Fox News Media and Tucker Carlson have agreed to part ways,’ the network said in a statement.” This suggests it was not a firing or resignation in protest. Carlson and Fox agreed. That will inform our understanding of the real reason Carlson was discontinued.

The L.A. Times article provides its reasons. Number one on its list? Anti-Semitism!

Carlson’s exit is related to the discrimination lawsuit filed by Abby Grossberg, a producer fired by the network last month, the sources said… Grossberg was moved… onto “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” where she alleged she was bullied and subjected to antisemitic comments, according to a lawsuit in New York.

In deposition testimony, the former Fox News producer also said she was coerced by company lawyers to give misleading answers in the Dominion Voting Systems defamation case against the network. Fox News denied the claim and said she was terminated for disclosing privileged company information.

A second reason the L.A. Times gives for Fox’s parting of the ways with Carlson is his coverage of the January 6 “Insurrection”:

Murdoch also was said to be concerned about Carlson’s coverage of the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol. The host has promoted the conspiracy theory that it was provoked by government agents, and Carlson has called Ray Epps — an Arizona man who participated in the storming of the Capitol but did not enter the building — an FBI plant, without presenting any evidence.

The L.A. Times most definitely rejects that the reason for Carlson’s “ouster” (mutually agreed upon) had anything to do with the huge settlement Fox agreed to pay Dominion Voting Systems:

Carlson’s ouster was not part of the $787.5-million settlement Fox News agreed to pay to Dominion last week, according to a representative for Dominion. Dominion accused Fox of knowingly making false claims related to the 2020 election.

We must forgive Battaglio for the vague wording here. He must mean that Fox News’ agreement to pay was, according to the Dominion representative, not Carlson’s “ouster” — because Dominion should have no knowledge of why Carlson was “ousted.” Right? But Battaglio does.

Other commentators dismiss or even ignore these reasons and provide others. On the Jimmy Dore Show titled “The REAL Reason Tucker Carlson Was Fired By Fox News!” guest host Aron Matte (formerly of Democracy Now) quotes an explanation from The Hill which states “Carlson’s departure from the network comes less than a week after it agreed to pay $787.5 million” to Dominion, suggesting this as the reason.

A search and a scan of the results yields many other reasons for Carlson’s departure or “parting of ways,” including legal discovery of texts by Carlson disparaging Donald Trump. This is #4 in The Hill’s “Five possible reasons Tucker Carlson and Fox News are parting company.”

Jimmy Dore said:

They’re firing him for several reasons. The biggest one is that he finally brought on RFK Jr. and they told the truth about Big Pharma. Big Pharma funds news to 70% and so I’m guessing that was the last straw… I think that 70% advertisers coming down on them was all it took. What do you think? (2:05)

Here’s what I think: If Big Pharma runs most mainstream media through advertising dollars, then Big Pharma is itself run largely by Jews. But mainstream media is run by Jews directly, and to a significant extent that includes Fox News. Here is what we learned about Fox in mt Occidental Observer essay “Jewish Media Ownership and Management—An Update”:

Murdoch’s ancestry is presented as mixed British Isles. Some accounts say Murdoch was funded by the Jewish banker family the Rothschilds, though this is unconfirmed. It did emerge in 2013 that Murdoch joined with Jacob Rothschild and others, including Dick Cheney, in investing in Genie Energy to drill for oil in the disputed Golan Heights region, currently occupied by Israel since its 1967 war with Syria. Murdoch’s son-in-law Matthew Freud is great-grandson of Sigmund Freud, Jewish.

