Discourse 6.2: Tucker Carlson- Heyoka for the Empire

Framing Thought Architecture II

                In this second installment of framing thought architecture, I want to address a particularly deceitful phenomenon that is embedded in our information, entertainment, and news media matrix. This remains a challenging aspect of our hyperreality to discern even for those who are aware of its existence, but is wholly inconceivable for those who are captured by it, particularly those residing in what I speak of as mass society.

Those of us who are not enchanted by the narrative managers spell craft, recognize the existence of this phenomenon because we understand and have internalized the nefarious Machiavellian nature of the power structure. We grok the notion that perception management is the frontline battlespace and that most often what we are told in the public square is always, to some degree, controlled. It could be as simple of a technique as framing, but most often it involves manipulation of truth or the absence of it, as well as selective omissions.

But it goes much further than that.

This essay will cover a technique of the system, that, in my opinion, is the most effective against both those still plugged into the matrix as well as those of us who have checked out.

For those within the matrix, they consume information passively, often absorbing it like a sponge, conditioned to delineate this information into one of two piles. Us or Them. From that tribal position information is assimilated as truth or fiction, gospel, or deplorable/fake news. (to co-opt empty rhetoric) What is very rarely questioned is the authenticity of the source. That newscaster, podcaster, entertainer, revolutionary, journalist, politician et cetera… believes X, Y, Z as they present it. While one may consider this person to be (good or bad) they believe that person is in fact presenting themselves as they are, causing the consumer to think “I know them”, easily deciding upon what pile to place them in.

I believe that most people want to trust others. Wouldn’t that be nice? If we lived in such a world that not only on an individual level, but on the level of society at large, we displayed the virtues of integrity, honesty, dare I say, honor?

I believe we all want this because deep down those ancient virtues call to us, directing us towards the revelation that there is objective truth, and our soul desires to see that truth reflected back at us in the world around us.

Civilizations used to teach this to our children as a standard for many millennia, that is up until a few centuries ago, leading us to a society without chests, without honor. This is an aspect of natural law, once considered innate is now pushed into the realm of a malleable metaphysic.

Propagandists and narrative managers for the power elite, know of this ancient desire and it has been manipulated to weaponize trust, particularly in “liberal democracies.” I have mentioned elsewhere that our base psychology has been used against us, this is one such method. For the mass media consuming lotus eater, they gravitate towards their tribal gospel, naturally feeling justified, supported, trusting their media heroes and papier-mâché politicians, while simultaneously having the direction of their lamentations framed for them. Of course, the left-right dialectic is an ouroboros, but it is really contained by the misplacement of trust. Managers have turned rational individual thinking of “surely not everyone is lying” into “nobody is lying but THEM.” “They are fake news. My tribe tells the truth.”  In this paradigm, regardless of tribal perspective, there is always someone telling the truth about every topic, and that person is most often a member of their tribe. Unfortunately, this engineered psychology prevents those captured by it from even having the imagination to see any other possibility than what is presented by the spectacle.

For those of us outside of wonderland, the hyperreality, the theatre, mass society… whatever you call it… we understand this phenomenon exists, but identifying it is difficult.

So, what is this phenomenon?

Spread throughout our entire psychosphere of entertainment, academia, politics, journalism, philanthropy, podcasting, Substack… and all other avenues of human life where perception management is possible, there exists a version of the sacred clown.

In the Native American culture of the Sioux, is a figure called an Heyoka, whose traits match others of its kind, collectively called sacred clowns. These figures are embedded in Human history, manifesting in cultures all across the globe dating deep into antiquity.

Side note: I do recommend studying this as a stand-alone topic. Simply fascinating.

The Heyoka is a satirist, a jester, one who conducts themselves as an inversion of the reality around them. Clowns such as the Heyoka served many positive purposes, as they helped establish proper interpersonal behavior by making the false appear absurd. From Shaman to community enforcers, even when attempting to edify the mores and values of their respective societies to their degree, their inherent nature was that of a trickster.

These clowns, arguably an element of good in human development (also have inspired the theatre), are embedded archetypes in our psyche, often conjuring upon their arrival an element of trust or reverence like our medicine men and shaman of old. This is the land of respect and fear reserved for witchdoctors and voodoo priests, who by their very presence and knowing rituals are able to foster an uneasy obedience to rules of their design. We subconsciously acquiesce to their machinations, like following the pied piper over a cliff.

This psychodynamic, our affinity for the shaman, is a phenomenon manipulated by modern tricksters who wear their masks in our psychosphere while flirting with the sacred clowns’ representative archetypes.

Some have called these tricksters agents, chaos agents, dis/mis/mal information agents. There are other names, but please focus on the meanings. These tricksters differ from other types of public deceptions such as the instigator/informant engineering false flag schemes the FBI (among others) is notorious for where an agent temporarily becomes a new identity to facilitate an agenda under a false presentation.

The difference, for these pseudo-Heyoka, their entire public persona could be fabricated. From a technical standpoint, they may have the credentials for the role they are playing, but their entire public position architecture is artificial, managed, planted. Naturally, this occurs in degrees and to scale. It could be merely a physics professor from Stanford, a computer scientist from MIT, a startup Tech CEO, perhaps an epidemiologist, a movie star or musician, even a politician up to and including a president.

There are people, all around us, who are in fact, not what they seem. Some are actors on a stage playing a pre-determined role and all of us are the audience. In private, when the garment of deception is no longer needed, when they exit the stage, they are different. The final cause for all of this deception has to do with perception management and manufacturing consent for the agenda of the empire.

