Damn you, Taibbi! I almost choked laughing so hard reading your lede!!! You, sir, are single-handedly restoring pride in American journalism. And that's no damn lie.
I wish a lot more people in powerful positions would get their "comeuppance." But it won't happen. Bill Gates and Epstein, Bill Gates and Covid-19, Bill Gates and Covid vaxes, Bill Gates and farm land, Bill Gates and international organizations---never gonna get the true stories. Even if we did, he'll get away with it.
Soros, all the Clintons, Kennedy's in the pocket of pharma, etc.
Here you go spewing stuff from a firehose like Owens does. Can agree with Gates and any conspiracy you tag to that bastard but your Kennedy is captured by Pharma is inappropriate and a leap too far. You need to thoroughly familiarize his background and those around him. A significant group of Republicans in the Senate are Pharma captured who are OUR problem along with most every Democrat. He's moving as fast as he can. Read some Dr. Robert Malone substack postings.
I wasn't specific about the Kennedy's, but I referred to the ones "in the pocket of pharma." I think a few of the Kennedy's are in the pocket of big pharma, RFK,Jr. exempted. His cousin, Caroline and others who have come out against him are my concern.
Though RFK, Jr. isn't perhaps personally exemplary, he continues to stand up to the onslaught of big pharma and a US congress that has many members attacking him. Witnessing the assassinations of his uncle and his father must have hardened him for this time.
The Macrons have Candace by the short hairs, along with her company, and even perhaps her husband‘s fortune. It ain’t gonna end pretty for Candace, and I for one am popping gallons of popcorn.
Virtually all of my – admittedly tiny – audience who believes in Candace are women. I’ll leave it at that.
She's trying to be another Alex Jones. Except most of what Alex Jones reported was backed by actual evidence and turned out to be, more often than not, true. And . . . note what happened to him.
I think they knew the boy was a loose cannon and chose to do nothing. The impetus is to overturn the Second Amendment. If you need an example of how this comes into play, think Parkland, Charlotte, Ft Lauderdale Airport, Las Vegas, San Bernardino, Pulse, Ohio Christmas Market, Columbine.. immediately following each mass shooting event, an incredibly well organized, well equipped ground swell protest rent a mob appears. Replete with professionally printed placards and synchronistic speeches and echo chamber messaging calling for gun control. In each case, there was ample forewarning of the shooter . They are known to the students , their teachers and administration. And calls have been made to authorities regarding the shooters as being threats to the safety of the students, coworkers, patrons.
Ditto the Christchurch mosque shooter, who was a veteran and expressed his feelings and desire to wipeout Muslims where they gathered to worship. Many calls were made about his plans and he needed to be taken off the streets before he perpetrated an attack. The Ft Lauderdale Airport Shooter went to the FBI headquarters , I can’t remember which city he was flying out of , asking for help. That he was overwhelmed with the desire to perpetrate a mass shooting , feared he was having some sort of mental breakdown and wouldn’t be able to control himself . He wanted them to take him into custody and keep him from hurting innocent people until he had been given treatment and was no longer a threat. He was dressed in his military camp, had ID and was headed to the airport, not trusting his impulse control. The FBI dismissed his concern. Assured him that he was fine because he had enough presence of mind to be “ overly considerate, sent him on his way and when he got off the plane and collected his duffel bag on the tarmac, removed his AK and killed five other passengers.
You are absolutely fucked in the head if you really think people (lets be honest, you want to say democrats or leftists or whatever) wanted so badly to get rid of 2A that they *checks notes* sacraficed 20+ elementary school kids just so that the bad press would carry them over the finish line. Especially considering that literally NO AMOUNT of bad press over horrible shooting events in this country has ever really moved the needle in a meaningful way on that issue. You are completely, and sickeningly deranged. Matt used to have intelligent readers and honestly, this comment section makes me more and more depressed each time I visit...
If you believe our “ vaunted” government is incapable of such grievous activity as a means to an end , you’re very naive. As was I for way too long. I wish I still was.
And no, it isn’t solely a Democrat thing. The real problem is the corruption and sociopathy is so endemic- has been going on for so long without any accountability, we’ve become numb to it. We just retreat to our tribe and blame the other side.
So let’s be honest- because our overlords aren’t. If we remain polarized,we will not survive as a sovereign nation.
I think the pattern of these types of shootings do have a strong element of false flag activity. How many mentally ill LGTBQ are there walking around feeling unsafe while packing an arsenal looking for a school to shoot up. These get shoved into the memory hole so quick it becomes last years news in a heart beat. It's not just our government who are fully capable, but many powerful Oligarch's who are protected by politics, their own cash and a cattle car of lawyers who know how to skirt the law will outsource their dirty work to plenty of Murder Inc. types while sending a checks to the Gates foundation, antifa and BLM to brag to their pals they are working for the greater good while getting massive tax breaks for their philanthpath sensibilities.
Really? I live in S Florida and repeatedly watched this shit go on. Worse, Pam Bondi was the Florida AG at the time and did NOTHING!
Parkland, Ft Lauderdale Airport, Pulse, the shooter’s wife and father, Epstein, Sheriff Scott Israel, Robert Runcie, David Kramer, Brenda Snipes election rigging, Broward/Dade/Palm Beach Tri-County IC Community Cartel,DWS/Awan Bros, David Hogg..
Don’t tell me I’m out of my mind. I wasn’t always like this. But the corruption, special interests, coverups and agenda has been for years.
I began taking notes, writing down dates, names of those involved in episodes seemingly small to very prominent. Ironically, going back to the seventies, certain names intersected over and over. Not limited to Democrats. But the Dems weren’t crazy left back then. The Republicans were Establishment. The religious right became prominent during the Reagan admin and pissed a swathe of the center right, centrist Dems, moderates and libertarians off,( before the went nuts) but it was the Establishment UniParty names that intersected.. even then. And the names invariably involved? Rockefeller, Kissinger, Brezinzski,Carter,Vance,Vernon Jordan,Bush,Gergen,Fauci,McCain,Soros,Clinton,Cheney,Burns,Mueller,Brennan,Wray,Panetta,Hayden,Podesta,Baker,Rumsfeld,McMaster.. On and on.. but it wasn’t until Obama that things began to appear very “ off”. Because they were. And Trump’s 2016 campaign. I was no longer passive. And for the record, I’m no long aligned with either party, but the Dems are now a Death cult. And we so desperately need a “We The People” pragmatic, constitutionally adherent sane, non hyper-ideological , representative party. Led by Enlightenment Rationalists.
If JD Vance becomes the Republican candidate, it’s over. He’s unelectable. I’m very concerned about the TPUSA influence. Pushing sectarian theocracy won’t defeat the CommunoIslamoFascist globalist left. It will drive the centrists, moderates, Independents,on the fence, minorities, women,non-fundamentalist Christians to stay home. Erika Kirk did a terrible injustice. It was bad enough when Trump opted for Vance. Something about him never set right with me. It’s only gotten worse. He did well debating Walz. Tulsi would have ended him within one sentence. The new Rubio would have wiped the floor with him. But had Vance pushed the Christian nationalism , Walz, as stuporous as he was, would have come out ahead.Americans want to choose their candidates. Everybody I’ve spoken with have named Rubio, Tulsi or the combination of.
Agree on the chaos part and damage part. Just insane!! Sadly in today's online World there's not much room for comeuppance particularly when Owens has millions of followers.
I can't imagine what Erika kirk must have thought sitting down with Owens. To force a meeting with Charlie's widow because her lying grift captured the paranoid delusions of so many people.... Words fail.
She, Tucker, Bannon, now Megyn, Alex Jones,Matt Gaetz Lew Rockwell, Raheem KassamMassie, Craig Roberts, Dave Smith are creating so much damage that they are directly responsible for getting innocent people killed. Not only that, but they are influencing elections in UK, AU, Spain, Italy, Germany, France, Austria, Argentina, Poland, Ireland, Canada, Asia,Africa,Latin America and the U.S. Now, Tommy Robinson,LePen,Orban,Milei,Modi,Meloni,AfD,Georgescu,Farage,Eva,Braverman,Truss,Wilders,UAE,Bahrain,Bukele MBS,Rubio,Tulsi,RFK,Musk,Huckabee ,Fetterman,Roseanneyaan Hirsi Al, Reza Pahlavi,Asra Nomani, TrumpTerrell,and every good guy is a bad guy. If anybody thinks this is inconsequential- look at what’s happening to the Heritage Foundation.Im concerned about Vance. I couldn’t stand him to begin with and more so each day.
I don't remember Candice being this nutty until her blow-up up with Ben Shapiro, maybe a year ago. Everyone on that side of the idle seemed to love her. Maybe longer than one year…. Anyway, she has spiraled down the drain…
I appreciate Matt’s take as always, but I am so throughly sick of Owens. My entire X feed is nothing but her…and I have her blocked! Her appeal is a cross between a never ending Scooby-Doo episode and the Psychic Friends Network.
Too bad she didn’t stay focused on Madam Macron’s crotch instead of her despicable shredding of Charlie Kirk’s murder. Shapiro did the right thing in telling her to go scratch and the other talking heads who didn’t should be ashamed.
It's the other way around. Candace used to be crazy, but recently she has become remarkably sane. Matt Taibbi use to be one of the most sane journalist in the world, and he has gone bonkers by denying genocide in Gaza, by treating the Epstein files as nothing important, by categorizing mayor-elect Mamdani as a nutjob communist, and by cheerleading for Wall Street crooks.
You don't actually read Taibbi, do you? Because if you did, you'd realize that everything you say here is completely unconnected from reality. Much like Candice.
I have read every page of 3 books by Taibbi. For many years I regularly followed him on Rolling Stone. I am currently a paid subscriber (but not in the future). I admired Matt back when he was connected to reality.
Matt was not objective about the Mamdani election. He was not objective about socialism. He was not objective when he supported Trump’s illegal bombing of Iran. He is not objective about the plight of the Palestinians. He is not objective about Candace Owens. Sure, she is sometimes a nutcase, but at times she is right on the money. The only things I have skin in are truth, free speech, the public good, and justice.
Don’t worry, he’s canceling his subscription. His conspiracy and lunacy will be gone soon. There seems to be one that pops up from time to time with their bizarre interpretations of Matt’s articles.
The guy literally just argued that one of the defining book "takedowns" of the 2008 financial crisis that Matt wrote was somehow written to aid the Wall Street bankers....that it spent hundreds of pages trashing and dismantling.
Remarkable, isn it…. I try to see all sides of a discussion. I usually fail.. maybe because I’m too hard headed. But, there’s a slight possibility I’m right! See….. there I go again…
You have just outed yourself as a racist genocide denier. You need to look at yesterday's dump of Epstein files, including some of the sloppily redacted material that several observant people have succeeded in uncoving. In a Substack post trashing Mamdani, Matt said he actually wrote Griftopia as a defense of Wall Street uber-capitalism and not to criticize it.
I am a white male socialist. That doesn't exactly make me Candace, who is a black female conservative. And I am criticizing Matt Taibbi from the left, not the right.
The UN defines genocide as acts (killing, serious harm, harsh conditions, preventing births, child transfer) committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group, as such, under the 1948 Genocide Convention, a crime that denies groups their right to exist, shocking humanity and violating moral law. Key is proving the specific intent to destroy the group, not just its members, which is a challenging legal standard. That is exactly what Israel is doing to gaza.
Corruption, bribery, and blackmail at the highest levels of govenment impacts all of us. So is the very real possibility that Epstein was a secret Massad agent. This may or may not be the biggest scandal in American history. Only a fool would brush it off.
Exactly! I've been a loyal and attentive reader, going back to Matt's time at the eXile in Yeltsin's Moscow. But I've just unsubscribed. Nothing to see or read here, I'm not wasting any more time.
Candace's honest and accurate denunciations of Israeli genocide, which influenced Charlie Kirk to follow her lead, and directly led to his state-sponsored assassination, is the invisible elephant in the room, here.
No idea why Matt is echoing all the talking points in the Establishment Echo Chamber. Bye, Matt! Hope you get well soon.
What all of us should have been talking more about is the fact that Charlie Kirk was giving all sorts of hints that he was abandoning his Israel supprt because of atrocities they were committing. For example, TPUSA and the MAGA crowd are overwehmingly pro-life. How can one be pro-life and support the daily massacre of dozens of children. How can one be pro-life and support the deliberate starving of little children while denying them medical care? That's where Charlies was going, and the Zionists just wouldn't let it happen. Candace is actually picking up where Kirk left off. She, not his widow, is honoring his last wishes.
Refusing to comment on the biggest moral issue of our day is complicity. Just look at all the Zionists who are now following Matt. They interpret his stubborn silence exactly the same way I do. And Matt never jumps in to say they are reading him wrong.
So, Matt attracts both racists and non-racists, genocide supporters and opponents of genocide? And why do the opponents of genocide remain silent in the comment sections? And why does Matt refuse to take a position? No one can be neutral on this issue. This is a little like a person saying he or she supports both sexual abuse of children and people opposed to it.
Says you? And what exactly made you a moral authority? I would suggest you need to have respect for reality instead your wanna be “facts” to justify your immorality before you make moral judgments. With your twisted logic, it is easy to say that the Allies committed genocide against the Germans and Japanese in World War II. I suspect you are a denier of the true genocide in WW2.
I absolutly condemn what the Nazis did to Jews. I likewise absolutely condemn what the Zionists through the IDF are doing to the Palestinians. Same thing, different time, different place. But the same damn thing.
IMO if Matt cares enough about protecting the federal "lone gunman" narrative about Charlie Kirk's murder to write an entire article smearing Candace Owens, he must care a lot less about the genocide in Gaza. Granted, he hasn't cheered on the genocide of Palestinians, but it appears to me that his choice of targets says a lot.
When did Matt ever indicate a preference for the "lone gunman" story on Kirk's assassination?
He has simply pointed out that Candace's stream of consciousness "questioning," which smears everyone from Kirk's widow to random Egyptian pilots, has no basis in reality.
I discovered Russell and Keaton when they were filling in for Jimmy Dore and now follow them regularly. As a Christian I respect them just as they respect Christians. So, Merry Christmas to you. Peace on earth, and good will to everyone.
Wow, a humorous Candice Owen take brings tin foil hat guys out in force who chew the drapery as hard as Candice with equal manic intensity.. Did MT post this as a psych op to flush them out? LOL. I doubt it but it discloses the broader cross currents of conspiratorial thought as well as cancelled subscribers who somehow just keep commenting? IMHO this is a value added proposition. Give me more..