Murdoch first acquired interest in 20th Century Fox in 1984, when he bought $250 million of stock owned by Marc Rich, Jewish hedge fund manager and financial criminal. This deal was brokered by Marvin Davis, Jewish, who at one time was majority owner of 20th Century Fox. Later Murdoch bought Davis’ stock. Murdoch bought six TV stations owned by Metromedia, founded by John Kluge, German, but whose CEO was Stuart Subotnick, Jewish. Murdoch bought a house in Beverly Hills from Jules Stein, founder of Music Corporation of America, Jewish. By 2005, Murdoch and News Corps bought Intermix Media, which held MySpace, gaming networks and other social media. Intermix was originally founded by Brad Greenspan, Jewish. A year prior to Murdoch’s purchase, Richard Rosenblatt, Jewish, became Intermix CEO.

However, my research into Fox concluded: “The current Executive Leadership at Fox Corporation show Rupert and his son Lachlan as Chairman and CEO, with Suzanne Scott, Joe Dorrego and Jay Wallace as top executives at Fox News Media. All are non-Jews.”

In the commentary of that essay, someone said “Rupert Murdoch’s mother’s name is Greenbaum.” Someone else provided a link to a National Vanguard essay by John I. Johnson titled “Fanatical Zionist Rupert Murdoch: Jewish or Not?” which stated:

In June 2003, Richard Curtiss, co-founder and editor of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, wrote in that publication that Murdoch’s mother was “an Orthodox Jew, although Murdoch never offers that information in his biographies.” Curtiss was an ex-foreign service officer (US State Department), US Information Agency (USIA), and Voice of America employee.

Of note, Tucker’s father Richard Carlson was Director of the Voice of America (VOA), a known CIA propaganda outlet, during the last six years of the Cold War (the appalling trauma of his birth and childhood must be read to be believed). He was also director of the US Information Agency which included the Voice of America. Richard Carlson was “the longest-serving director in VOA’s 50-year history,” from 1986 to 1991. He was appointed by Ronald Reagan, who was himself controlled by Jews. I could not discover the years during which Curtiss was an employee at VOA, but it is at least possible and even likely that they overlapped with Richard Carlson’s directorship.

Curtiss’ essay in 2003 titled “Rupert Murdoch and William Kristol: Using the Press to Advance Israel’s Interests,”, whose subtitle is “Rupert Murdoch: Despite Affairs Worldwide, His Heart Stays With Israel,” does indeed contain the exact quote from the National Vanguard essay in the first paragraph when recounting Rupert Murdoch’s parentage. William Kristol is the Jewish neocon son of Irving Kristol, a Trotskyite (real name Bronstein, Jewish) who along with Leo Strauss, Jewish, founded the infamous and largely Jewish neoconservative movement involved with the events of 9-11 and the subsequent “War on Terror.”

A few other sources which rely not only on the Curtiss quote suggest — or declare — Rupert Murdoch is himself Jewish. For instance, this essay by Christopher Bollyn, “Murdoch’s Deeply Hidden Jewish Roots — A Biography” both on Bollyn’s own Web site and republished at Veterans Today and many other sites, presents more evidence that Rupert has Jewish ancestry. “Later in life, Keith Rupert chose to use Rupert, the first name of his Jewish maternal grandfather.” Bollyn also sources a Candour (UK) article which states: “Rupert’s father Sir Keith Murdoch attained his prominent position in Australian society through a fortuitous marriage to the daughter of a wealthy Jewish family, née Elisabeth Joy Greene.” The TOO commentator who said “Greenbaum” was close.

A great many articles, including Curtiss’ and Bollyn’s essays, confirm that Murdoch is an avid Israel-First Zionist and philo-Semite. If Rupert Murdoch is himself Jewish through his mother, and if his media empire has been at the service of Jewish neocons, hardcore Israel-Firsters, and avid philo-Semites, this is more than enough to prove that mainstream mass media reporting on Tucker’s parting of the ways with Fox News is obscuring the Jewish Issue. All of the many reasons given in the press, from the L.A. Times to Jimmy Dore to The Hill to so many others, are most likely false fronts to obscure the real reasons.