These Heyoka are the most dangerous deceivers, as their methods of their rituals often use limited hangouts which foster trust in their words, even to the unenchanted. Mass society cannot imagine the Heyoka, so they only exist alongside elves, fauns, and fairies, trusting in the system to be authentic enough to maintain some truth. For those outside, we become susceptible to Heyoka even though we know they exist. This is because even in our cynicism and inherent distrust in the system, we want to hope. When we hear truth in an empire of lies, we become drawn to it like a moth to a flame.

I am not advising you to resist trust. Some of us, God willing, are attempting to speak towards truth. Undoubtedly there are *some* in the public square who are doing so to the degree they can. However, we all must be careful not to allow one truth spoken by the possible Heyoka to disarm us of our questions and skepticism. This after all is how the Anglerfish operates, drawing in its prey with the carrot, only to provide the stick.

In previous Discourse, I have made it clear my agnostic position on information. With that being said, after I cross a certain point in thought I move into speculation. I do not deny this, particularly as it relates to part of this essay. However, if my house burnt down is it wrong to assume it caught fire? If I can show you the charred remains but not the flames…. What will you think?

Our Human inclination is to trust, and I already said the system has weaponized that psychology against us. So, I will not ask you to trust me, rather, I ask you to think and consider.

While I cannot “prove” it, much like I cannot prove the charred board came from a structure that was once my home, I can present questions about a particular individual who I highly suspect is a form of a chaos agent, a demonic parody of a Heyoka. There are many others, but this one is currently taking center stage in our psychosphere, and I suspect this act is far from over.

Additionally, this is not just any run of the mill pseudo-Heyoka, this individual is one of many public figures whose familial history is obfuscated for nebulous reasons, presenting them in reality as not just a mere * journalist*, but a member of the real American aristocracy class.

At the least, let the reader take this as a warning to always question the motives and authenticity of your sources regardless of topic. Here is my speculation that Tucker Swanson McNear Carlson is a chaos agent, a Heyoka, another sacred clown for the dialectic. This is the main topic of this essay.

Part I

                Tucker Carlson has been a household name for years, even having at one time the most popular cable news show in the nation Tucker Carlson Tonight. Over the past decade he has created a large appeal by presenting himself as a maverick outsider, who is not afraid to ask questions outside of the normal spectrum and often goes into verbal attacks against powerful individuals and institutions in the world of public-private partnerships, whether they be “private” or “public.” (Hopefully the reader understands that is a distinction without difference to power) Often, he provides takes on foreign policy that appear to be against orthodoxy. Later we will get to his most recent performance, that of interviewing Vladamir Putin.

On the surface, he does offer surprisingly damning coverage at times against the ruling establishment, addressing many stories and topics that most media personalities do not cover. For this reason, it is easy for one to see the appeal of Tucker Carlson, even for those who understand most media is controlled, especially large platforms. It is indeed nice to hear some truth sometimes. But I digress. However, this is the tactic of the anglerfish, as well as the function of setting the edge for Chomsky’s spectrum of acceptable debate. Tucker sets the extreme edge of the acceptable public spectrum just outside of the place where it threatens the status quo, for select things, thereby channeling popular rage towards safer targets. So, on the surface, he will appear to be a maverick journalist looking for truth to one tribe, while the other side discards him into the “THEM” pile.

At first glance it may appear that I am just a crank, especially to a lotus eater. For others they may say he is too public. Everyone would know if he was not being authentic. Perhaps. But there is reason to doubt. Many in fact. After all, the biggest of lies are easiest to sell. Plus, most often these things are hidden in plain sight, just like the gorilla suit study demonstrated.

If one begins to peel back the layers of his own performance over the years it can be seen that something is amiss, there are inconsistencies and a very opportunistic feel to his theatrics. Clearly, that is subjective and proves nothing, but it can lead one to a series of questions that if followed will lead to more questions. While there may not be a definitive answer at the end of this essay for you, at least you will come away with a firm understanding that Tucker Carlson is not what he presents himself to be.

I will state here clearly what few know and understand but many refuse to believe. The real movers and shakers of the world belong to a particular class or segment of our population. Membership in this segment does evolve, but most often when one rises their station to this class, their descendants will most often still be among them, as it is self-protecting.  Again, this is because power knows how to protect itself. In our modern world many of the real power elite do not show their face on a public stage, but when they do, they often arrive either in disguise or shrouded in enough obfuscation to limit questions. Sometimes they run in high end philanthropic circles, other times they may live a period of time under a false identity, only to fake their stage death and return to the shadows. I accept it if you think the latter is far-fetched. Disregard it if you want. Just understand, history is not a product of a debate of ideas nor is it an organic phenomenon, it is a continual manifestation of an agenda by those with power, power that evolves.

Other times these aristocrats will not necessarily hide their identity but will change part of their name to confuse the genealogy or they will seek to not draw attention to it… such is the case with Tucker. Let us begin.

Part II

Tucker Swanson McNear Carlson was born in 1969 to a very wealthy California family. He attended some of the most prestigious prep schools in the county including St. George’s School in Rhode Island. Eventually he attended Trinity College in Connecticut where he studied history. This may not seem like much, so his family had money and he could go to great schools. Many people can do this. After all, I attended a prestigious private university. This does not mean anything on its own, but it is not a secret that networks of power recruit at many of these institutions, sometimes in overt and other times covert ways. One such publicly known network is the Skull and Bones, but they are mostly an antiquated tool and are not what I am referring to here.