Reading his comment sections I get the impression that Matt is attracting a lot of crazies, a lot of racist Zionists who support the genocide in Gaza, and a bunch of hardcore right wingers. This is very different from his former fan club which I felt more comfortable with.
OK, that made me laugh out loud! Good for you! And that’s exactly why I watch Candace at times… Just need a good laugh-and she is likable… that’s enough for my exhausted mind sometimes!, That whole story needs to be investigated because it doesn’t make good sense… It’s both/and- regardless of what we think of Candy, some Charlie things don’t make sense.
Some of history’s greatest psychopaths seemed likeable…at least at first. Remember that guy who used to dress up like a clown for the kids? Gacy, I think his name was.
Mike Huckabee is likeable, but he supports the wholesale murder and starvation of Palestinian chilren. Marco Rubio is likeable, but he is a war criminal.
Exactly what is evil about objecting to the daily murdering of Palestinian childern? Exactly what is evil about questing the official but shaky narrative about the Kirk assssination?
There is no "daily murdering of Palestinian children." It's evil to suggest there is. The vast majority of Palestinian children who have died have died because of Hamas' indifference to their safety.
There is no official but shaky narrative about what happened to Charlie Kirk, nor would there have been in the public's mind but for Owens' pathological lying
IDF soldiers use food trucks as bait to draw Palestiian children out into the open so they can shoot them. They make a game of it: One day they shoot them in the leg. One day they shoot them in the neck. One day they shoot them in the head. Several mass graves have been found with dead Palestinian children blindfolded and shot point blank in the head. Israel is deliberately starving children and poisoning their drinking water.
Quite frankly, very few people on either the left or the right belive the official story about the Kirk assination. Forgive my colorful languange on Christmas, but your comment is bullshit.
What doesn't make sense.? He was shot by Tyler Robinson b/c he (Tyler) was a trans-adjacent sociopath with a trans boyfriend/girlfriend who thought Charlie was full of "hate"...There's both physical evidence and evidence of motive and deliberation.
You know what doesn't make sense--that so many people believe in bullshit conspiracy theories. Or maybe it does make sense, since conspiracy theories are captivating to those too lazy or stupid to bother with facts.
The official narrative is lazy but those that push official narratives don't care because they are never held to account. It's the great and never-ending gaslighting. Everyone knows the official story about JFK is BS and yet it's never been officially admitted to. There are so many examples of the official story being total bullshit but as long as these mother effers don't admit it it's not true. Gaslight Gaslight Gaslight. Were all crazy. Right? That's what they want us to think.
Just like the official narrative of Covid was bullshit and the safe and effective narrative is bullshit. Did we not all just live through the same pysop? Did we all not just witness a mass poisoning of the population? I've hot plenty of receipts.
I am open minded about what is the truth because we've been lied to for so long that most of us has no clue what the truth is and every time I think I am at the bottom of what the truth is, there's more.
As for Candace. I am not writing her off as crazy. They want us to think she's crazy because of the things she shares that are not for public consumption. I tend to think she must be over some target because otherwise they would just ignore her. But instead every influencer, podcaster, independent journalist is speaking out against her all at the same time with the same exact talking points.
The coordinate takedown seems too obvious.
I am forever a skeptic and will almost never believe the official narrative. Official narratives are created to protect the officials.
Considering we’re all subscribed to this substack, we all know that “official” narratives can be outright lies. No argument there. The last ten years have proven that without a doubt. I don’t blame anyone at this point who instantly questions the narrative behind any major event. Our own media outright lie to us and lies by omission.
Do I believe there are evil people combing the dark corners of the internet looking for people to goad into murdering prominent people? Yes. The Trump assassination attempt is just one. The digital footprint of these people is conveniently wiped. No one has to wonder why that is and you’re right to question it.
I understand questioning certain things, but when she got into blaming his widow and some Egyptian planes, then she’s just wading into clickbait dollars and loses credibility. Making a circus of his murder is gross. There is going to be a criminal trial of the accused individual and casting doubt over nonsense will turn that trial into the second circus. In my opinion this makes her no better than Alex Jones. I have a good friend whose kids were in the Sandy Hook school, and to think that parents of those murdered kids had to produce death certificates because of the trouble Jones caused them is unimaginable.
Legitimate questions are necessary for everyone who values the truth and benefit all of us. Outrageous money grabs benefit the few at the expense of many.
I suggest you listen to the Joe ROgan with Alex Jones and young Jamie fact checking in real time. Sandy Hook was a huge screw up which Jones admitted, but he is correct more often than not. Alex is crazy, no question, but he is not in the Candace zone. She is malicious.
Very sorry about your friends, that is really rough.
Alex has been right on many things, and he admitted that he was wrong on Sandy Hook. I don't find him crazy at all. He is very passionate, which sometimes comes across as unhinged, but he is definitely sane.
"one thing of the 'official narrative' things I list here was proven to not be true so all the other things I've listed that lack one single shred of evidence supporting me are probably also not true"
"when people write crazy people off as crazy they must be threatened by them."
Fertile ground for lying grifting demagogues like Candace. So, so sad
That gun and its bullets would have shot his head off. Nobody behind him got a spot of blood spattered onto them. The official story makes exactly ZERO sense- not to mention much of it has been debunked or had video "go missing". You'd have to be sound asleep to believe the official narrative.
Janine, please do just a little research before you make crazy statements. Charlie was NOT shot in the head! The TPUSA employee who dove on Charlie to stick in his hand and dress his wound (yes, I saw the video) had blood on his hands and clothing. The bullet never left his body as it collided with the cervical bones and ultimately shattered while still in the body. Read the autopsy report. You are the one who is sound asleep.
Has the autopsy report been released?? Strangely, no one has been able to confirm an employee stuck in his "hand" to dress a wound as you say -- did you see the size of the neck wound ... a hand makes NO sense! There is no video of a "dressed wound" & as another exercise, do a time lapse, count the seconds, watch the movements & determine the likelihood of enough time/space to perform that act. Further, there is a video of the "employee" purporting to do that shows no sign of blood on his hands in the most validated close-ups. It's like Mikey's father describing Mikey w "blood all over" -- Mikey who walked away w/in a few seconds & was nowhere near Charlie as he was pushed to the ground by security, which shooed away EMTs, btw!
As you advised Janine, "do a little research"! There are many more data points of import in this matter. She misspoke -- you misspoke+
The rifle claimed as the weapon would have blown his head off, EVEN WHILE HITTING HIS NECK. Everyone behind him would have been covered in blood. The autopsy is not public information, so whoever you are parroting about that either has you completely duped or is a co-shill for whoever you are working for. No human cervical bones would have stopped a 30 06 bullet at the distance claimed. Why do you know none of that OR Why are you lying about it?
A young person like Tyler Robinson, who may be on the autism spectrum, was noted by several people who saw the family video of him reading out loud the full college scholarship acceptance letter. He was bright, scholarly, and articulate. The text messages made complete sense.
Just out of curiosity, instead of a lone nut with a gun, how many thousands of conspirators do you believe were involved in the Charlie Kirk assassination (and “coverup”)?
These "bullshit conspiracy theories" proliferate because the official story on Charlie's assassination doesn't make sense -- like virtually every major news event over the past 20 years.
Does it make sense that there were searches in DC and Israel for Tyler Robinson days before CK’s murder? Or in Israel months earlier for the doctors at local hospitals?
Does it make sense the judge appointed counsel for the defendant even though a crack team of criminal attorneys offered their services pro bono because they saw the evidence as being flimsy at best?
There are conspiracies, but Robinson killed Charlie. The conspiracy is who is pushing the trans agenda, assassination ideation and what is the end game- no pun intended. This is the creation of an assassin creed. I’ve been tracking it since Sandy Hook. None of it is “ organic” the killers are being recruited, manipulated, propagandized and trained. All share a personality type. Nerds, wallflowers, weak, medicated, troubled.
Sandy Hook. Parkland. Nikolas Cruz was an outcast. He had issues. Dylan Roof - Charlotte AME Black Church. Tree of Life Synagogue, Uvalde, Tennessee Christian School, Las Vegas Country Music Shooter, Buffalo Supermarket shooter, Strawberry Festival, Ohio Christmas Market Shooter, Ft Lauderdale Airport Shooter,DNC/RNC Pipe bombs,Thomas Crooks Pennsylvania Trump assassination attempt. Mar a Lago would be assassin, arsonist who firebombed Shapiro’s home, the Israeli Embassy aides gunned down in front of museum, firebomber in Colorado,assassination of two national guards in DC, Luigi Mangione, Pulse Nightclub shooter, Ft Hood Shooter, Brown University Shooter, Minneapolis congressional member and husband shooter,New Orleans car ramming. Congressional baseball practice shooter,Texas ICE shooter who accidentally killed the detainees,the judge who’s husband was killed, Colombine shooter
No way ANY of these were not groomed. Look at their photos. You cannot help but see the similarity . It’s as though they have been brainwashed. Their eyes are vacant, they’re all homely but for Mangione. The young ones have bad skin. Very rare in this day and age. The trans thing. Somebody knows something and nobody is doing anything . It is an agenda. But not the idiocy Candace. Tucker Bannon, Rockwell, Max Blumenthal, Greenwald, Roger Waters, Mamdani, Code Pink, Dore ,Massie, Kim Iversen,Dave Smith, Mandy Patinkin, Cynthi a Nixon and now, sadly, Neil Oliver is parroting
I agree with you that she is likable. I also think maybe Candace goes overboard and maybe that's the point. She's on someone's payroll for sure. But who? However, something is shady with the Charlie hit just like JFK. I don't believe Tyler shot Charlie.
Yeah, I don’t really believe it either unless what that surgeon allegedly said about a frangible bullet is true. I’ve also been wondering what her real motive is given the path of destruction she is leaving in her wake. Like Matt said, we dont want to believe in nothing. I think it’s psychologically destructive.
I think if you access X via the web you can mute particular words, and thus reduce the references to Owens in your feed. I muted “Kardashian” years ago to eliminate frivolous nonsense from mine.
Or cancel your account, which I did. After walking The Camino, social media has started getting removed and X was the first to go. The peacefulness was to precious, so Matt I’m counting on you to keep me informed. You, I’m keeping.
I’m thinking of canceling all of my socials. There’s no other media I trust, and there are a few local news accounts on X I follow that I know are doing the job that the media should be doing.
I trust Matt which is why I’ll never get rid of this account.
Really. Maybe the pro bono crack team of attorneys were looking for something? Some form of pay off at some time. But you obviously know way more about the Kirk case than I do
My opinion is still Owens is off on this matter. My wife believes her. It seems women tend to believe her I’m not sure why.
My question is WHY was she so focused on Madam Macron's crotch. Who cares really, in this world of crazier matches than that, i.e. Bill and Hilly.
But I do wonder why Erika K is spending so much time trying to defend TPA and herself in too many talk shows in Legacy Media and podcast-land when she should be grieving and caring for her 2 kids who just lost a father. Just saying.
Macron crotch: absolutely no idea. It’s the last thing I want to think about. I’ll leave thinking about it to Emmanuel and Candace.
Erika: I suspect she’s forcing herself to stand up and keep moving. If she allows herself to fall apart then those kids lose even more than they already have lost.
No matter what Erika does people will condemn her. Mothers can't win. If they work, they are neglecting kids, if they stay home, they are wasting their lives. I agree that it would help with the grief to carry on the mission. None of us has any idea how much she is with the kids.
Exactly. How Erika chooses to deal with the public execution of her husband and the running of his company is her business. She’ll be judged no matter what she does.
Maybe diving in is helping her cope. Everyone has their ways. Sitting and grieving may not be hers. She’s in charge now and I think she needs to go full steam ahead
Because it's relevant to the BIGGER story of a major conspiracy that's been being perpetrated against us regular folk by the elite class for centuries - Macron was groomed to become president by the Rothchilds and Brigitte is his handler - Brigitte, formerly Jean Michel Trogneau. Note as well that Owens is reporting on this using a book written by French journalist Xavier Poussard, who has NOT been sued for liable or defamation by the French First Lady. Jean Michel Trogneau transitioned when he was about 30 years old (so 1975 give or take) and many years later Brigitte magically appears on the scene as a teacher at Macron's school. It's clear that she's still undergoing transition in the photos from that time. She/he was 47 (not 36 or 39 as reported) and he was 14 when Brigitte left her existing family for him. The official reports all changed her and his ages to make it sound more palatable and not like what it was, pedophilia. His birth certificate was changed when he transitioned and reports her DOB as 13 April 1953, which "coincidentally" is the date the MKUltra program officially began.
This is the worst piece you have ever written….i have enjoyed your writing for years, and I find you one of the few worth following these days.
Having said said, what the fuck was that you just wrote? Ridiculing a podcaster who is raising legitimate questions about a sketchy FBI non-investigation into the biggest political assassination of our century is really below you. All of a sudden, we are supposed to trust the same organizations that gave us the 9-11 bullshit, COVID bullshit, JFK murder bullshit? You trust Kash et al. to tell us the truth? Really? The only reason Candace has hunches and guesses and dreams and what not is because every single piece of relevant information regarding the alleged assassin has been buried, disappeared and so on. I sure as hell don’t know what happened, but I, and every sane rational person on the planet know what did NOT happen, and what did not happen is what the authorities are peddling.
If Candace interests you enough to write an article, how about you examine, critically, some of her theories and questions and compare what she is doing against the crap that the Feds and TPUSA are dishing out? How about going back to real journalism instead of piling on one of the few honest people left on the public sphere? Candace may be wrong about every single one of her theories and guesses and hunches, but at least she is asking the questions, and is sincere in trying to get to the bottom of who murdered her friend. Why don’t you do the same?
I'm going to answer at length, so people understand why I'm laughing at Candace Owens instead of engaging with her “questions” or comparing her work to "the crap that the Feds and TPUSA are dishing out," as you put it.
Like a million other older reporters I was raised to follow certain rules. The rules are there to protect both the public (from unfounded, irreversibly damaging accusations) and the reporters (from making mistakes). The number one rule is you can't make serious claims without evidence, especially when the reputations of people are involved.
If I wrote an article in the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal or even in Racket saying the FBI, the French Foreign Legion, and Erika Kirk were somehow involved in Charlie Kirk's assassination, and then admitted on national television as she did that this was done without "concrete evidence," I'd be sued into oblivion.