What might they be? The difficulty of knowing directly is a given, but we can deduce from clues and context. First, we know that some of the mainstream media is operated at a financial loss, the propaganda effect more important now than the income. One of many examples is provided in Curtiss’ essay:

One reason Kristol was able to help create this war (the War on Terror) was the fact that he had a ready-made platform, courtesy of the Australian press lord Rupert Murdoch, who underwrites Kristol’s magazine, The Weekly Standard. Never mind that… the magazine has operated at a financial loss ever since it was founded. It succeeds in its main purpose, which is to provide legitimacy to the ubiquitous Kristol and other staffers of the little-read Weekly Standard in their primary role as television talking heads.

Advertisers dropping Fox News over some of Tucker’s coverage, such as Disney and T-Mobile over “racism for attacking anti-racism protesters” is explained in a Guardian article of June 2020 titled “Tucker Carlson: advertisers desert Fox News host after he attacks protesters.” Recently, Infowars declared: “RFK Jr. Says Fox Fired Tucker Carlson For Calling Out Big Pharma Advertisers’ ‘Deadly’ Vaccines.” Even if Murdoch cared, none of this should be a threat to Fox News advertising revenue, since Carlson was so popular other advertisers would surely fill the gaps. In fact Carlson’s many fans would probably boycott Disney and T-Mobile (though less so Big Pharma) and patronize new advertisers.

Carlson told the truth only to that point his Jewish handlers required to fulfill the psy-op strategies of controlled opposition and limited hangout (COLH). The two strategies operate together to confine the range of discourse within a false two-sided frame, and release some selected “inhibited truths,” which, they hope, forestalls inquiry into deeper truths. In the Carlson case, COLH operates to obscure the Jewish Issue.

So why the parting of ways now between Carlson and Fox? I will attempt a prediction. The real reason Fox fired Tucker Carlson will most likely turn out to be similar to the real reason Alex Jones and Infowars were deplatformed and apparently sued: It will boost interest in Carlson’s “news” reporting, depicting him as a martyr to evil Big Pharma (or Fox itself), so that when he resurfaces on a platform that they themselves provide him, he will have even greater credibility and influence in his COLH. And Carlson’s COLH amounts to obscuring the Jewish Issue.

Alex Jones focused on Carlson’s ways parting in the Monday 24 April “The Alex Jones Show.” Jones said:

“…I’ve experienced it. In 2015 we had 10 million viewers… By 2016 some days we had 30, 40 million viewers. Every day we had 25 million. …And I’ve experienced the CIA — it’s all come out in Congress — literally run all these programs against me. So when I tell you, hey, Tucker’s for real, he’s for real.” (11:12)

Jones claimed he had not been able to talk to Carlson directly as yet because Jones’ phone was damaged in a play date with his daughter, he only heard the news 25 minutes before going live, and “we talk a lot, we’re friends, he’s been here to visit, things like that,” but “I’m sure he’s overwhelmed right now.”

Assuming Jones is being honest and accurate about his viewer numbers, how many viewers does Jones have today after this alleged CIA attack and the apparent lawsuit he lost over his Sandy Hook coverage? We may not have to trust Jones on his numbers, because YouGovAmerica provides numbers of both Jones’ “popularity” and “fame” from Q3 2020 to Q1 2023. His popularity has gone up from 16% to 23% over the time period, with no significant dips or rises due to CIA “programs,” deplatforming, lawfare including losing the Sandy Hook lawsuit in the amount of $965 million, or any other factors trying to marginalize and destroy Jones. His popularity has steadily risen since these measures were taken against him.

At the very least, the news of Jones being attacked by the CIA to marginalize him, the Sandy Hook lawfare, and other opposition only served to maintain Jones’ popularity, and at most worked to increase it. In the same way the news of the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago, and more recently the renewed lawsuit over the Stormy Daniels payoff only worked to raise President and candidate Trump’s popularity.