Tucker was not groomed into a power position in such a manner or converted along the way like so many others by sex, money, blackmail, career advancements, power… not Tucker. Those tactics were necessary for many Heyoka to engage in manipulation, from presidents to professors, to get them to trade a part of their public persona for a cause, essentially selling their soul to the devil. Not Tucker.

This is why he is possibly a very dangerous Heyoka because he understands the whole game on a deeper level. He understands what in some circles is called the occult technology of power. The best way to protect power is to project it, to wield it, while not being seen. Do not stand as a king of the hill, rather, rally the peasants from among them or out of their sight. Real power has learned to hide, and Carlson is a blue blood through and through.

With that being said, I will split this speculation into two parts. The first part will take a very brief look at his family history, from which it will be quickly seen how he is a member of  American aristocracy hiding in plain sight, much like how David Crosby from the music group  Crosby, Stills & Nash presented like a mere musician when he was really a relative of two of the most powerful American families you have never heard of, the Van Corlandt and Van Rensselaer families. Anderson Cooper anyone? There are tons of such examples of this type of minor obfuscation found all over the public square. Additionally, you will see one example in Carlson’s lineage that show how part of his ancestral family was part of the artificial settlement movement during the late 19^th century where the America was flooded with immigrants “seeking a better life” as well as European aristocrats who sought to secure both financial and industrial levers of power in the burgeoning American world power. I discussed this “fifth column” in one of my previous books at great length, often times it worked in concert with the newly formed American Gentry, “new money”, but always it worked against the interests of the governed class. This element of Tucker’s tree creates its own suspicions that the reader can explore at greater detail if they so wish.

 The second speculation is less circumstantial and does not need the first to be true, even though it is such, but it is the story of Tucker’s life as well as his Father Richard (Dick) Warner Carlson, which alone shows that Tucker is most likely a Heyoka.  My only question that remains for myself is to what degree. Decide for yourself what you think, but the following is my summary.

Part III

To begin with, Tuckers family is full of questions that beg to be asked. While I will address his father Dick Warner Carlson at greater detail later, there are many questions surrounding his father’s youth including a strange sob story of being unwanted and put up in an orphanage. I have seen others claim he is of the Warner brother’s family but that is probably too much speculation, but the surface story smells really bad. (Later I will discuss Dick Carlson’s connection to the intelligence agencies, such individuals often have parts of their “history” intentionally muddied, supposedly for safety. Perhaps that is the case here.)  Let us assume this is all true and that he was adopted. This orphan made his way from the east coast to California and found himself in the circles of his first wife, Tuckers mother, Lisa McNear Lombardi.

Note: A general trend I have noticed while studying America’s growing and evolving power dynamics in the 19^th and 20^th century, most people tend to focus on the east coast, particularly New York City, while this is undoubtedly not only a hub of power in the United States, but also of the world at large, it is but one of two Romes in this empire. Perhaps one of three if one considers Chicago, which I do, but for the purpose of this essay I will only discuss San Francisco… which is often overlooked. It was after all initially going to be the home of the United Nations, and the concept of the “golden gate” has layers of esoteric and occult meaning. Plus, for those interested, in Star Trek, San Francisco is the home of Starfleet headquarters. It is important to the elite.

Tuckers biological mother was from a very wealthy family, one that traces back to John McNear, a famous Petaluma pioneer who settled in the San Francisco area in 1850. Important to note that McNear’s father-in-law was George Bailey Williams. This family is equivalent to California royalty, odd company for an orphan to be marrying into. However, after having two sons with Dick Carlson and nine years of marriage, Lisa Lombardi decided to pursue a “bohemian lifestyle”. Tucker has even spoken about this in public and it appears as though this genuinely bothers him, as it should for a normal human being. At that time Tuckers Father was granted custody of him as well as his brother Buckley. However, their luck would turn around because just a few years later this orphan from Boston married his second wife, another aristocrat, Patricia Swanson, heiress to the Swanson Frozen Food company fortune. She adopted the two brothers shortly after the marriage.  Swanson’s mother was a Fullbright, her uncle was Arkansas Senator William Fulbright. (Fulbright’s were originally the Volprechts, an established international banking family) That family line, as well as the McNear line, surrounds the Carlson family with old wealth and old power. Prior to becoming as public of a figure as he is now, Tucker Carlson openly described himself as a trust fund baby, saying in 2008 “I’m extraordinarily loaded just from money I inherited from a number of trust funds”.  I would certainly say so.

Before moving on to the second speculation, I want to bring up another member of Tucker’s ancestral family that embodies the idea of the Fifth Column I have mentioned earlier and in other works. This individual went by the name of Henry Miller, who became known as the Cattle King of California. I say he “went by” the name because his birth name was Heinrich Kreiser, and he was born in Brackenheim Germany in 1827. Cover stories were easier to pull off in the 19^th century apparently.

The story goes that Heinrich was born to a butcher and his wife, but it is left out that this wasn’t just any butcher. His father was a huge cattle baron in Germany and his mother was from a rich family of vintners. As usually during this period of history male children most often engage in the same line of work as their fathers, this was no different for young Heinrich Alfred Kreiser. At the age of 8, he was apprenticed to become a butcher, which like other trades of the time was protected by guilds and was not easy to secure an apprenticeship unless you were connected, even harder to become accepted to train as a master. Yet, even after just 7 years he completed his apprenticeship and traveled to England where he would find himself under the tutelage of several of London’s premier master butchers. During this time, he became fluent in English and developed extensive networks on both sides of the Atlantic. Officially, he was unsatisfied with his work and decided to “save up some money” and travel to New York.