It was once understood that the penalties for this behavior, called "actual malice" in the landmark NYT v. Sullivan case (which made "reckless disregard" for the truth the standard for punishment) should be so high that it would cripple the career of anyone who engaged in it.
Why should the penalty be so high? Because when you print or say things about real people, it can have a devastating impact on their lives. If you’re in the media business you should want to be careful, you should want to be right, because you should fear having a mistake on your conscience. If you lack that fear, there’s something wrong with you, and you shouldn’t have a big audience.
Many years ago I wrote a jokey little sports column for alt-weeklies about crimes committed by athletes. It wasn’t investigative and most of the entries were just 300-400 words based on published items. Once, I ran a bit about a sports figure caught up in a sex scandal, based on someone else’s published report. That other story turned out to be wrong, which meant I was wrong.
The victimized person arranged through lawyers to speak to me on the phone. The agreement was, no lawsuit, but I had to listen to a comprehensive description of all the pain and damage that story had caused this person. I was devastated as I listened to the story of what just this one little wrong story had done to a marriage, a family, a career, the questions it inspired from kids, and so on. This person’s idea was that maybe I would learn something and be more careful in the future.
Thinking of that, I get extremely pissed off when I see “influencers” accusing people not of infidelity but complicity in murder based on “I’m sensing.” That is not the behavior of someone who cares about the truth.
This leads to your comment, “Candace may be wrong about every single one of her theories and guesses and hunches, but at least she is asking the questions, and is sincere in trying to get to the bottom of who murdered her friend. Why don’t you do the same?”
This “asking the questions” trope is just plain wrong. There is a right way and a wrong way to “ask questions.” If you suspect someone of a crime you have to dig, dig, dig until you find something concrete, and if you don’t find that thing, you have to walk away. You can’t just say, “A weird thing happened over here, therefore this person over here is suspect…”
That’s malice. We don’t do that for the same reason grand jury proceedings are secret (another thing people seem not to care about anymore). We’re supposed to care about whether or not we’re hurting people with accusations. If a person is innocent, if there isn’t enough evidence to indict someone, it’s better that no one know they were ever suspected, because in the mass media age, you can convict on suspicion alone.
Then there’s the trope, “If you criticize X, you must believe the ‘official story.’” As you put it, “All of a sudden, we are supposed to trust the same organizations that gave us the 9-11 bullshit, COVID bullshit, JFK murder bullshit?”
Anyone who reads this site knows I look critically at official statements. On the Covid front, I had a lot of questions about what happened, but I didn’t proceed by just lobbing accusations. I worked with people like Michael Shellenberger and Alex Gutentag to put out the texts of the scientists who wrote the seminal Nature article asserting zoonotic origin, showing even they thought a lab leak was “so friggin’ likely.”
Later I worked for months with a CIA whistleblower who was unfortunately constrained for a variety of reasons in being able to speak freely, but still was able to show (again with Michael and Alex) that even CIA investigators were pressured away from the lab-leak story. We did other stories, including some about early Covid patients at Wuhan, but always we printed only what we could back up. It is an agonizing, time-consuming, frustrating process, and one other reason I get frustrated by people like Candace – they make it seem like “investigating” can be an instant procedure.
It isn’t, if you care to avoid getting things wrong about people. If your investigative method is casually defaming people to the point where they publicly beg you to stop, you’re not interested in what’s true, you’re up to something else.
That person deserves ridicule. Responding in any other way tends to legitimize the activity.
Brilliant story and rebuttal Matt. Thanks for sharing. I wish you had started your article with this personal experience you had, I think it would have added weight to it.
This is not the same courageous Matt who I once followed on Rolling Stone. There has been a major personality change. Matt has become a spokesperson for Israel and Wall Street and a strong supporter of the uber-capialist and imperialist status quo.
Oh, please. Give it a rest, man. You're spamming every comment thread on this post. What are you up to now, 100 comments?
We get it -- Matt isn't adequately outraged about the Gaza "genocide." He falls short of the moral compass you follow. Understood.
Believe me, we ALL understand your take, even if many of us don't agree. Dude, sometimes less is more -- have faith in the articulation of your take and let it gestate.
Matt, I appreciate this response, and I'm a loyal reader and someone with a ton of respect for your work over the years. But you need to come out and say it: You either believe there are legitimate questions about this assassination, or you don't.
If you believe there are legitimate questions (why the weird text messages? why no exit wound? why release video of the shooter only after he allegedly pulled the trigger? why did Netanyahu deny immediately?), then you have to admit that Candace is one of the few asking them with determination. She might not be following your preferred journalistic methods (which are honorable), but she nevertheless deserves support as she investigates, not ridicule. At the very least, hands-off curiosity might be the proper approach, as she might just uncover the truth.
On the other hand, if you don't believe there are legitimate questions about this assassination, and you think the FBI is telling us the full story, then why not just let it go? Why not ignore her and let her drive her own truck into a ditch? Instead, you're smearing Candace in much the same way you suggest she's smearing Erica Kirk.
As it is, I don't want to jump to conclusions, but it appears you could be running interference for the establishment and/or one of the many arms of the Israel lobby.
It's perplexing to say the least. To watch this substack go from an anti-establishment juggernaut to trying to cover up both the Epstein files and the Kirk assassination at the same time. Merry Christmas I guess 🤷♂️
Candace is con artist with an anti-Semitic agenda. Have you ever noticed she only asks questions and only ever asks then in a way that furthers her narrative and agenda?
If you care about accuracy rather than tribal cheerleading there is an easy test to run when trying to determine if someone is worth listening to: have you ever heard them admit they wrong, agree with someone based on the merit of their argument despite clashing ideologies or criticize themselves or people in their own ideological tribe when it is going to ruffle feathers?
In other words, does this person ever say or do anything that could hurt them politically, financially or reputationally because it is the right thing to do?
If you cannot honestly say “yes” you are listening to an Alex Jones or an MSNBC talking head that will say whatever furthers their narrative and increases their ratings. That not someone whose words or arguments should ever seriously form your own viewpoints. They are modern day social media Jerry Springers with even less decency yet discussing exponentially more important topics.
Thank you for expressing my exact thoughts. Taibbi's current trajectory (not to mention the unfortunate biases of his current readership) has been devastatingly disappointing. After my annual subscription expired, I switched to monthly just to see where he (and they) were headed. After this article, I think it's time to unsubscribe altogether. So sad.
You seem to be a bit dense. Matt answered your questions in the post you are replying to. The point is Candace is not “investigating” anything, she is just lobbing unsubstantiated allegations and smears and hunches, because that produces revenue in the podcast world. Matt’s point is that you don’t run your mouth about what you are “sensing” until AFTER you have done the hard work of actually investigating and have evidence to support your “hunches”.
This from the guy who has said equally outrageous things about mayor-elect Mamdani as well as uttery insane and untrue things about the so-called evils of socialism? This from a genocide denier, who refuses to see what seems obvious to all the rest of the world except for ardent Zionists? This from a man who argues that the Epstein matter is at bottom a nothing burger? I have lost all respect for this journalist I once admired. And I have actually gained a little respect for Candace Owens. For all her faults, she is currently making the world a better place by asking tough questions. Matt isn't.
Go back and read Matt's scathing takedown of Mamdani after he was elected mayor. It was vicious.
In order to spread capitalism the US has killed more than 20 million people in 37 victim nations since World War II. Since 1945, capitalist America has perpetrated 297 invasions of foreign countries and at least 60 coups. Capitalist US and EU sanctions have killed 38 million people since 1970. Lenin correctly said the highest stage of capitalism is imperialism. Capitalists invade other countries to steal their resources, get cheap labor, and force them into debt. Socialists don't invade other countries. They don't kill for profit. And all this nonsense about Mao killing millions is just propaganda. So as a socialist I am now celebrating the birth of the Prince of Peace. I extend goodwill wishes to everyone, inclulding you, even though you apparently hate what I am.
Matt lived in the former Soviet Union. He knows more about the horrors of “socialism” and its corrosive effects on society than you could ever care to know.
Matt was in Russia in the 1990s when capitalist shock therapy was being rammed down Russia's throat. It was their worst and most miserable time since the Tsars. Everything was being privatized, sold off to Russian and American oligarchs who didn't give a damn about the common good. Desperate men were on the streets trying to sell single cigarettes in order to buy food for their families. Russians who had lived through Stalin's regime and the 90s almost universally believed they had been far better off under Stalin when they had jobs and govenment services. As someonewho has read Marx and studied socialism at great length, I feel confident in saying Matt, inspite of his high intelligence, doesn't know shit about socialism.
Additionally, this is the guy who loves the first amendment unless it’s enjoyed by genocide protesters on college campuses. He calls Bari Weiss critics “jealous losers “ while praising her work. Which is incessant Israeli propaganda.
He is now riding shotgun in the Michael Tracy pedophile obfuscation clown car. Where if victims are sluts then forget everything you know about black mail and mossad connections exposed daily by dropsite and others. This from the same cunt who told viewers that Gaza wasn’t his expertise. If Taibi, TP USA, Ben Shapiro and Israel are pearl clutching Candace, then knowing nothing else about her, I’d say she’s over the target.
I plan to be subscribing to racket until it goes bankrupt. Hooray for free speech.
One of the often overlooked attractions of anti-semitism is the self-assured, self-righteous clarity it gives its most ardent adherents. I mean, if you lack the normal gag-reflex decent people feel about racist ideologies, anti-semitic ferver does provide morons a nice, clear, black-and-white view of the world to embrace. I’m sure that is refreshing for people with low-powered brains in a world where nuance and complexity require constant data processing, analysis and adjustments to one’s stances.
Every dilemma can be approached by the simple question, “Are there Jews involved?” If yes, then their side of the debate is “Evil” and the other side is “Good” and nothing else matters.
If you don’t actually care about being correct or joining one of the most loathsome groups in both modern and ancient human history: Jew haters and anti-semitics. 🤷♂️
How dare you call me a Jew hater! I admire the Jewish faith. Here are some prominent Jews who, like me, strongly condemn the ongoing Zionist genocide in Gaza: Medea Benjamin, Max Blumethal, Norman Finkelstein, Glenn Greenwald, Ilan Pappé, Katie Harper, Jill Stein, Naomi Wolf, Noam Chomsky, Daniel Levy, previously a peace negotiator for Israel and now a prominent critic; Gabor Maté, physician-psychotherapist-author; Aaron Maté, his award-winning journalist son; Wallace Shawn, playwright and actor; Amy Eilberg, American rabbi and activist; Peter Beinart,one of the organizers of Jews Demand Action; Naomi Klein, progressive Canadian writer; Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro, author of The Empty Wagon: Zionism’s Journey from Identity Crisis to Identity Theft; Yuval Abraham, co-director of No Other Land, the documentary that won an Oscar in 2024. Jewish Voice for Peace, the Jewish Bloc, The International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network, Jews for Justice for Palestinians, Jews Against the War on Gaza.
Listing a bunch of American Jews(mostly) doesn't mean anything. They are far away from Israel. Why don't you check with the (majority) Misrahi Jews who always lived in the ME? You know, the ones who got purged from Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt,.etc. Ask them how they feel?
Many of the Jews I mentioned live in Israel. Israel is a settler-colonial project filled largely with European Ashkenazi Jews who have no genetic or historical connection to the Levant. The indigenous people of the Levant (the so-called "Holy Land") are the Palestinians. What Hitler did to the Jews in Europe, the Zionists are now doing to innocent Palestinians. Whie Judaism is a beautiful religion, Zionism is pure evil. It acts in defiance of the Ten Commandments. Thou shalt not covet. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not kill. Zionism is a Jewish heresy. The founder of Zionism was actually an atheist. Christian Zionists also are heretics. Now why don't you ask some Palestinians how they feel about being murdered, driven out 0f their homes, and having their land stolen.
Love that picture of your hero Noam with Epstein. Tells you all you need to know about how ethical Chomsky is. And isn’t Epstein Mossad? Why would Chomsky be buddy buddy with a Zionist?
I never said Chomsky was my hero, though I have read him extesively. I admire much of his writing, but not all. If Chomsky was a participant in the sexual abuse of underaged women, I would call that shameful and disgusting.
Matt has a much better journalistic history, but currently Candace is moving in a good direction and Taibbi is moving in a bad direction. Matt has become moral coward. He, for example, won't say anything critical of Israel. We should all be asking why.
I ain't no bot, and I disagree with many of the ridiculous things Candace has said over the years. Candice is right-wing, and I am left-wing. But lately she has been right more than Taibbi, who I used to admire. I strongly support your decision to ignore me, so go away.
The irony of this, "Because when you print or say things about real people, it can have a devastating impact on their lives", after your demonstrably false statement about Candace from the article:
"After spending most of the last few months implying that Erika Kirk somehow had guilty knowledge of the plot to kill her husband"
Baseless claim. Candace had not "implied" jack shit about Erika, and certainly not about "guilty knowledge" of a plot to kill her husband, prior to these recent few weeks of media blast/sitdown/follow up. Megyn Kelly called Ben Shapiro out as a liar for saying the exact same thing, because it's not true.
You don't care about accuracy. This is Bari Weiss level "but she's an Assad Toady" shit.
Nah. Here's a collection of links to reporting on Candace Owen from October, stirring the pot around Erika Kirk, "just asking questions" and raising doubts about her behavior. Owens made no direct assertions of guilt but repeatedly raised implications about Erika Kirk's knowledge and behavior.
Your own link clearly says this isn't true: "The available analyses characterize Owens’ rhetoric as personal and confrontational, asserting Erika “can’t handle the truth” or is invested in preserving a particular narrative.... ".
The reality is, the statement: "Candace has spent MOST of the LAST FEW months implying that 'Erika Kirk' somehow had guilty knowledge of a plot" is a completely incorrect thing to say, by all measures. Saying that once or twice, since Charlie's death, that she "veered close to saying Erika was perhaps not letting on all she knew, or trusting the FBI/TPUSA people too much, would be accurate.
This is a falsely framed statement, and he knows it. Unless he doesn't know it, because he has not seen any of her last few months of podcasts and is taking a verbal "she's totally an Assad toady" generalization from someone he trusts but shouldn't. Megyn Kelly looked into after Shapiro first made this false claim, and rightfully called him a liar, at the time.
Bollocks, I enjoyed your cherry pick from the linked article and your picayune parsing of Taibbi's standard hyperbole. Nice try, but... Nah.