They know this. The CIA, the FBI, the entire Establishment know that generating this kind of news will only increase the popularity of those figures they appear to target. I assert that the targets know it too, and actively participate in the scandalous theater. The Masters of Discourse have studied the rest of us intimately, and launch sophisticated delusions to manipulate the public mind. All of the major media personalities are themselves members of the mass mind-control cult, and speak their lines and play their roles according to its plans. We know this cult is mostly Jewish, and not only at the planning level.

Speculation is already spreading over Tucker Carlson’s next endeavors. Some wonder if he will run for president, though Carlson himself appears to have dismissed that prospect. Others say Carlson may pursue his own independent media ventures, as Bill O’Reilly (also parted from Fox) and Laura Ingraham have done. Once again The Hill provides good reporting in its “Is the ‘toppled’ Tucker Carlson about to become master of the media universe?” After recounting some of the celebration over the fall of Carlson on “the left” and among “far-left activists,” and by the oft-quoted leftie Alexandria-Ocasio Cortez (AOC) who said, “deplatforming works and it is important,” author Douglas Mackinnon goes on to accurately describe the real situation:

Tucker Carlson was freed from a restrictive contract to finally reinvent himself as the soon to be unrivaled Master of the Media Universe. You think that’s an exaggeration? I was told that several sites are already pursuing Carlson as they put together offers multiple millions of dollars higher than his Fox News contract.

Said one person: “Carlson is about to become the Joe Rogan empire on steroids.” Meaning Rogan’s massive $200 million contract with Spotify — as reported by the New York Times — is about to look like chump-change to what Carlson will command. “King” Carlson was not vanquished. In his mind, he may have just been liberated from the constraints preventing him from creating the most powerful and influential media, political and educational platform in the nation.

And again, it’s not just about the obscene amounts of money about to be thrown at the feet of Carlson. Much more importantly, it’s about the platform either “they” will allow him to create or, if he goes on his own, the platform he will establish — and own. A platform that, at a minimum, could fold in politics, education, corporate branding, entertainment and publishing. A platform that could exponentially raise Carlson’s power to influence and infuriate (sic).

If Mackinnon had depicted “they” as (((they))) (grass-roots typography meaning Jews), he would not have been obscuring the Jewish issue as Carlson also does. It is this last sentence fragment which reveals so much. Carlson’s increase in power will not only influence and infuriate as part of the partisan divide/conflict/conquer strategy, it will also raise Carlson’s ability to deflect attention from Jewish power, depict it in select strategic ways, direct fury at scapegoats, and generally obscure the issue.

I predict Carlson will go “low profile” for a short while, then resurface on what appears to be his own independent Internet media platform. He will command more attention, draw more viewers, and manipulate more minds than before. It will appear that his parting with Fox, being an attempt to stop him from violating taboos, alienating advertisers, and undermining official narratives, has backfired. Tucker will become more popular than ever. But the reality will be that the whole “Tucker phenomenon” will be the Establishment firing on all cylinders and tightening its grip on the public mind.

Carlson is in the same category as Jones, Trump, and others. Despite, or because of, Carlson’s supposed “anti-Semitism” — which, like the Dominion lawsuit, surfaced in 2021 when Jonathan Greenblatt of the Anti-Defamation League called for Fox to ban Carlson over his reporting on White replacement immigration according to the ADL’s own letter to Fox CEO Suzanne Scott — Carlson will continue to obscure the Jewish issue and deflect attention away from real Jewish power. He will continue to attribute our national problems to the Democratic party, driving the political divide from the right, which the two-faced Jewish corporate media require as part of their divide/conflict/conquer strategy.

Jones said “Tucker Carlson is going to come back stronger than ever.” (13:22). “Mark my words, you’ll be seeing Tucker Carlson on the show soon. Haha! Didn’t compromise, didn’t sell out. And it’s gone at Fox. He won’t be fading away like that joke Bill O’Reilly.” (20:18)

Agreed. Expect to see Carlson surface at some point, with more influence than ever — and, once again, consistently obscuring the truth about Jewish power.

* * *

Source: Author