In 1846, at 19 years old, Heinrich lands in New York City, and if the story is to be believed he struggled “mightily to find sustainable wages. After working “voluntarily” for a local butcher, he managed to finally win a job by his good performance. Over the next year he was able to save enough money to purchase his own shop, but he was still dissatisfied because he had not reached his potential of becoming a wealthy man. (Read this as securing his birthright.) What we are expected to believe what happens next is almost comical if it was not the standard operating procedure for wealthy immigrants at the time. Naturally these success stories are sold as hallmarks of the positive nature of immigration, the capstone of such conditioning is presented by the Statue of Liberty, one of the largest psy-ops of the 19^th century. Can one really believe that a 19-year-old master butcher from old money in Europe who owned their own shop after just one year did not have enough money to purchase a train ticket two years later?

The official story goes that Heinrich Kreiser, while in New York, became friends with a man named Henry Miller. Miller began discussing with Heinrich the possibilities of wealth that could be acquired in California by participating in the Gold Rush. Heinrich explained to Henry that he could not afford a ticket just yet. So, Henry Miller, apparently excited about the opportunity, went on to buy a ticket for the next steamer to San Francisco. The ticket was not refundable and non-transferrable. Unable to go for some reason, Henry either gave the ticket to Heinrich or sold it to him for a lower fee. Since the ticket was non-transferrable, Heinrich had to become Henry Miller, a name that Heinrich decided to keep because it would be more advantageous in America to be Henry Miller than Heinrich Alfred Kreiser. Oddly, his “friend” Henry Miller, never made it to California in all of the years that followed.

Upon arriving in San Francisco in 1850, this Henry Miller, a gold prospector, arrived with only six dollars to his name. Not long after his arrival he “realized” that the gold rush was not his destiny, so he decided to fall back on his skills from his former trade that he seemingly up and abandoned in New York City.    

Note: This was a convenient period of time for someone with large amounts of money to arrive in the Bay area, as among other things, California became a state in 1850.  Let me explain this speculation. In 1849 the “Gold Rush”, which was later understood to be largely overhyped to bring people to the area, brought in so many transplants that the local press called them 49ers. Often penniless and used to roughing it, the 49ers pitched tents along the cold muddy streets which are now part of the financial district. However, in 49 also came “The Great Fire” which burnt through the tent cities, and homes that gold diggers had managed to scrap together. The city deployed a scorched earth technique to stop the fire, where they ripped down or used dynamite to take out the remaining homes to deprive the fire of fuel, leaving no buildings on the south side of Washington between Kearny and Montgomery. Over the next two years, seven other fires would ravage the city, including what is called the “penultimate fire” in 1951. This fire destroyed three-fourths of the city and began with an act of arson in the Portsmouth Plaza. Despite the damage from this fire, workers were able to fully rebuild one-fifth of the city in just ten days, unfortunately in just over a months’ time the last of the Gold Rush fires would raze the city. These fires ended up being very beneficial for the developing city, turning its population of 5000 in 1849 into a population of 50,000 in just under a decade by providing it room to grow. By 1865 the population tipped north of 100,000 residents.

If one is so inclined to be suspicious, a miraculous similarity occurred in Chicago in 1871 with the great Chicago fire, which not only paved the way for new and upgraded residents but set the stage for the development of the Chicago World’s fair in 1893. Sometimes burning things down is easier than obtaining permits or permission. This is a fact that residents of Maui in 2023 became all too aware of. If the elite class want your land or are in a mood of renovation, they play by their own rules. Cities to skyscrapers, companies to countries, there isn’t anything that does not have a shelf life when you are part of the class pulling the strings. With that being said, perhaps Heinrich, I mean Henry, had nothing to do with this and was just amazingly lucky. Right place. Right circumstances. Right time.  

With his “meager” funds and prime opportunity, Miller opened up a beef market on the newly renovated Washington street. He became such a success that his competition, a wealthy meat company owner by the name of Charles Lux, decided in 1858 to make Miller his partner. So, in 1858, the Miller & Lux company was formed during what became one of the largest and fastest population explosions in the western United States. What an amazing stoke of luck for a first-generation immigrant who would go on to be known as the Cattle King as well as one of the largest landowners in the entire country at the time.

The organic nature of this story is about as believable as another well-known European immigrant who arrived in New York City with a paper in hand titled “Defects and needs of our banking system” in 1902.Isn’t it a bit strange that an immigrant would arrive on American shores with a critique of the existing banking system, and referred to it as our banking system? After all he did not even become a citizen until 1907.  Never mind this immigrant had deep ties to the venetian banking cartel, a promulgator of central banks across the world including the Bank of England. That is all a coincidence we are told. This paper was written by a Paul Warburg who also arrived from Germany, and he is known as the Father of the Federal Reserve. There is a reason it was called the Federal Reserve conspiracy and there is a reason its inception is never discussed today in the public square. Authors such as Anthony Sutton with his “The Federal Reserve Conspiracy” and Edward Griffin’s “The Creature from Jekyll Island” cover this topic in great detail and I recommend both. During the 19^th and early 20^th century, most Americans were unaware that their nation was being taken out from underneath them. This invasion covered many sectors, financial, industrial and education among others. It was an old scheme that a relatively new country was ill prepared to defend itself against. By the time it was over the levers of society had been captured. That was over a century ago.