In the spirit of the holidaze, I'm going to give you a gift: the slightest clue.
Let's start with the linked article. You concede that Owens was repeatedly critical of Erika Kirk (this was the point of the article). Criticism implies wrongdoing. What sort of wrongdoing? Let's take a look at the sources cited, what Owens said, and the implications.
10/06: Owens questions Erika Kirk: “What Kind of a Widow Would Not Want the Truth?” Implication: Erika Kirk doesn't want the truth, because she already knows what happened (as revealed by Candace Owens).
10/08: Owens asks, "What kind of widow would not want the truths of her husband's murder to come out?" Implication: Erika Kirk doesn't want the truth to come out; in other words, she may be hiding the truth (as revealed by Candace Owens).
10/15: Owens mocks how Erika was doing photo shoots hours after Charlie Kirk's death while Candace was raising crucial questions. Implication: Erika Kirk is more interested in promoting herself than in her husband's death. In other words, Erika Kirk's behavior shows that she isn't particularly concerned about her husband's death, pointing toward some kind of guilty knowledge (of the truth as revealed by Candace Owens).
I think that's enough to make my point. Candace Owens is a vile, self-promoting fabulist. You are her pathetic fanboy, so insecure that you can't possibly admit that you might be wrong, let alone that you have been fooled by a charlatan.
'Saying that once or twice, since Charlie's death, that she "veered close to saying Erika was perhaps not letting on all she knew, or trusting the FBI/TPUSA people too much...'
Implications are vague by definition. What you said above is an implication.
Saying once or twice in the span of dozen's of hours of podcasts, that Erika is "trusting the narrative" is an implication that she doesn't seem to have an interest in finding out who killed her husband. That could be for personal grief/faith, career, or any number of head-in-the-sand reasons. It's not even remotely akin to his quote that she was, "spending MOST of the past few MONTHS, implying Erika Kirk in on some sort of plot".
Obviously, Megyn wouldn't have stood up for Candace if she had been doing that, and Erika likely wouldn't have met with her either...
I have a hard time believing that any decent honest person would have a problem with what you wrote here. It makes sense in a time that doesn't. Nicely done.
“…one other reason I get frustrated by people like Candace – they make it seem like “investigating” can be an instant procedure.”
She never said it is instant and she makes theories and circumstantial evidence public to crowdsource the process.
Charlie Kirk's assassination was a monumental event and you're a damn good journalist. Put your talent to use instead of focusing on the person investigating, which is a distraction. If Candace is doing such a poor job, set an example and do it YOUR way.
Excellent Matt. You and a few others are reminding us what a journalist ought and ought not do. I consider this to be important. It’s the reason that I’ve never listened to Owens, turned off Carlson, and become very skeptical of Rogan. Baseless “that’s just a fact” flying everywhere.
I would advise you (if you don’t mind), to not feel obligated to debate the conspiracy guy. You’ll get nowhere, as I’m sure you know. However, for the thinkers in the audience, thanks.
What I hear in your article is contempt. Matt, you called Charlie Kirk an “influencer.” Seriously? He built the most powerful conservative youth outreach organization this country has ever seen. He was responsible for MAHA joining MAGA. He was responsible for Trump picking JD Vance as VP. He was a coalition builder and he was the glue that held the various factions of the republican party together. As you can see they immediately fell apart. He had influence all right, but he was not making TikTok videos about Italian cooking. So you might wonder if any groups of people wanted to wrest control of TPUSA away him. Like the MIC since he spoke against war? Or the Israeli government since he spoke about the odd circumstances around Oct 7 on the PBD podcast? Is it weird to you that freaking nobody seems interested in what really happened except Candace? It does to me.
Matt, I’ve been a longtime reader and supporter of your work. I value both your wit and the civility you maintain during hostile congressional hearings. That said, your coverage of Candace feels like a misstep and diminishes the strengths that usually define your work. I hope you reflect on the direction you want to take moving forward.
I suppose if I were to take a journalism course at a reputable school, I would learn about everything Matt noted in his response, except perhaps, the personal story about getting it wrong and the damage inflicted on an innocent person. It’s a good thing we have people with integrity like Matt who still play by the rules. Thank you.
Actually I don’t think I do need to express an opinion about that. There will be a trial that either will or will not prove someone’s guilt, and we’ll go from there.
I’ll add that it’s very easy to make piles of suspicious-sounding assertions and much harder to make a coherent case for one version of events. I’m also cognizant that rumors about Israeli involvement spread with light speed through the media world before Kirk was even dead, and that case isn’t convincing to me.
Matt, you expressed strong statements about Russiagate (and I agreed with you on that one) but there has been no trial, no legal proof of guilt. You also expressed strong opinions about Democrats censoring comments on X (Twitter). There also rothing there that has been poven in a court of law, but I support you on that one, too.. Also, you said it was just fine with you when Trump bombed Iran. (That one was pehaps the most disgusting thing you have ever said.) The official narrative about the Kirk assassination has more holes in it than a chunk of Swiss cheese. Perhaps Candace says too much. You say too little.
Well, Matt, asking questions is the first part. Of both journalism and the scientific method. Asking questions is healthy and important, and it generally shouldn't elicit criticism by others in the field unless they have a vested interest in the status quo.
You're right that it's far harder to make a coherent case for one version of events than to point out flaws in the received establishment version. That doesn't make pointing out flaws wrong. Again, it's the first step on the path of investigative journalism.
Many of us here would just like you to do this -- provide your assessment of the facts of the Kirk assassination case -- even if you're unprepared or unwilling to attempt to make a convincing case for one specific version or theory of the event.
But if you don't want to touch the case at all, that's fine too, but then leave it be. Don't cast aspersions at one of the few people willing to stick her chin out for the sake of uncovering the truth.
The insane clown journalist has earned his $7000 dollars again. Save your money. And all the numb nuts stupid enough to work for you should work on their resumes. My contempt for your work reaches new lows every week. You can make an argument that Zionists weren’t involved. The problem is that Netanyahu was denying involvement so vociferously that he interjected Israel into the matter. That’s not a rumor. Egypt jets full of Jews are chasing Erika all over hell. If that’s not true, better tell Tucker, tough guy. Bring your disheveled new friend Michael Tracy. The FBI sucks ass. Go write that story. Looks like the orange savior is going to let comey, clapper and friends shit in your stupid face…again. Write that story. Or would that be awkward for the gypsy and his library of Congress job interview? You worthless so-called journalist.
Joe has to be Candace under a fake name, right? No one can really believe this crap. Matt is spot on to skewer her, although I'm a little concerned it just gives her that little more attention. I'm convinced the whole phenomenon is mostly a case of people wanting to see what she/does says next, a la Jerry Springer.
People like you and Candace are afraid of how chaotic reality is. You and she need to believe that someone is in control, even if that somone is an evil cabal of Jews/reptiles/illuminati etc. The reality that no one is really in control, and that bad things can be done by bad people even in the most powerful nation in the world, is too unsettling. The idea that some loser can just kill someone like Kirk, for pretty mundane reasons, and that no one could have stopped him, just cant be real to people like you. You're deeply afraid of chaos and vulnerability.
You are pathetic if you cannot see that our government- especially Congress is controlled by outside forces and is not doing the will of the people. And how do you suppose those outside forces operate, by calling the Congressmen on the phone and talking to an intern maybe? Stop being so naive. Charlie Kirk wasn't even hit by a bullet from the gun they are claiming. Wake up already.
Listen pal at some point there is nothing left other than “name calling”. If I saw a child stumble into the street I’d holler. If you think what Owens and her ilk are selling is worthy of being considered go ahead and cough up. But you’re nuts. It’s just as simple as that.
Not a single intelligent rebuttal of the claims- only insults. The issue is not those who question the narrative; the issue is those who blindly swallow it and then shout down the thinkers.
You might want to read the comment and come to a little better understanding of the world you actually live in as opposed to the fairey tale world in which the FBI tells you the truth about political assassinations.
"Congress is controlled by outside forces and is not doing the will of the people."
I think Janine has a valid point there. Consider the Epstein vote. It was nearly unanimous. But individual members of Congress had to pass a discharge petition to get a vote. Think about that. They had to override leadership to get a vote on something that was near unanimous. Okay, contrast Epstein with the carried interest tax loophole. Obama and Trump both said, when campaigning, they wanted to eliminate it. If we have a congressional vote, it would be eliminated in another near-unanimous vote. But we don't get the vote. No talk at all of a discharge petition to repeal the carried interest tax loophole.
It's seems clear to me that Congress itself (supposedly a reflection of the will of the populace) is not calling the shots.
P.S. I pretty much ignore all the wild speculation about "what really happened." I think most of the time what happened is what appeared to happen. People are bored with reality so pretend to believe nutty stuff to spice up their lives. 9/11 Truthers being the quintessential example.
Calm down. My comment was very clear. I even pulled a quote from the comment to which I was replying. If you have a point to make, you should make it. I can't read minds.
I was alive in high school when JFK was assassinated. We all know Oswald was not the shooter.
Kirk was assassinated by a lone gunman on the roof of the college, and by videos of him leaving the scene. Fingerprints on the remaining bullets and rifle are Robinson's. Usually, the simplest explanation is the correct one. If Charlie was just an ordinary apolitical man, there would be no controversy
Elaine: "We all know Oswald was not the shooter" 'But after that the government would NEVER lie to us. "If Charlie was just an ordinary man" he would not have been assassinated.' Why the heck do you presume you are accomplishing here Elaine Eeek, with your 22 comments?
Wow, this article sure made things interesting, especially the back and forth comments. One things is certain all media engages in some form of speculation and assumptions. Candace Owen’s is on the extreme end of speculation and assumptions. She attracts those folks who need to belong to a group that believes that they have some form of inside knowledge, some inner revelation that others just don’t see or understand. Yes it is Cult like thinking, and it is reinforced the rare times they are correct, but as they say, “even a broken clock tells the correct time twice a day.”
Which group is in the cult? It's a good question. Questioning the proclamations of the FBI and government agencies is not cult-like thinking, it's probably independent critical thinking. Don't take anyone's word for it, that's the key. Think for yourself. If you agree with Candace (as I do) that there are unanswered questions about the Kirk assassination, that doesn't make you part of a cult.
Now, if you believe everything Candace has ever said, and you're handing over your intelligence and a portion of your wealth to her, then yes, you might be in a cult.
All of us here are giving money to Taibbi, so it's probably wiser to ask whether those of us on this forum who blindly believe what Matt is saying here are part of a cult. It is worth considering.
I recognize many of the readers on this thread. Most don’t blindly agree with Matt and/or Walter all the time. There’s debate, it’s part of what I love about this subscription. But honestly. Some of you are whacked. The other thing. If Matt discovers additional info that might convince him alternatively, he’ll freely admit it and report. I’ve witnessed that too.
Agreed, and I'm one of those like you who agrees with much of what Matt writes and has written, and I too do not blindly agree with Matt nor Walter all the time.
I'm a huge fan of independent media in general and my most recent book (Red White & Blind) is on this topic.
I have agreed nearly all the time with Matt on topics ranging from covid to Russiagate to free speech, the Twitter files, censorship, etc. At times I've celebrated his writing and directed friends and colleagues to his work.
It's because of the high esteem with which I hold Mr Taibbi that, in this case, I'm so surprised to find him undermining and smearing a fellow independent journalist who is asking questions of the FBI and other nebulous government authorities. The Kirk assassination, like covid or Russiagate, is a seminal event of our era, and it's essential we understand it accurately. I find it frankly disappointing and weird to see this attitude from this substack, in particular combined with this space trying to minimize the Epstein files earlier this month.
It could just be a place (or two) where I differ with a couple of his honestly held opinions. Sure. But I suggest we also must consider that it's a case of calculated deception by Matt. I'm hoping it's the former, of course, but I'm keeping my eyes open in case it's the latter.
Actually, the cult-like thinking is among the pro-zionists who claim Candace is the crazy one. Consider for a moment that "inside knowledge" might just be from (the MANY) reputable sources who are doing actual investigative work on this issue, unlike the author of this article.
Once again, you are repeating Candace Owens' lies. I will again remind you to do research, like the autopsy report. The bullet came from the Robinson rifle. Period.
There is no publicly available autopsy report. Despite your ignorance, here you are up and down this page pummeling commenters with your misinformation. Over and over and over again. You are in here TWENTY TWO times. Whatever on earth you presume to be accomplishing, not a soul in this chat can figure out.
See? You crave order and predictability, which reality can never give you...so you concoct a fairy tail in which scary (but orderly and predictable) forces are really behind everything
So you are admitting that the usual suspect did it, but you want to use that fact to cast shade on me because I don't believe a completely fabricated chaos theory? Is that really what you are going with? BTW, if they were going for a chaotic-looking assassination, they failed miserably.
You heard Marco, people. “Outside forces” is now a conspiracy theory. There is henceforth no such thing as outside forces in any setting. Everything from now on is organic- no matter what. You heard him!
How does a gangly kid who doesn’t look like he has ever held a gun climb up on a roof at a crowded TPUSA event with supposed security on duty. He then assembles a 30-06 rifle on the roof, takes one shot and hits Charlie in the side of his neck, the bullet doesn’t even exit the neck, and then he climbs down from the roof and is seen by no one, not even a university security camera, and then hides out for two days before confessing to his father? Really?
Sirhan Sirhan is still alive in prison since 1968. RFK Jr and coroner Thomas Noguchi have pronounced Thane Eugene Cesar the real assassin based on evidence (fortunately for Cesar the US has courts of law!)
TERF Owl, how much are you being paid to defend the establishment narratives? It's pitiful and not going well, but I'm just curious because I'm between jobs and might need the money.
I believe Tyler Robinson grew up in a rural area of southern Utah and his grandfather taught him how to shoot as a kid. Wasn't the 30-06 was a gift from his grandfather?
I can see you may never have lived in Utah. They are some of the most naive people you will ever meet. Security was low because,"No one would do anything like that here"
You do realize investigators (the real ones, not podcast grifters) present evidence in something called a court of law to people called "jurors," with standards of evidence, where the accused are innocent until proven guilty. These are fundamentals of our justice system. What she's doing is the opposite of that. The only people who need to be convinced of ANYTHING are the twelve jurors when Tyler Robinson's trial happens. Candace Owens is not necessary for any of that. She's in fact undermining the process by making it fodder for clicks, where she rambles on about vibes. "Theories" are not evidence.
She's also pretty much demonic for attacking a widow and getting her insane clown posse of followers to spread the worst shit about Erika on X.
I try not to hate people, but she is loathsome. I hope she's ruined in the Macron case, and that Erika and TPUSA file suit against her as well.
Well, whatever media you are listening to, Janine, is dead wrong. Probably some purveyor of click bait with no actual proof of anything they are saying.
Meanwhile Katherine has all the proof she needs, given to her by her super-honest and trustworthy social media feed. Or the people who pay her paycheck for shilling regime narrative online.
Yeah, it’s totally normal to behave like how Erika Kirk has behaved. She’s above criticism because she’s a widow selling books, merch, and doing the podcast circuit. That’s the expectation we have for how all widows should act, monetizing the death of their husbands.
She is CEO of TPUSA bc Charlie wanted it. His last book was published. Perhaps she feels a duty to do all this to carry on his legacy. May you be spared this kind of vicious judgement of your own life. You will have to answer for the things you’re saying about her to God someday.
You are completely insane. You think an internet random writing mild criticism of a public figure invokes the wrath of God? Do you worship these people like they are gods, or what exactly is wrong with you?
Tim, I agree that, while I think everyone mourns in different ways and we should not judge them, I am uncomfortable with Erika Kirk and the way she is behaving. I think she is a self-promoter. I simply cannot understand it. I know she has a desire to keep Turning Point going, but she has gone way beyond that.
That said, it is a stretch to exspouse "questions" (more like unfounded claims) about Kirk's nearest and dearest friends and his wife. You and I both know that Candace Owens is saying these things to be provocative and to further herself.
It is odd that you are ready to think that perhaps Erika Kirk had something to do with her husband's murder, but unwilling to think that Candace Owens is acting the provocateur to further her career.
"She is asking questions." No, she is vomiting garbage and implying connections with zero evidence and rationality. She vomits garbage all day and then demands she be proved wrong, a tactic to twist into us a pretzel trying to prove a negative, which is an exercise where one never reaches the end.
They’re either purposely stirring the pot or not real. I wouldn’t worry. You’ll begin to recognize the normal folks that like debate and enjoy w/o nastiness what Matt shares.
Matt isn't even framing the idiotic aspects of Candace's podcast correctly, and chooses to repeat the Shapiro lie/talking point that she's spent "most of the past few months accusing Erika Kirk of being involved in a plot", which is just patently false.
Candace accused/implied zero to do with Erika, until she started on her grieving widow Sabbath book tour a few weeks ago, and started doing canned interviews with Bari Weiss and Fox and friends, mentioning Candace by name...
I'm nearly convinced that Matt is actually being paid by pro-Israel voices at this point. This is pure propaganda about the most popular podcaster in the country (followed by Tucker). It reads very much like his Anti-Mamdani piece- just wrong on core facts and willfully ignoring the obvious reasons for his popularity. Candace did a long sit down with Gaza scholar Norm Finklestein. Tucker recently had on the censored/sanctioned-by-Trump UN rapporteur Francesca Albanese. The reason these folks are so popular is because THEY are the ones standing up and allowing for dissenting voices in a MSM environment that is still actively lying to the American people and denying genocide.
Mr Bollocks. One thing we do know is that Matt puts his name behind his accusations. So now you are “nearly convinced “ that Matt is being paid by pro Israel forces? And your proof of this accusation is what? I can see why you like Candace so much. You have the same moral compass
For those of you interested: Expanding on Candace’s work is Ian Carroll (also excellent reporting on Epstein), Baron Coleman, James Li. Reporting parts of Candace’s work is Jimmy Dore and Kim Iversen. Max Blumenthal has done some investigative work on Charlie’s life.
Max Blumenthal was the first person I heard to suggest that the Israeli lobby was interested in silencing Charlie Kirk. I think it was on a JudgeNap podcast.
I didn’t know who Charlie was prior to his death nor had I ever heard of TPUSA…, nor Piers Morgan! I dislike Piers’ style of “talking over his guests” journalism. I subjected myself to listening to the whole hour before commenting on the short clip Matt posted. Candace stood her ground with him. Matt tends to shut up as do I when talked over.
Thank you for writing this. I have liked and trusted Taibbi on so many things for years, but I honestly don't know what to make of this piece. This is shocking, weak, poor, disgraceful, name calling. I'm stunned actually that Taibbi would be running interference like this for a ridiculously obvious FBI coverrup.
The honest intellectual thing to do is to attempt to answer the questions Candace is asking, or to shut up and let the honest ones ask questions.
Name calling and "conspiracy theory" this and that is anti-intellectual blather that I had hoped was below this gifted writer.
It's pathetic. Either actually jealously for her popularity (as he claimed was the case for those pissed that the idiot/noob Bari Weiss got tapped for CBS, despite having no actual popularity) or something worse.
Also, this and the stuff on Epstein have been some of the weakest, least accurate, "whataboutism" style things I've ever seen published on Racket.
It's perplexing to say the least to watch this substack go from an anti-establishment juggernaut to trying to cover up both the Epstein files and the Kirk assassination at the same time. Merry Christmas I guess 🤷♂️
Omg that's right, that's actually pretty funny. I remember when he was like "ya'll just jealous of Bari"....now look who's writing bullshit hate pieces about the most popular podcaster...
He’s saying her popularity carries a responsibility to tell the truth. Someone speaking to millions of people shouldn’t speculate based on hunches and unsupported theories. Maybe you’re right, she’s a podcaster not a journalist. But presenting speculation as investigative reporting can ruin lives and reputations. Do you think podcasters should start using basic journalistic ethics? Matt makes a pretty strong case that they should. Not sure why he’d unpack and weigh all her statements, though. It’s her job to find corroborating facts to prove her arguments, not Matt’s.
You guys do remember what he discovered after digging into Twitter right? Influencers who were allowed to freely spew BS and those that tried to combat it were blocked. Remember Covid. The Barrington Declaration, blocked. He has the right to combat her crap, yes crap, because mostly it’s outrageous. It can cause insurmountable harm. Maybe pull up the old Paul Newman movie Absence of Malice. It will show you what smearing people for gotcha news can do. I agree, the Macron thing is out of line. The Erika Kirk too. The. More outrageous influencers are, the more money they make
Joe has a valid point, Matt. Real journalism today is mostly hunches, theories and zit-brained, conspiracy bullshit. You need to get with the program and support Candace in being wrong about everything. At least she’s sincere in her dogged pursuit of wrongness. Bong-hit speculation is the new hard-hitting news. Why the weird obsession with verifiable fact?
The Fifth Column guys have the same take on Candace. Unfortunately there is no amount of bullshit people won't believe. The asking questions is nonsense.
“You trust Kash et al. to tell us the truth?” He is part of the Vast Conspiracy now?
“At least she is asking the questions …” Matt points out Candace routinely goes beyond “asking questions”, to making (often deranged) assertions and accusations.
“… and is sincere in trying to get to the bottom of who murdered …” How do you know she is sincere?
“… her friend …” Smearing the mother of his children seems less than friendly. As far as I can figure, Charlie Kirk had kept Candace Owens at arm’s length for years.
Maybe if her arguments weren't even more absurd than the official narrative, you might have a point. She is an attention whore whose sole purpose is to get clicks and constantly create content with no investigation of any sort. It's all her "feelings" about things with zero evidence. Then you attack Matt for focusing on evidence, unbelievable. People can be so gullible.
How is it that you know what didn't happen? Are you a prophet sent by God or just another sheep who lacks the lucidity to deal with conspiracy nonsense?
Please provide a link supporting the assertion that Netanyahu made an announcement "the very next day that he didn't kill Charlie?"
I tried searching and the closest I found was video released (on either 9/17/25 or 9/18/25- one week after the assassination) of Netanyahu denying Israel's involvement (not stating that "he didn't kill Charlie"). This was in response to the conspiracy theories which quickly sprung up after the shooting. Much different that implying it was a preemptive deflection move by the actual perp...
There was a time when if you told me about the Twitter Files I would have called you a crazy bonker conspiracy theorist. Would love it if you went through all/some of her theories/clues on Kirk and examine the 'receipts' (as presented) and poke holes in them. Now THAT would be helpful. Generalized mocking tends to leave my thinking she may be onto something. Check out Jon Aaron Bray's analysis on X and a few recent podcasts. It's interesting!
Without Candace, we’d still believe Charlie Kirk’s magic bones stopped a 30-06. Because of Candace, we learned no doctor ever told Andrew Kolvet Charlie had bones is steel.
People are lying in the Charlie Kirk story. I’ll accept Candace may not yet have the right story, but she’s breaking apart really bad fedslop, and I’m grateful for that.
Be sure and catch podcasts with Jon Bray, you'll find his forensic analysis most intriguing. He has been on Trigger Smart ( I think it is) and Baron Coleman this past week. With his technical background, his hypothesis makes the most plausible sense. It's the most important information yet.
I hear you, but the thing that pissed Peirs off, and triggered Matt & Walter on Friday, was Candace wouldn’t declare a hypothesis. I think she’s right not to. I’m a lawyer, so maybe biased toward this thinking, she just needs to create reasonable doubt in the fed slop. She doesn’t need to establish anything.
If you're really a lawyer don't you think the best place to assess whatever evidence (against the guy whose OWN FAMILY recognized him) is a court of law, with standards of evidence, the right to a defense attorney, etc? We even know the full extent of the evidence they've collected. Again, the only people whose opinions on the evidence we see in the TRIAL (the only place justice is served) are the jurors.
"We even know the full extent of the evidence they've collected." WHAT???? That's a real headline for those observing follow-up! The locals can't even produce a copy of his "confession'!
Now an honest retort … as stated by another in this thread. So much is theater. When the narrative must be maintained, the courts will convict. There’s no way a jury will ever see this. There are two procedure books the courts use. The normal one, most of us see most of the time and the special one they pull out when they need to get you.
This Tyler kid is going to be convicted, plead guilty or mysteriously die. His lawyer won’t do what Candace is doing for the same reasons _Manufacturing Consent_ was written. But that doesn’t mean the doubt (in the fed slop system) Candace is creating is bad.
Actually, human bones are as strong as steel. In Google AI mode,
"Strength-to-Weight Ratio: Gram-for-gram, human bone is significantly stronger than steel. This is because bone is highly porous and lightweight, while maintaining a compressive strength similar to some metals."
There are different types of strength Elaine. Bones are not as stronger than steel with regards to shatter-proofness. Stop. Reallly, you are humiliating yourself.
So you basically know nothing about any of the investigatory leads she has followed and possible evidence she is looking at, asking for crowdsourcing to rule out or add information to her hypotheses. She may be way off, partially onto something or anywhere in between. You merely sound a fool. I assume you're being intentionally silly. But...you bee you 🐝😉
She's not an investigator. Investigators don't make merch to grift off their work, like she did with Macron. We don't know what evidence has been collected because, and I repeat myself, that's presented IN A TRIAL to JURORS.
There are, though. You can exclude some of her leads but many have been proven. I know it’s hard to sort it out, but it doesn’t change the facts. 1. Charlie was unwavering in his support of Israel (FALSE) 2. Charlie had a miraculous neck that stopped a 30.06 as stated by surgeon/Kolvet (FALSE) 3. Erika has had ‘Egyptian’ planes land in tandem to her 77 times over the past two-ish years (TRUE) 4. Donors were pressuring Charlie (TRUE) 5.there are more, but I can’t type them all it.
I see your name has "Bee" in it. Isn't is possible you are trying to deflect attention away from the bee people right now by being here asking questions about Israel, Egyptian planes, the people in maroon shirts, Britney Spears (didn't she have a Britney angle briefly?), and TPUSA? I mean, that's the buzz anyways.
There’s also a long list of lies and discrepancies among TPUSA employees not to mention complete lack of transparency. When did Dan Flood leave TPUSA? (If firing/resignation can’t be discussed), is Brian Harpole still a contractor for them? (If we’re playing semantics game “he doesn’t work for TPUSA”), many other fair questions.
Nah, you’re fine. The bee people just fantasized that da Jews flew on a fleet of Egyptian planes to commit the assassination. And they also fired bunch of TPUSA people using that famous mind control device.
I don’t know much about Candace, don’t listen to her. But I do listen from time to time to Megyn Kelly. And I thought I heard Megyn say in AmFest interview last week that major Jewish donors to Turning Point were pressuring Charlie Kirk to speak out and condemn voices on the Right (like Tucker) who were not friendly enough to Israel. And this had been going on for a while, ramping up and it pissed off Charlie. Kirk was behind the scenes throwing up his hands in frustration that these Jewish donors were trying to coerce him into cancelling others.
Is this behind Candace trying to tie Israel to Kirk’s assassination?
If Charlie Kirk was being pressured this way behind scenes, it seems it came out from behind the curtain when Ben Shapiro gave his recent AmFest speech, a part of which was calling Megyn a ‘coward’, for her not condemning anti-Israel voices on Right - and why she’s now unfriended Shapiro.
Megyn Kelly has lost her mind. I used to listen to her daily for over two years. She's a total coward. If she was a true friend of Charlie she wouldn't have wanted Erika to submit herself to 4 hours with her narcissistic abuser.
Candace should be called out on her lies and innuendos, not cancelled. That is the essence of free speech. Megyn Kelly defends Candace and does not address the elephant in the room, the lies and innuendos. MK has also become a knife-wielding, F-bomb-throwing, angry Mean Girl. It may be a result of her use of Ozempic before her Grand Tour. She has become unwatchable.
Nailed it. I went from really liking Megyn to despising her. Wish she could see how much she acts like a middle school mean girl on social media. She really needs to get out and touch grass. Imagine lighting your reputation on fire for an antisemitic psychopath.
TERF Owl, how much are you being paid to defend the establishment narratives? It's pitiful and not going well, but I'm just curious because I'm between jobs and might need the money.
I'm noticing a pattern with the folks (as exemplified in this thread) who were once loyal followers of _____ [fill in the blank - Megyn Kelly, Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, etc] UNTIL those "once-respectable" journalists/podcasters started re-examining their blind support of Israel. Hmmmm...