Aristocrats love their rags to riches stories because it resonates with the class struggle that the plebian class experiences so acutely, and these stories provide false hope for those trapped under the wheel, that they too can achieve great things. However, for every ten such stories, upon deeper investigation, you will find eight of them being wholly fabricated, especially the big ones. Even during the height of the Roman republic, they knew there needed to be a few “success stories” from the plebian class. With this in mind some plebians were permitted to serve in the Century Assembly or made the most prominent ones Tribunes protected by being elevated to being sacrosanct. This phenomenon still exists today, albeit it takes on a different form than the robber baron philanthropic mythology of the 19^th century or the Roman facade. Today such figureheads are propped up by the national security state apparatus, figures such as Musk, Gates, Bezos, and Zuckerberg… all have their own constructed fakelore.

So, while you may disagree with some of these initial speculations, it should be clear that Tucker Carlson is not just American royalty in one line or two, but many. He grew up at the La Jolla Beach and Tennis Club, his childhood house being next door. His family-owned houses in four states, two countries and owned two islands. With all of that being said, you can disregard everything in this first line of theory if you wish. The second part can stand alone to show the reader that Tucker Carlson is undoubtedly a version of the Heyoka.

Part IV

                I will begin with the assumption that the surface story of Dick Carlson’s childhood is true and that he was indeed adopted. While I consider that suspect, it is not relevant for this section. Dick went on to graduate from the Naval Academy Preparatory school in Rhode Island and then briefly attended the University of Mississippi through an ROTC program. He was discharged a year later without graduating, deciding then to travel to Los Angeles in 1963 when he was 22 to look for work in “Independent journalism.” His first job was with the Los Angeles Times as an errand boy for a night editor, but less than six months later he secured a job with United Press International (UPI), often writing for their Foreign Film Bureau, which had deep ties with the intelligence agencies dating back to the Officer of Strategic Services (OSS). The OSS had many functions which included propaganda and subversion, and it later was folded into the organization that became the CIA. UPI was one of many private extensions of the CIA up until it was discarded at some unknown time after the mid 1980’s. During his time with the Foreign Film Bureau, he worked with Henry Gris, the first president of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, who also happened to have had a long career working with the intelligence agencies. After a few years of seemingly “learning the ropes” Carlson traveled from Los Angeles to San Francisco to work as TV reporter for KGO-TV.

During his time working for KGO-TV very little is known, but from some reports it appears as though he was involved in blackmail operations where he would acquire leverage over his target and disseminate information outward when necessary. 1967 was the year he married Lisa McNear Lombardi, and his son Tucker was born in 1969. In the same year, his reporting on San Francisco mayor Joseph Alioto was published in Look magazine, where he linked him to organized crime and it caused a media firestorm, eventually causing the magazine to be sued for libel. While the magazine did have to pay 350K dollars, Carlson was excused from being a defendant due to “legal technicalities” but stood by his story all the way. Dick spent the next six years working at various local TV news outlets from Los Angeles to San Diego. In 1976, the same year he divorced Lisa Lombardi, he decided that he was finished with working with the news. Saying it is a “kids’ game that was insipid, sophomoric and superficial.” He apparently had grown tired of outing transgender individuals for blackmail purposes and was ready for bigger fish.

In 1977 he began working for San Diego Federal Savings and Loan and within just a few short years he became vice president of finance, coincidently of course, he married Patricia Swanson in 1979. Pretty nice gig for an investigative journalist without a college degree. This savings and loan company became the Great American Savings company which was eventually led by Gordon Luce, who was a close friend and cabinet member of Ronald Reagan.

Dick Carlson, sticking to his M.O of blackmail and leverage acquisition, during a 60 Minutes interview with Mike Wallace in 1981 about some odd home foreclosures by the Savings and Loan bank, managed to record Wallace on an off-mike moment where he was making racist jokes about blacks and Hispanics. “You bet your ass the contracts are hard to read, especially if you’re reading them over watermelon or tacos.”  Naturally, the line of questioning about these controversial practices of this bank was effectively tabled. This savings and loan company was certainly connected to the power apparatus and became involved in a public scandal in 1984 when it was discovered that an advisor to Ronald Reagan by the name of Edwin Meese was given a mortgage that he never paid.

In 1983 Carlson began his public dive into politics when he sought an appointment with the San Diego County Board of Supervisors followed up the next year by running for mayor of San Diego. It was a controversial campaign that spent significant time attacking the gay community and was accused of receiving funding directly from the white house and its orbit through the Great American First Savings bank. Despite out fundraising his opponent by a 2:1 margin, Carlson went on to lose the election, but it was clear there were other agendas at play.  

In 1986, President Ronald Reagan appointed Richard “Dick” Carlson as director of the U.S. Information Agency (USIA), the body that has oversight over government-funded media, including Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, ratio and TV Marti and VOICE OF AMERICA, of which Dick was also the director. (USIA has now been replaced by the U.S. Agency for Global Media) Together, these outlets are part of what the New York Times during a limited hangout called “a worldwide propaganda network built by the CIA”. Their goal is to bombard enemy countries (even allies) with regime-change propaganda. Until the 1970’s, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty was directly funded by the CIA. Now such funding is often run through client organizations that are part of the omnipresent public-private partnership apparatus.

Note: Former USIA director of TV and film service Alvin Snyder recalled in his 1995 memoir that “the U.S. government ran a full-service public relations organization, the largest in the world, about the size of the twenty biggest U.S. commercial PR firms combined. Its full-time professional staff of more than 10,000, spread out among some 150 countries, burnished America’s image and trashed the Soviet Union 2500 hours a week with a ‘tower of babble’ comprised of more than 70 languages, to the tune over 2 billion dollars per year. The USIA was the biggest branch of this propaganda machine.”