Along with the personalities involved, the blatant, in OUR face, "warning shot" to the throat drove me immediately to military snipers on-line. It's not my wheel-house never having even seen a gun before, I knew living in Texas during deer season, there would be little left of a human neck after being hit with a 30.06. Myriad videos replicating the scenario seem to prove that thought reasonable. Watching further rollouts of the Robinson narrative, "slo-mo" vids of staff responses during/after the event & emerging podcasts of Baron Coleman, Jon Aaron Bray, George Webb, Ian Carroll & others prove more insightful about the world we live in than some here, so I wouldn't discourage those who may have some curiosity. If nothing else, there is a good deal of collateral information that emerges.
Much of the same attitude arose following the JFK assassination that occurred in my freshman year of college a hundred miles down the road. Low info news reports didn't make sense with the bits & pieces that emerged the first decade following, but after 40,000+ books written over ensuing decades, the original narrative certainly has suffered in authenticity. It was this event, for which the intel agency developed the term, "conspiracy theory", & is still used to heartily wallop any thought straying from the narrative.
The Warren Commission had lots of evidence, but as we now know much of it was made up (like the autopsy photos and X-rays-- why would they do that?) and much more relevant stuff was shredded or lost. And witnesses were dying like flies. Seems standard in high visibility cases in the US, or maybe not noticed as much in other cases?
Wonder how often the evidence is tampered with in more common cases?
The US is generally in the lowest 20% in homicide rate in the Western Hemisphere. And yet we have one of the highest incarceration rates and the most people imprisoned:
Top 10 Countries with the Highest Rate of Incarceration
Well, that is a bit off-piste for the specificity of my comment that is well-documented when one sifts through the myriad of publishings on the topic. However, I will point out the national clearance rate (crimes resulting in arrest and charge) for homicides is reported as a record low, with only about half of all homicides being solved, a rate that is even lower in some major cities. As Prof MacDonald notes, officials are notorious for under reporting... and bid you farewell to enjoy the celebrations of the season!
I did not miss anything. I cannot in a good intellectual faith compare empirical observations of respectable doctors to a crazed speculations of an engagement farmer.
Oof. She goes off on some mad tangents. Annnnnddddd here comes the but…. she has also brought receipts to bear against lot of half-truths and misdirection by leaders at TPUSA & the threadbare results of the FBI investigation ie Kirk’s stance on Israel being unwavering (false), the Superman-type analogy made by the surgeon (false), that Charlie texted friend “they are going to kill me” the night before UVU event (true), the oddity of Egyptian planes at 77 stops coinciding with Erika Kirk (true), the shady lack of ephemera from Brigitte’s own history, the journalists that have been threatened or died covering the Macrons’ oblique history, and more.
I don’t buy a lot of her side riffs…. but hey - I don’t buy the trash output by LE that Charlie Kirk was killed by a 30.06 (suddenly frangible), the rapidity with which they paved over the crime scene; the lone, 4.0/Near perfect ACT gunman that texts like a caring lover from the distant past but has a psychopathic desire to expunge “hate” from public discourse by assassinating someone in broad daylight; the idea that his father seeing a stock image of the gun supposedly used online and reckoning it was the family heirloom and that the grainy images/Spider-Man roof commando looked like his son; the weird turning away of the First Responders as they wrangled his lifeless body to a getaway SUV (who, WHO has ever seen such mishandling of a critical medical emergency?); et cetera, at al.
I suppose both versions lead us to the conclusion that once AGAIN we will be snowed over by bullshit cleverly disguised as evidence. In the meantime, I’m just gonna keep watching the “Conspiracy” theories.
Unlike his gaudy, attention-starved widow, I just can’t let it go yet.
The "77 Egyptian Planes" narrative has been proven false by a YouTuber who invested $900 in a flight log that showed some of these planes were on another continent, etc.
But he couldn't have just been looking at other planes. And he certainly couldn't have been an agent working to dissuade people from following Candace. Like what Elaine does, all day every day.
I’m sorry, I was off living my life. I didn’t realize the urgency with which you wanted the these sources- I would think your zeal would have inspired you to click open a tab and find it for yourself, but alas… I know that your are not interested in finding out, but rather proving people wrong and making quick comments to tap some receding, disappear adrenalin in your brain, most likely. Anyway, some of these sources are articles, so you’ll need to be able to focus and spend time reading. If you are a knee-jerktionary, then I’m pretty sure this is a pointless ask. But here goes a few to get you started. I’m sure you will take umbrage with everything here & just slander me & the rest of us curious people because you can never convince a fool that he has been fooled, right? Who is the fool in this scenario, though? 🤷🏻♀️🙋🏽♂️. Feel free to share your thoughts and anything new you have learned after reviewing this stuff. Do some digging yourself. It’s a great big world full of things to make you go hmmm. Cheers!
Did Tyler text that he did it? Were those texts? They were delivered to look(-ish) like texts and we were told they were texts, but no dates or times were included. Normal, for investigation purposes, wouldn’t the just black that part out? Now, Tyler sits in court awaiting a trial presumably because he is going to argue that he is not guilty? Why the complete flip? Yet again, LE’s story is extremely suspect…. Dare I say it again? IT DOESNT MAKE SENSE.
The "77 Egyptian Planes" narrative has been proven false by a YouTuber who invested $900 in a flight log that showed some of these planes were on another continent, etc.
Matt, I’ve been rolling with you and Walter for years now, and - I was a little put off by yours and Walter’s minimization/dismissal of Owens last Friday. I heard Dave Smith say that for all her misses, at least because of her - we know of Kirk’s issues with Netanyahu just before he was killed, if for nothing else - and for that he is grateful. Me, too - for that glimpse behind the facade. Plus… your pal Jimmy Dore seems to be taking her pretty seriously. I know both of them (and Glenn Greenwald) are reflexively anti-Israel, but for me - I’ll also always be grateful to - for her exposing the hypocrisy of The Daily Wire, and especially - Ben Shapiro. It’s fun to see everyone acting like a bunch of ‘pansy hairdressers’… Get the reference? You should with all the references you ASSUME we all share with you. I’ll still rock with you guys, and - I think you’re both overdoing it. And - is Walter maybe letting his proximity to all things Kirk muddy his POV? You can’t judge what ain’t you. Applies to both of you, and, of course - to me judging you guys in this case. Cheers…
Among the reasons I’m a paid subscriber to Racket is Matt’s ability to dig down through the surface BS, the politics, the propaganda, and provide us verifiable facts plus analysis.
This hollow and snarky piece just shattered that trust.
The questions about Ckirk’s assassination are legitimate.
Yet all that Matt cites here is combing through the pics on CO’s website, her comments to Piers Morgan, her perspective on Brigitte Macron, etc. etc —but there is zero focus on the legit questions swirling around this ghastly event or any effort on Matt’s part to answer them.
He’s really giving us the PR statements from some companies? Wow.
Frankly, this piece just doesn’t fit Matt’s dog-with-a-bone temperament. The same temperament that has made him a great journalist.
This reads like a very persuasive “don’t believe your lying eyes and ears” issuance that we got during Covid regarding Ivermectin.
Matt plays it safe unless he has an exclusive. He fancies himself an old school well sourced investigative journalist. What Candace is doing is crowd sourcing, exploring possibilities, and taking chances. I watch her show and honestly don’t know what the truth is. But, based on what she has covered I don’t know if she knows what the truth is. What I do know is the official story stinks. CK was not shot with a 30-06, the photo they put on line was not the murder weapon (composite stock didn’t exist in WW2) so his parents couldn’t have made the connection from the photo, and TPUSA has been acting really strange ever since. Matt, why don’t you do an interview with rifle experts and prove to your readers that you are willing to challenge the mainstream narrative?! Maybe challenging Russiagate has you shell shocked.
No dude, what Candace is doing is whoring out her integrity to drive engagement….she earns a living that is directly proportional to the number of eyeballs she draws. Shes crazy, but crazy like a fox. This whole saga is going to make her a ton of money
Will, many hunters with WW2 vintage rifles change out the wooden stocks to synthetic because the old wood stocks are beaten to hell from 70 years of use, plus the synthetic stocks weigh much less, which helps a lot when trekking through the mountains of Utah for hours in pursuit of game. So, the photo of the murder weapon could have easily shown a synthetic stock on a WW2 rifle. I suspect Grandpa upgraded his old 30-06 to make it more accurate and comfortable to use. I have done the same thing with my WW2 30-06 rifle. One more thing, the shot made by Robinson would have been easy for any average hunter with a scoped rifle.
What we should have learned from covid is discernment. Instead, some learned simply that there is no upper limit to how suspicious we should be. That truth only lives in the deepest recesses of the rabbit hole.
Ask yourself “what if Candace is wrong?” Think about the lasting damage she will have caused to those she is effectively smearing. And there is no doubt that she is smearing them, for in the eyes of the merely suspicious, they cannot ever be exonerated now. Think about the distraction from the changes we desperately need to make in this country. Think about priorities.
If Charlie built a movement, but every single one of those hand-picked trusted advisers are dark agents, what did he actually build? What kind of a fool would he be?
Candace is making real money from floating innuendo and “just asking questions”. Do you think this presents a conflict of interest that perhaps propels the “investigation” forward, drip by drip, episode by episode?
Think, people. Or the powers that be, those that have run world events for decades, really will have broken your brains, just as they set out to do.
I like what you're saying about finding discernment and not falling for every suspicion.
But then you have to ask, why is the FBI lying? Why did they manufacture those text messages? Why did they release the video of the guy on the roof but not the video (from the very same camera at the same angle) when he was actually lying in place and shooting the weapon? Why did someone abscond with the chip from the video camera behind Charlie? Why did they tell us such a large bullet left no exit wound because Charlie had a "superman spine"? There's literally a dozen impossible elements of the story, and simply no chance that Tyler Robinson did this on his own.
I agree that what we should have learned from covid is discernment. Yes. Discernment pretty clearly in this case shows that, yes, again, the government agencies are lying to us to cover up something that is probably very dark and dangerous. Same as during covid. If we pretend that's not the case, I fear we've learned nothing.
Candace could be wrong, sure, but she's actually asking the right questions, and we should take them seriously. Some of her conclusions will be wrong but I think that some -- probably many -- will turn out to be correct. That's discernment. I hope we indeed can learn it together and continue to practice it as events unfold.
This nuttery also prevents us from finding out if the perp was intentionally radicalized online. I can picture that and there have been cases like the Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping where gullible people were used. This does not require a grand international conspiracy.
Agreed. Shockingly poor piece after all his great work during covid and with the Twitter files and on free speech and Russiagate, etc. So odd. Almost like he's held hostage or something.
True. The mechanics of his writing remain just fine. In fact I remain a huge fan of Matt's writing in general and his take on many, many issues.
I'm saying the angle he's taking here, on this one issue, is poor, anti-intellectual, and needlessly defamatory.
Many of us would like to hear his honest appraisal of Candace's questions about the (to me) obviously ridiculous FBI version of the events of the Kirk assassination. But it seems he deems them unworthy of even consideration and he levels tasteless ad hominem attacks at Candace and calls her a "conspiracy theorist." This is a poor take in my opinion and anti-intellectual to boot. To undermine someone who is questioning government agencies after a high profile assassination is akin to when people shouted down critics of the lockdowns or the vaccine during covid.
If he's not interested or not willing to provide us his appraisal of the gaping holes in the assassination case, that's fine and his prerogative. I wish he would, but at the least he might refrain from criticizing one of the few independent voices who is.
Why should he address questions that have no basis? Owens an absolutely made up the entire thing! How do you go about dealing with something made up out of the ether and her fevered brain?
No, most of Candace's questions are legitimate questions. For instance, why didn't the FBI release all the video from the campus camera? They've only released one small clip showing what might be Tyler Robinson, but it's too hard to tell. Release the whole thing, including when he supposedly fires the rifle.
Matt, this doesn’t seem like your angle. What are you doing here? Investigate her or forget her. This is just giving oxygen to her flaming, unprincipled showomanship.
He is going full on Israeli apologist. Gaza, Epstein Charlie Kirk assassination. He has become the anti-journalist. Very sad. Used to be the best. Not him and Greenwald are worlds apart.
I have no illusions about the self-interestedness of Israel but I lived in Muslim countries for nine years. And I’m a fanatical Christian. Enemy of my enemies.
Israel is a terrorist state founded by terrorists, committing terrorism against Arabs and Christians and Jews for 80+ years so that they can steal more land. By way of deception.
Yeah, I have been SO AFRAID of Israeli terrorists knifing me in public, or killing me if I criticize their religion, or carrying out a suicide bombing, or raping my daughter, or forcing me to obey their religious demands.
Oh offended by the fact that Israel is a terrorist state founded by terrorists? Any arguments or just garbage from your mouth? I'll be hanging with my family and opening presents and making some family recipes, and watching a new Candace episode. While your types get emotional about people trying to find the truth.
Back in the day journalists used to care about the Truth above everything else. Good times.
Read Isaiah 53. Who is that a biography of? What is Psalm 22 about if not a prophecy of the crucifixion? Isaiah 7:14 prophesies the virgin birth. Micah 5:3 anticipates that Messiah will be born in the boondocks, Bethlehem, Zechariah ( 12:3, I think ) prophesies that the Jewish people will look upon "Me whom they have pierced."
If you want to find a reason to reject truth, be confident, you will. Be assured that you have at least one spiritual doppelganger this morning who is desperate to find truth, and he will.
As it says those who bless Israel will be blessed, those who curse Israel will be cursed.
But exactly who is Israel? Not the country called Israel today.
The real Israel are a people who rejected their diety and have lost their identity. They will always reject their "mythical sky god" until they are almost totally destroyed.
Call me superstitious, but I'll show respect for the Most High El.
One thing for sure, Owens and her ilk are proving that Charlie Kirk was the glue holding MAGA together. Within a couple of weeks of his assassination, the whole “big tent” was being blown apart, no doubt to the great joy of Trump-haters and anti-Americans everywhere.
With respect, whatever Owens and her ilk can destroy is definitionally almost inconsequential and without substance.
MAGA is many things but in terms of influence a transactional coalition of self-interested voters keen to avoid proven incompetence and distrustful of all claims of future competence.
Think MAGA has a hole in it? Ask Europe, Asia, Central and South America. Think MAGA is weakening? Look at the 4th quarter growth rate, etc, etc.
Mistaking personalities, especially the most grandiose and self-serving, for policies and focusing on hot air instead of substantive action isn't the best use of anyone's time.
Voters took back their republic back in 2016, tried to protect it in 2020, and succeeded in 2024. The victories belong to the voters, not any politician, pundit, or political party.