In his position of director of USIA, Dick played a significant role in the downfall of the Soviet Union. In a 1990 event alongside media moguls Rupert Murdoch and Ted Turner, he noted that “international broadcasting played a very critical role, as was suggested by Mr. Murdoch, in the events that took place in the USSR and Eastern Europe in the past couple of years.” In his speech, it is clear he understood his primary role as being that of facilitating regime change. A fact he was proud of, stating:

“International broadcasters were equally important in laying the groundwork for the democratic revolutions that we have seen. Isn’t it incredible how Western all those Europeans sound in talking about freedom, democracy, free enterprise, environmental concerns. And they didn’t get those ideas from their own media or textbooks in their own countries; they got them mainly from international broadcasters like Voice of America, the BBC, Radio Liberty and Radio Free Europe.”

During his time as director, he was also a key component in the ultimately successful attempt to bring down the Sandinista government in Nicaragua though hybrid warfare, one element of what is now called fifth generation warfare. The U.S. bombarded the country with incessant propaganda, funding local media outlets that preached regime change, amplifying fake news and scare stories, as well as supplying enormous number of weapons and training to far-right death squads that labeled themselves “Contras.” U.S. trained and armed death squads would go on to engage in massacres across Central America throughout the 1980’s killing hundreds of thousands of people. While this strategy has evolved, it is still performed globally to maintain hegemony to this day.

Dick Carlson would later be appointed by President George H. W. Bush as U.S. Ambassador to the Seychelles and serve on a number of executive boards for powerful think tanks. One such tank was the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), an organization that is a mere front for the Israel lobby. Even when asked point blank if this was indeed the case Carlson did not deny it. Stating only that “Israel is a country under siege. It’s a democracy in part of the world where there are no democracies. And it is under constant irregular terrorist attack and threat.” I hope that the reader understands that Israel is not only not a democracy, but creates its own threats for political purposes. Hamas is just but one example.

Also, on the board of the FDD at that time were Jeanne Kirkpatrick, a very high-ranking official at the center of the Iran-Contra Affair as well as R. James Woolsey, CIA director from 1993-1995.  Dick would later team up with Woolsey again at the Institute for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence just in time for the inception of the 20 plus year “War on Terror” that kicked off with the tragic events of September 11^th. Again, a pretty remarkable achievement for an orphan without a college degree.

While it is clear publicly for most people that Dick Carlson was involved with the intelligence agencies of the empire, especially his role in the dirty hybrid war against Nicaragua, far fewer people are aware that a young Tucker Carlson was involved. While in college at Trinity he was a member of the Dan White Club with his roommate and eventual co-founder of the Daily Caller, Neil Patel. It is known that this club was an Intelligence recruiting apparatus at the time. Tucker and his roommate traveled to Nicaragua at least two times to, in Tucker’s own words, “Get involved in the war and support the side that was right, which was not the Sandinista side.”

Note: Patel went on to serve as Scooter Libby’s deputy before becoming chief policy advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney. He was later nominated by Bush to operate the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, but he was not confirmed for the position.  His family history is quite interesting in itself.

While many people have written about Tucker and some of his family history, rarely is this ever mentioned. Although, in a 2017 podcast interview with The Jamie Weinstein Show, he was asked about it directly. “I don’t think many people know that you were actually a freedom-fighter who traveled to Central America to fight with the Contras. Could you fill our listeners in on that story?” Weinstein asked. “No,” he replied, laughing, before coyly stating that his supposedly “liberal” father “let” him go because he and Patel “wanted to go see the war in Nicaragua.” “All kinds of hilarity ensued”, he added, laughing nervously before changing the subject.

Both Carlson and Patel would return in 1990 at the time of the presidential election, which pitted Sandinista Daniel Ortega against U.S. Banked, Contra-supporting candidate Violeta Chamorro. Thanks to years of U.S. sponsored terror and a huge political war chest, Chamorro was able to win, becoming the sixth person in her family to hold the office. According to a 1990 edition of his college’s newsletter, The Trinity Tripod, Carlson and Patel attended “many Chamorro rallies”. In the National Review podcast, Carlson said that he was literally “standing next to her when she won.” Tucker presents his time in Nicaragua as an innocent endeavor of curious college kids. “We did not have a place to stay or any set plans. It was very spontaneous. We are both extremely political and we felt that getting to know the country and some of its citizens would give us a better perspective on the situation,” the Tripod quotes him as saying. This story is about as believable as “Henry Miller” arriving in San Francisco with only six dollars to his name and a sack full of generational luck.

While such cover stories are designed to sound plausible, that two curious politically motivated college kids just wanted to get in on some action, the fact that he is the son of a man in charge of a CIA front organization tasked with aiding the Contras and overthrowing the government went there on more than one occasion is more than suspicious. How was it possible for a random college student to find themselves at Chamorro’s side as she won given the overwhelming security that was present after years of a terrible civil war? What sort of support did Carlson give the Contras and how should we interpret the word “freedom fighter?” Adding to the suspicion is the fact that shortly after his second trip to Nicaragua and his graduation from Trinity, Tucker Carlson formally applied to become a member of the CIA.

The official story tells us that he was rejected, causing his father Dick Carlson to suggest to him to take up journalism because “They’ll take anybody.” While Carlson may or may not be an official CIA agent, it has been known for years that the media is most often an extension of the intelligence apparatus and carefully placed journalists often times are more potent weapons than bombs.