You seem to subscribe to the theory that individuals do not matter in historical terms, that large forces determine everything and the people who arise are really just riding the wave.
On the whole, I think there is a lot to recommend that approach... but then I come up against examples where an exceptional individual did matter, for better or worse, and there is little reason to believe that there was anyone in the wings who would have played the same role to the same ends.
Clearly, there were factions and cracks in MAGA, but I do not believe it is mere coincidence that those cracks became large, maybe unbridgeable gaps within a few weeks of Kirk's death, especially as we see how much effort he was putting into keeping the factions talking to each other in the weeks before he was shot.
You don't mention Trump by name, but it is pretty clear you are talking about him as a "grandiose and self-serving" person, and I do not disagree. Even as I voted for him back in 2016, I knew that a "movement" that revolves around one aging and somewhat volatile personality with no clear personal political base and no succession plan is hardly a movement, at all. I do think Trump tried to set up a succession with Vance, but at this point, as MAGA seems to be devouring itself, it is fair to ask what, exactly, Vance is succeeding to.
There may ultimately be a great irony in all this, as for all the attention paid to Owens, and Fuentes, and even Carlson, none of them have ever received a single vote in an election, and we all know how images and causes and personalities can be Astroturfed. They gain attention and access based on clicks and viewership numbers, but those are easily manipulable--- Disney does it with every major movie, Nike with every new shoe line, and politicos increasingly do it with every election and in between. I have no idea what is actually going on, but wouldn't it be a hoot to find out, say 5 years from now, that 70% of Owens' or Fuentes' clicks and viewers were bots and troll farms? There are smart, strong, and deep-pocketed entities that would love to see MAGA tear itself apart, so why would they not give it a nudge? We are now seeing how China has pushed Net Zero for decades, with great success in Europe that is now deindustrializing. Why not accept the mere possibility that someone, somewhere, has an interest in kneecapping MAGA using proven tools?
Call it a conspiracy theory, except I really am not arguing that, merely noting that we don't know. Which seems to be the state of almost everything, these days.
Thanks for the reply. Change agents arrive and absolutely unlock the possible in ways others cannot. That's not a theory, but an observable fact. Some will see Obama that way.
I was not, btw, thinking of Trump, nor do I see any upside in linking my observations to any theory, individual, or political label.
As for "what's happening now", you rightly note that we're in the midst of information vacuums in what I consider largely meaningless respects. If anyone thinks governments, banks, institutions, have ever been keen to freely share information you're living in a different world to me.
Access to extremely high-quality information on subjects of interest to me, on the other hand, has never been better I'm delighted to report.
Unfortunately one man does not make a movement. There are so many corrupt, evil people both elected and unelected in our Government that it truly is a sisyphyian task. I fear we are too far gone, but pray we are not.
I would be very happy if all the “tariffs will be the end of us all!” takes are proven wrong. But careful boasting on GDP growth, as an awful lot of consumer spending is being done by the upward-trajectory folks in our K economy.
Dont believe you eyes and ears everyone. Believe the FBI and the lone gunman theory, unless the FBI says there's 1,000 epstein victims. Then believe Michael Tracey.
Uh, you are trying to conflate two very different events. No two periods in the history of the FBI's history are the same. Technology has improved. And, I have every reason to believe that the FBI had nothing to do with Kirk's murder.
And whose stories are you repeating? You weren't there either, but you think Candace Owens has it all figured out? That's sad. I guess if they have a trial you're gonna believe the Jews got to the judge, jury, lawyers and witnesses too? You're a delusional fool. Get a hobby that doesn't include a computer.
I haven't repeated any stories. The slop that has been fed to the public regarding this public assassination is obviously not true. Same as trumps near assassination. To make fun of people searching for real answer is to be an anto-journalist. Matt's buddy Walter will question every single shooting, as long as it doesn't relate to Israel in any way.
Have you considered the possibility they aren't speaking out because they know the truth? That their son killed Charlie. They're even closer to all of this than anyone on this thread.
The never-ending "prove a negative" game. If the shooter's father stood in front of you and said his son told him he did it, then it would be Mossad paid off the father. Anything for the continuous conspiracy titillation.
Why would they want to be out there? They got their son to turn himself in because they recognized him. They're probably horrified their family member took another person's life.
The problem with Candace is that if you actually follow her argument it's genuinely convincing. No not the bees or the dreams or statements like "I'm sensing" or "I know know"--and she doesn't have definitive proof of a conspiracy--but she has completely dismantled the Tyler Robinson lone shooter narrative, caught many people outright lying in the wake of Charlie's death, and makes a very compelling case that the truth is being covered up by the federal government.
If you follow her series from the start and aren't put off by her style it becomes impossible to ignore the mountain of mutually reinforcing evidence she's mustered. Matt doesn't appear to have done this, or if he has this article doesn't suggest it. And I get it. Matt's a busy man who does great work, he has a family and investigations of his own. I don't expect him to have watched a fraction of the last 70 hours of Candace's podcast. But Matt, we can tell that you aren't taking her argument seriously and you haven't put the time in to understand it, or else you would be steel-manning rather than straw-manning. Does Candace say wild things? Yes. Does she get out over her skis? Yes. Is she weaving a Charlie Kirk assassination conspiracy fever dream out of thin air? It turns out that in this case she isn't. But if you won't really engage with her argument then you aren't in a position to know.
It would be immensely helpful if Candace would simply write an article or series detailing her hypotheses with citations and links to the evidence that support those hypotheses, just like Matt Taibbi does. If she was a serious journalist, that is exactly what she would do (and you should demand). Doing so would allow the rest of us, including Matt, to objectively evaluate what she is selling and come to our own conclusions. If she's not willing to do that, then why should we take her seriously?
Matt, I’m just asking questions here, but is it completely stupid to think that, given all we see from Bibi and crew, they could have a hand in something like this?
I mean, we’re all supposed to condemn Pete Davidson and Bill Burr for performing at a Saudi comedy festival because the Saudis KILLED A JOURNALIST!
But can someone tell us how many journalists has Israel killed in the past 26+ months?
Damn you, Taibbi! I almost choked laughing so hard reading your lede!!! You, sir, are single-handedly restoring pride in American journalism. And that's no damn lie.
I’m sensing that Matt’s head is about to explode from repeated exposure to Candace’s radioactive retardation.
Radio active retardation🤣🤣🤣
Owens is so dense, light cannot escape her.
She is his new Rachael Maddow.
I am glad he is still posting his musings though.
Was worried by his recent postings that he was going to refocus his energies on strictly just the facts type stories.
I think he has the capacity for both....
Good read
radioactive retardation I think Rachel Maddow is still in the lead.
I don't find the chaos she creates funny. I think she is causing enormous damage and can't wait for her to get her comeuppance.
I wish a lot more people in powerful positions would get their "comeuppance." But it won't happen. Bill Gates and Epstein, Bill Gates and Covid-19, Bill Gates and Covid vaxes, Bill Gates and farm land, Bill Gates and international organizations---never gonna get the true stories. Even if we did, he'll get away with it.
Soros, all the Clintons, Kennedy's in the pocket of pharma, etc.
Here you go spewing stuff from a firehose like Owens does. Can agree with Gates and any conspiracy you tag to that bastard but your Kennedy is captured by Pharma is inappropriate and a leap too far. You need to thoroughly familiarize his background and those around him. A significant group of Republicans in the Senate are Pharma captured who are OUR problem along with most every Democrat. He's moving as fast as he can. Read some Dr. Robert Malone substack postings.
I wasn't specific about the Kennedy's, but I referred to the ones "in the pocket of pharma." I think a few of the Kennedy's are in the pocket of big pharma, RFK,Jr. exempted. His cousin, Caroline and others who have come out against him are my concern.
Though RFK, Jr. isn't perhaps personally exemplary, he continues to stand up to the onslaught of big pharma and a US congress that has many members attacking him. Witnessing the assassinations of his uncle and his father must have hardened him for this time.
Fine, but what do you think about Bill Gates? Inquiring minds want to hear you lose yours on an internet comment section.
You want me to lose my mind on the internet comment section? I already posted here about Gates.
The Macrons have Candace by the short hairs, along with her company, and even perhaps her husband‘s fortune. It ain’t gonna end pretty for Candace, and I for one am popping gallons of popcorn.
Virtually all of my – admittedly tiny – audience who believes in Candace are women. I’ll leave it at that.
Much though I loathe the Macrons,I hope they vaporize Candace
LOL
I’m guessing you aren’t a lawyer.
YAWN…
She's trying to be another Alex Jones. Except most of what Alex Jones reported was backed by actual evidence and turned out to be, more often than not, true. And . . . note what happened to him.
You think Newtown is a hoax?
I think they knew the boy was a loose cannon and chose to do nothing. The impetus is to overturn the Second Amendment. If you need an example of how this comes into play, think Parkland, Charlotte, Ft Lauderdale Airport, Las Vegas, San Bernardino, Pulse, Ohio Christmas Market, Columbine.. immediately following each mass shooting event, an incredibly well organized, well equipped ground swell protest rent a mob appears. Replete with professionally printed placards and synchronistic speeches and echo chamber messaging calling for gun control. In each case, there was ample forewarning of the shooter . They are known to the students , their teachers and administration. And calls have been made to authorities regarding the shooters as being threats to the safety of the students, coworkers, patrons.
Ditto the Christchurch mosque shooter, who was a veteran and expressed his feelings and desire to wipeout Muslims where they gathered to worship. Many calls were made about his plans and he needed to be taken off the streets before he perpetrated an attack. The Ft Lauderdale Airport Shooter went to the FBI headquarters , I can’t remember which city he was flying out of , asking for help. That he was overwhelmed with the desire to perpetrate a mass shooting , feared he was having some sort of mental breakdown and wouldn’t be able to control himself . He wanted them to take him into custody and keep him from hurting innocent people until he had been given treatment and was no longer a threat. He was dressed in his military camp, had ID and was headed to the airport, not trusting his impulse control. The FBI dismissed his concern. Assured him that he was fine because he had enough presence of mind to be “ overly considerate, sent him on his way and when he got off the plane and collected his duffel bag on the tarmac, removed his AK and killed five other passengers.
You are absolutely fucked in the head if you really think people (lets be honest, you want to say democrats or leftists or whatever) wanted so badly to get rid of 2A that they *checks notes* sacraficed 20+ elementary school kids just so that the bad press would carry them over the finish line. Especially considering that literally NO AMOUNT of bad press over horrible shooting events in this country has ever really moved the needle in a meaningful way on that issue. You are completely, and sickeningly deranged. Matt used to have intelligent readers and honestly, this comment section makes me more and more depressed each time I visit...
If you believe our “ vaunted” government is incapable of such grievous activity as a means to an end , you’re very naive. As was I for way too long. I wish I still was.
And no, it isn’t solely a Democrat thing. The real problem is the corruption and sociopathy is so endemic- has been going on for so long without any accountability, we’ve become numb to it. We just retreat to our tribe and blame the other side.
So let’s be honest- because our overlords aren’t. If we remain polarized,we will not survive as a sovereign nation.
I think the pattern of these types of shootings do have a strong element of false flag activity. How many mentally ill LGTBQ are there walking around feeling unsafe while packing an arsenal looking for a school to shoot up. These get shoved into the memory hole so quick it becomes last years news in a heart beat. It's not just our government who are fully capable, but many powerful Oligarch's who are protected by politics, their own cash and a cattle car of lawyers who know how to skirt the law will outsource their dirty work to plenty of Murder Inc. types while sending a checks to the Gates foundation, antifa and BLM to brag to their pals they are working for the greater good while getting massive tax breaks for their philanthpath sensibilities.
Really? I live in S Florida and repeatedly watched this shit go on. Worse, Pam Bondi was the Florida AG at the time and did NOTHING!
Parkland, Ft Lauderdale Airport, Pulse, the shooter’s wife and father, Epstein, Sheriff Scott Israel, Robert Runcie, David Kramer, Brenda Snipes election rigging, Broward/Dade/Palm Beach Tri-County IC Community Cartel,DWS/Awan Bros, David Hogg..
Don’t tell me I’m out of my mind. I wasn’t always like this. But the corruption, special interests, coverups and agenda has been for years.
I began taking notes, writing down dates, names of those involved in episodes seemingly small to very prominent. Ironically, going back to the seventies, certain names intersected over and over. Not limited to Democrats. But the Dems weren’t crazy left back then. The Republicans were Establishment. The religious right became prominent during the Reagan admin and pissed a swathe of the center right, centrist Dems, moderates and libertarians off,( before the went nuts) but it was the Establishment UniParty names that intersected.. even then. And the names invariably involved? Rockefeller, Kissinger, Brezinzski,Carter,Vance,Vernon Jordan,Bush,Gergen,Fauci,McCain,Soros,Clinton,Cheney,Burns,Mueller,Brennan,Wray,Panetta,Hayden,Podesta,Baker,Rumsfeld,McMaster.. On and on.. but it wasn’t until Obama that things began to appear very “ off”. Because they were. And Trump’s 2016 campaign. I was no longer passive. And for the record, I’m no long aligned with either party, but the Dems are now a Death cult. And we so desperately need a “We The People” pragmatic, constitutionally adherent sane, non hyper-ideological , representative party. Led by Enlightenment Rationalists.
If JD Vance becomes the Republican candidate, it’s over. He’s unelectable. I’m very concerned about the TPUSA influence. Pushing sectarian theocracy won’t defeat the CommunoIslamoFascist globalist left. It will drive the centrists, moderates, Independents,on the fence, minorities, women,non-fundamentalist Christians to stay home. Erika Kirk did a terrible injustice. It was bad enough when Trump opted for Vance. Something about him never set right with me. It’s only gotten worse. He did well debating Walz. Tulsi would have ended him within one sentence. The new Rubio would have wiped the floor with him. But had Vance pushed the Christian nationalism , Walz, as stuporous as he was, would have come out ahead.Americans want to choose their candidates. Everybody I’ve spoken with have named Rubio, Tulsi or the combination of.
Agree on the chaos part and damage part. Just insane!! Sadly in today's online World there's not much room for comeuppance particularly when Owens has millions of followers.
I can't imagine what Erika kirk must have thought sitting down with Owens. To force a meeting with Charlie's widow because her lying grift captured the paranoid delusions of so many people.... Words fail.