Today, the U.S. still supports the Chamorro family, with CIA cutout organizations like the National Endowment for Democracy, the same organization that helped organize the coup in Kiev in 2014, among many other places, through a variety of ways, including developing and funding pro-western media outlets such as the Kiev Independent. In this new age of fifth generation warfare, intelligence operatives are not just involved in clandestine operations in the dark, rather they are often behind the microphone, on a stage, pushing the necessary propaganda to control and frame the narrative, ultimately with the goal to win the war for your mind and to maintain the status quo power apparatus.

Most likely Carlson was determined to be more effective in that battle space rather than him being rejected by the CIA on other grounds. This suspicion is essentially confirmed shortly after his rejection as he went to work for the Heritage Foundation, a known CIA front. During this time, he was brought on to work for The Weekly Standard by neocon and future Iraq war architect Bill Kristol, where his skills were used to defend the CIA against a charge levied by investigative journalist Gary Webb.

In his “Dark alliance” series for the San Jose Mercury News and later by the book of the same name, investigative journalist exposed that the CIA funded its dirty war against Nicaragua by helping the Contras flood America’s black urban centers with crack cocaine. The articles and book ignited a storm of anger directed at the CIA. Fortunately, the CIA could count on many of its captured and placed journalists to come to their defense. One such defender was a young Tucker Carlson who while working for The Weekly Standard in 1996 published an article titled “A Disgraceful Newspaper Expose and Its Fans.”  The article was a full out defense of the agency he recently sought to join, framing Webb’s accusations as being ludicrous, claiming there was “no evidence” for his claims. Tucker presented the CIA as a noble institution that was receiving unfair scrutiny from inside the U.S from forces that just wanted to bring it down. Tucker claimed that the CIA was doing just the opposite, instead of engaging in the drug trade, he stated there was “ample evidence” that CIA officials had moved to remove drug traffickers from the Contras.  Tucker also claimed that the black journalists who took issue with what Webb revealed, were mere “conspiracy theorists” (a known go to conversation stopper).

The CIA was very thankful to Carlson for helping muddy the waters and shooting the messenger. A declassified CIA document cites his Weekly Standard article, among several others, as aiding them in “managing a nightmare.”

Gary Webb was assailed by a massive campaign to discredit his name and work, including criticism from the national security state, eventually pushing him out of journalism. In 2004, he was found in his home in California with two bullets in his head, his death was ruled a suicide.

Since that time, between further declassified documents through freedom of information requests as well as leaks, the work of Gary Webb has been found to be accurate, but by the time this was revealed most of society has already moved on distracted by other things. I suspect, from observation, narrative managers began shifting from addressing such true damning information publicly, to simply ignoring it or omitting it from public discourse. Most investigative journalists who uncover such unpleasant truths are just washed out of the public square with information overload and obfuscation. Unfortunately for journalists like Gary Webb, the system will indeed silence those who truly challenge it.

After Tucker left The Weekly Standard, he went to work with CNN hosting the show Crossfire. During this time, he was a mouthpiece for the national security state, often parroting the words of Bill Kristol while supporting the invasion of Iraq. He even traveled there and hung out with private U.S. mercenaries who were later found to have been committing many war crimes, particularly DynCorp International. He was also involved in an iconic and bizarre piece of pro-war propaganda that involved pop star Britney Spears. During a 2003 Interview Carlson asks Spears what she thought about Iraq and what her followers should do. “Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision he makes and should just support that, you know, and be faithful in what happens.” Tucker followed up with another question. “Do you trust this president?” Spears responds with “Yes, I do.”   Tucker then exclaimed “Excellent.”  The interview was even more awkward than it was to type the words, the body language is clearly not natural. Now, the establishment openly pays influencers to speak the party line, not caring that people know they are in on the take.

Throughout the 2000’s, Tuckers on-air persona was remarkably different than it was ten years later, even more so from today. Sporting a bowtie and a suit, he reveled in his position among the upper class. “I’m an out-of-the-closet-elitist… I don’t run around pretending to be a man of the people; I’m absolutely not a man of the people, at all,” he stated during a 2008 radio interview. Even after he had joined Fox News as an analyst in 2009, he was still very candid about his role in the media. “I am 100% his bitch. Whatever Mr. Murdoch says I do.” He also showed little respect for right-wingers and their faux populism, which he regarded as an attempt to appeal to working class people by offering them false consciousness. In a 2003 interview he criticized Fox News anchor Bill O’ Reilly, stating:

“I think there’s a deep phoniness at the center of his schtick. It’s built on the perception that he is the character he plays; he is everyman. He’s not right wing, he’s a populist fighting for you against the powers that be… and that’s great as a schtick. But I’m just saying that the moment it is revealed not to be true, it’s over!... Because the whole thing is predicated on the fact that he is who he says he is. And nobody is that person. Especially not somebody who makes many millions a year.”

However, when Carlson replaced O’Reilly in his prime-time slot on Fox News, he adopted virtually the same persona, as a fiery, unpredictable outsider standing up for working people and saying what so many are thinking. However, he largely now identifies Democrats rather than Republicans as the real problem saying, “Democrats have become the party of the elite, professional class”, telling his viewers this while using the phrases “elite” and “liberal elite” interchangeably, a framing tactic deployed frequently now including by politicians such as Ron DeSantis. Quite a departure from his early 2000’s public persona.

For some, Tuckers real purpose is clear. He works to channel popular frustrations away from the real causes of economic hardship into a pointless and perpetual red vs. blue culture war. Media critic Carlos Maza stated this about Tucker:

“The goal of Tucker’s show isn’t to challenge the elite; it is to make sure that you never realize who they are. To get you so mad at atheists, feminists, immigrants, millennials, trans people, pot smokers, college students, vegans, the NFL, Brooklyn witches and Lena fucking Dunham, that you don’t get mad at the people who are actually in charge.”

Essentially, Tucker runs interference and helps promulgate recuperation techniques on behalf of the power elite, like most of our mainstream media.  This much should be fairly self-evident by this point.

In 2019, Dutch historian Rutger Bregman was brought on to the show to criticize the World Economic Forum at Davos, but it did not go as planned after Bregman went off script, highlighting the phony nature of Carlson’s critique. “You are a millionaire funded by billionaires…and that’s the reason you’re not talking about these issues…you are not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem, he told Carlson. “You’re all like I’m against the globalist elite, blah, blah, blah; Its not very convincing.” Tucker replied, “Why don’t you go fuck yourself!”  The interview was terminated and never broadcast, but clips of it can still be found scattered on the internet as of now.

By summer of 2020 Tucker Carlson had the number one watched show in TV News, capitalizing on his coverage of Covid as well as artificial social movements such as BLM and ANTIFA. While Tucker was eventually released with drama from Fox News, which now appears to be a staged departure so he can continue operating as a maverick outside of the legacy media paradigm, he remains a significant force in the public perception psychosphere.

This elite Heyoka has worn hats for media instruments all over the acceptable spectrum, and now he is poised to make his largest splash ever. Setting himself outside of the “establishment”, an entity that a growing number of people recognize encompasses “both” political parties, he can truly captivate their trust and can easily steer them into whatever recuperation technique is being deployed. He now presents himself as a charismatic journalist who seeks only to uncover the truth, acting as if he were a member of the resistance movement alongside such actors as Elon Musk who is currently being hailed as a champion of free speech. Everything he does is part of a larger agenda, one that does not involve disclosing the truth to the common people that he has such disdain for. This large splash, at the least, begins with his interview with Vladamir Putin.

One thing to understand about the way media now operates is that if something comes up that is harmful to the system, it usually no longer gives it the Gary Webb treatment, it generally removes it from the public spectrum by omission. So, when figures from all across the “political spectrum”, from all over the western controlled world came out against his interview with Putin, and the usual suspects came to his defense (i.e. Musk) all within 24 hours, it was clear to me that they want you to look. It is important to note that during this interview there was nothing revelatory gained. What Putin said is the same information that he has spoken to non-western approved outlets since the war officially began. What this tells me is that the west wanted their audiences to know this now through one of their, albeit seemingly outcast, approved channels. This serves some unforeseen utility that may have something to do with a push for peace and a pivot to China, although I certainly do not know for sure. Also, I cannot help but have a growing mustard seed in the back of my mind that questions the true nature of America’s relationship with Russia, but that is certainly in the realm of theoretical.

 What I can say, this interview was the inspiration for writing this article. I wanted it said that people should be very skeptical over Tucker Carlson, because power is indeed moving its hand and it is using Tucker once again as its instrument of facilitation.

Concluding Remarks

                If the reader takes only one thing from this essay, I ask to let it be this. Our social reality is a constructed hall of mirrors, a hive of glass, obfuscation and lies are axiomatic and truth is elusive. Knowing this, we must be very careful with thinking we are NOT watching a performance from anyone we do not personally know. Make everyone prove their authenticity and do not fall for the false trappings of parasocial relationships.

As unbelievable as it sounds, some public personas are indeed constructed for a purpose. Whether it be a mildly extreme case like Tucker or as seemingly mundane as the opinion of a college professor, some people are putting on an act. Perhaps it is just one scene. Maybe it is the whole play.

The essential problem throughout history for those who are not among the power elite, is the uncomfortable fact that we do not see or can imagine the ways we are being manipulated at large. It is only realized by looking backwards after time has lifted the veil of perception, when we can finally see the methods and the weapons of our oppressor. However, by that time when we see beyond the veil, the new unseen methods are already being deployed. Meanwhile, we remain looking from the past into the preset for signs of our enemy, signs we will never see until we internalize that power is always at least one step in front of those who do not have it. We must have a better imagination and not be so trusting. We need to awaken to this reality and become bigger skeptics. The world isn’t as it seems. Reminds me of this powerful truth:

-Few people have the imagination for reality-.

-Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

In closing, I want to mention one moment from Tucker Carlson’s interview with Putin, when Vladimir implied that NATO powers were behind the 2022 bombing of the Nord Stream pipeline. Carlson responded by asking why Putin wouldn’t present evidence of this to the world, so as to “win a propaganda victory?”

“In the war of propaganda, it is very difficult to defeat the United States because the United States controls all the world’s media and many European media.” Putin replied, adding, “The ultimate beneficiary of the biggest European media are American financial institutions.”

Putin is correct. The United States global empire has by far the most sophisticated and effective propaganda apparatus every to have existed, operating with such complexity that most people do not even know it exists. And what does it protect at the end of the line? The money. It’s always the money. From it flows power, control, and the capture of knowledge. Americans are fooled into thinking these things are not true, just as the global public-private partnership scheme intended. Start looking behind the curtain, you might just see OZ.

There is an old joke that goes like this:

A Soviet and an American are on an airplane seated next to each other.

“Why are you flying to the US?” Asks the American

“To study American propaganda.” Replies the Soviet.

“What American propaganda?” Asks the American.

“Exactly.” The Soviet replies