She, Tucker, Bannon, now Megyn, Alex Jones,Matt Gaetz Lew Rockwell, Raheem KassamMassie, Craig Roberts, Dave Smith are creating so much damage that they are directly responsible for getting innocent people killed. Not only that, but they are influencing elections in UK, AU, Spain, Italy, Germany, France, Austria, Argentina, Poland, Ireland, Canada, Asia,Africa,Latin America and the U.S. Now, Tommy Robinson,LePen,Orban,Milei,Modi,Meloni,AfD,Georgescu,Farage,Eva,Braverman,Truss,Wilders,UAE,Bahrain,Bukele MBS,Rubio,Tulsi,RFK,Musk,Huckabee ,Fetterman,Roseanneyaan Hirsi Al, Reza Pahlavi,Asra Nomani, TrumpTerrell,and every good guy is a bad guy. If anybody thinks this is inconsequential- look at what’s happening to the Heritage Foundation.Im concerned about Vance. I couldn’t stand him to begin with and more so each day.
Matt Taibbi works hard for his $7000, compared to most of Them.
We'll crowdfund $7K for you dolts to workshop some new replies.
OMG, it's so tiresome. Does she give her followers talking points? Because they all say the same thing on everyone's platform.
Kinda like the demokrat crowd.. All speaking points to the “T”
Oh, my God. Seek help. Maybe get a Jewish psychiatrist.
Oh, you haven't seen the Candace about Freud and Bernay and that viper den.
Is that the one where she talks about “the Sabbatians”?
I don't remember Candice being this nutty until her blow-up up with Ben Shapiro, maybe a year ago. Everyone on that side of the idle seemed to love her. Maybe longer than one year…. Anyway, she has spiraled down the drain…
The Jewish psychiatrists have lost their minds. Suicidal doctors treating homicidal patients. A self fulfilling prophecy. The world has gone mad.
So true
Echoes of Mencken. High praise.
Yes, the Scopes trial
I appreciate Matt’s take as always, but I am so throughly sick of Owens. My entire X feed is nothing but her…and I have her blocked! Her appeal is a cross between a never ending Scooby-Doo episode and the Psychic Friends Network.
Too bad she didn’t stay focused on Madam Macron’s crotch instead of her despicable shredding of Charlie Kirk’s murder. Shapiro did the right thing in telling her to go scratch and the other talking heads who didn’t should be ashamed.
Alison: Your comparison of Candace to Scooby/Psychic Friends is worth the monthly fee for this Substack, so I get Matt for free! Thank you.
So sad. She used to be normal.
I know. I liked her once upon a time.
Me too now I only pray her family gets her help.
I only hope science gets her brain!
😂
I pray that her horribly deluded followers get help and understand what Owens is soon
I stopped feeling that way...
Me too, except the help she needs is what we all need: a career ending massive lawsuit that makes her toxic to insurance companies world wide.
I know right? I hesitate to ask how many children she is raising...scary thought
It's the other way around. Candace used to be crazy, but recently she has become remarkably sane. Matt Taibbi use to be one of the most sane journalist in the world, and he has gone bonkers by denying genocide in Gaza, by treating the Epstein files as nothing important, by categorizing mayor-elect Mamdani as a nutjob communist, and by cheerleading for Wall Street crooks.
Taibbi has said exactly none of those things, so keep lying like Candace.
You don't actually read Taibbi, do you? Because if you did, you'd realize that everything you say here is completely unconnected from reality. Much like Candice.
I have read every page of 3 books by Taibbi. For many years I regularly followed him on Rolling Stone. I am currently a paid subscriber (but not in the future). I admired Matt back when he was connected to reality.
Perhaps you are the one no longer connected to reality?
Yes, once the tin foil hat goes on it's really hard to get off...
so why are you lying about him "cheerleading" for wall street crooks. You are either lying or very very poor at reading
The is no journalist more objective than Taibbi. Your take is silly. You must have some skin in some other game.
Matt was not objective about the Mamdani election. He was not objective about socialism. He was not objective when he supported Trump’s illegal bombing of Iran. He is not objective about the plight of the Palestinians. He is not objective about Candace Owens. Sure, she is sometimes a nutcase, but at times she is right on the money. The only things I have skin in are truth, free speech, the public good, and justice.
This from a self-described "Christian Socialist, antiwar, pro-working-class populist"?
Damn right! Taibbi despises socialism and clearly favors Wall Street greed over the needs of the working class. I see no signs that he is antiwar.
Sometimes I wish Substack had a thumbs down button like the Discus Powerline blog…
Oh shit. Here we go again. An escapee from the loony bin.
Don’t worry, he’s canceling his subscription. His conspiracy and lunacy will be gone soon. There seems to be one that pops up from time to time with their bizarre interpretations of Matt’s articles.
The guy literally just argued that one of the defining book "takedowns" of the 2008 financial crisis that Matt wrote was somehow written to aid the Wall Street bankers....that it spent hundreds of pages trashing and dismantling.
This comment section has just gotten....wow
Remarkable, isn it…. I try to see all sides of a discussion. I usually fail.. maybe because I’m too hard headed. But, there’s a slight possibility I’m right! See….. there I go again…
Candace probably agrees with you, and the voices in your head. Get fucked, please!
I am often critical of MT, but I don’t believe he holds or has communicated any of these positions.
But Taibbi is right on the first three, and I can't imagine anyone ever accusing him of "cheerleading for Wall Street crooks".
You have just outed yourself as a racist genocide denier. You need to look at yesterday's dump of Epstein files, including some of the sloppily redacted material that several observant people have succeeded in uncoving. In a Substack post trashing Mamdani, Matt said he actually wrote Griftopia as a defense of Wall Street uber-capitalism and not to criticize it.
Reading comprehension is not your strong suit.
Gratuitous insullts are not your strong suit.
I just realized who you are. You're Candace!! Don't you have ghosts to fight Candace? Be gone!!
I am a white male socialist. That doesn't exactly make me Candace, who is a black female conservative. And I am criticizing Matt Taibbi from the left, not the right.
And while you’re learning about something from economic history, take some time to learn the true meaning of genocide.
The UN defines genocide as acts (killing, serious harm, harsh conditions, preventing births, child transfer) committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group, as such, under the 1948 Genocide Convention, a crime that denies groups their right to exist, shocking humanity and violating moral law. Key is proving the specific intent to destroy the group, not just its members, which is a challenging legal standard. That is exactly what Israel is doing to gaza.
What impacts are the Epstein files likely to have on your and our lives?
Corruption, bribery, and blackmail at the highest levels of govenment impacts all of us. So is the very real possibility that Epstein was a secret Massad agent. This may or may not be the biggest scandal in American history. Only a fool would brush it off.
Exactly! I've been a loyal and attentive reader, going back to Matt's time at the eXile in Yeltsin's Moscow. But I've just unsubscribed. Nothing to see or read here, I'm not wasting any more time.
Candace's honest and accurate denunciations of Israeli genocide, which influenced Charlie Kirk to follow her lead, and directly led to his state-sponsored assassination, is the invisible elephant in the room, here.
No idea why Matt is echoing all the talking points in the Establishment Echo Chamber. Bye, Matt! Hope you get well soon.
What all of us should have been talking more about is the fact that Charlie Kirk was giving all sorts of hints that he was abandoning his Israel supprt because of atrocities they were committing. For example, TPUSA and the MAGA crowd are overwehmingly pro-life. How can one be pro-life and support the daily massacre of dozens of children. How can one be pro-life and support the deliberate starving of little children while denying them medical care? That's where Charlies was going, and the Zionists just wouldn't let it happen. Candace is actually picking up where Kirk left off. She, not his widow, is honoring his last wishes.
When did Matt deny the genocide in Gaza?
I must have missed that.
While it is true that he has not covered it, I don't recall him actually denying it.
Refusing to comment on the biggest moral issue of our day is complicity. Just look at all the Zionists who are now following Matt. They interpret his stubborn silence exactly the same way I do. And Matt never jumps in to say they are reading him wrong.
Matt has generally attracted both Zionists and those who condemn Israel for its war crimes.
So, Matt attracts both racists and non-racists, genocide supporters and opponents of genocide? And why do the opponents of genocide remain silent in the comment sections? And why does Matt refuse to take a position? No one can be neutral on this issue. This is a little like a person saying he or she supports both sexual abuse of children and people opposed to it.
Says you? And what exactly made you a moral authority? I would suggest you need to have respect for reality instead your wanna be “facts” to justify your immorality before you make moral judgments. With your twisted logic, it is easy to say that the Allies committed genocide against the Germans and Japanese in World War II. I suspect you are a denier of the true genocide in WW2.
I absolutly condemn what the Nazis did to Jews. I likewise absolutely condemn what the Zionists through the IDF are doing to the Palestinians. Same thing, different time, different place. But the same damn thing.
IMO if Matt cares enough about protecting the federal "lone gunman" narrative about Charlie Kirk's murder to write an entire article smearing Candace Owens, he must care a lot less about the genocide in Gaza. Granted, he hasn't cheered on the genocide of Palestinians, but it appears to me that his choice of targets says a lot.
When did Matt ever indicate a preference for the "lone gunman" story on Kirk's assassination?
He has simply pointed out that Candace's stream of consciousness "questioning," which smears everyone from Kirk's widow to random Egyptian pilots, has no basis in reality.
Two Jews with one of the best Christmas messages IMO https://youtu.be/ILlO0QHXc9s?si=xXD6nCOX4OCasvlR
I discovered Russell and Keaton when they were filling in for Jimmy Dore and now follow them regularly. As a Christian I respect them just as they respect Christians. So, Merry Christmas to you. Peace on earth, and good will to everyone.
Wow, a humorous Candice Owen take brings tin foil hat guys out in force who chew the drapery as hard as Candice with equal manic intensity.. Did MT post this as a psych op to flush them out? LOL. I doubt it but it discloses the broader cross currents of conspiratorial thought as well as cancelled subscribers who somehow just keep commenting? IMHO this is a value added proposition. Give me more..
Reading his comment sections I get the impression that Matt is attracting a lot of crazies, a lot of racist Zionists who support the genocide in Gaza, and a bunch of hardcore right wingers. This is very different from his former fan club which I felt more comfortable with.
Literally everything you just said is wrong. Impressive.
It is definitely NOT the "other way around." Your take is absolutely ridiculous.
Oops wasn’t finished… go take a walk and stop pontificating.
As if normal were a goal. See: Covid.
excuse me, are you the "Bee" that Owens is talking about??...
Maybee
Hilarious
That's what I thought. I now question my ability to discern what the hell is going on.
Says who?
Says me. Of course it is my opinion, not yours.
OK, that made me laugh out loud! Good for you! And that’s exactly why I watch Candace at times… Just need a good laugh-and she is likable… that’s enough for my exhausted mind sometimes!, That whole story needs to be investigated because it doesn’t make good sense… It’s both/and- regardless of what we think of Candy, some Charlie things don’t make sense.
Likeable? She's a psychopath, an evil woman.
Some of history’s greatest psychopaths seemed likeable…at least at first. Remember that guy who used to dress up like a clown for the kids? Gacy, I think his name was.
“Everyone” said Ted Bundy was extremely likable — at least, until he got them into his car…
There you go!
and not to bring up-well ADOLPH HITLER, but he charmed the Windsors and many others!
Mike Huckabee is likeable, but he supports the wholesale murder and starvation of Palestinian chilren. Marco Rubio is likeable, but he is a war criminal.
Wait. Is Rubio really likeable?
Point taken!
They're everywhere. Reagan was likeable. The dumb Bush was said to be the guy we'd want to have a beer with.
Exactly what is evil about objecting to the daily murdering of Palestinian childern? Exactly what is evil about questing the official but shaky narrative about the Kirk assssination?
There is no "daily murdering of Palestinian children." It's evil to suggest there is. The vast majority of Palestinian children who have died have died because of Hamas' indifference to their safety.
There is no official but shaky narrative about what happened to Charlie Kirk, nor would there have been in the public's mind but for Owens' pathological lying
IDF soldiers use food trucks as bait to draw Palestiian children out into the open so they can shoot them. They make a game of it: One day they shoot them in the leg. One day they shoot them in the neck. One day they shoot them in the head. Several mass graves have been found with dead Palestinian children blindfolded and shot point blank in the head. Israel is deliberately starving children and poisoning their drinking water.
Quite frankly, very few people on either the left or the right belive the official story about the Kirk assination. Forgive my colorful languange on Christmas, but your comment is bullshit.
There isn't a single honest word in your comment.
I find her gross and phony. I thought it was because I was racist.
And sexist.
Goes without saying
Why, you are. Of course.
What doesn't make sense.? He was shot by Tyler Robinson b/c he (Tyler) was a trans-adjacent sociopath with a trans boyfriend/girlfriend who thought Charlie was full of "hate"...There's both physical evidence and evidence of motive and deliberation.
You know what doesn't make sense--that so many people believe in bullshit conspiracy theories. Or maybe it does make sense, since conspiracy theories are captivating to those too lazy or stupid to bother with facts.
The official narrative is lazy but those that push official narratives don't care because they are never held to account. It's the great and never-ending gaslighting. Everyone knows the official story about JFK is BS and yet it's never been officially admitted to. There are so many examples of the official story being total bullshit but as long as these mother effers don't admit it it's not true. Gaslight Gaslight Gaslight. Were all crazy. Right? That's what they want us to think.
Just like the official narrative of Covid was bullshit and the safe and effective narrative is bullshit. Did we not all just live through the same pysop? Did we all not just witness a mass poisoning of the population? I've hot plenty of receipts.
I am open minded about what is the truth because we've been lied to for so long that most of us has no clue what the truth is and every time I think I am at the bottom of what the truth is, there's more.
As for Candace. I am not writing her off as crazy. They want us to think she's crazy because of the things she shares that are not for public consumption. I tend to think she must be over some target because otherwise they would just ignore her. But instead every influencer, podcaster, independent journalist is speaking out against her all at the same time with the same exact talking points.
The coordinate takedown seems too obvious.
I am forever a skeptic and will almost never believe the official narrative. Official narratives are created to protect the officials.
Considering we’re all subscribed to this substack, we all know that “official” narratives can be outright lies. No argument there. The last ten years have proven that without a doubt. I don’t blame anyone at this point who instantly questions the narrative behind any major event. Our own media outright lie to us and lies by omission.
Do I believe there are evil people combing the dark corners of the internet looking for people to goad into murdering prominent people? Yes. The Trump assassination attempt is just one. The digital footprint of these people is conveniently wiped. No one has to wonder why that is and you’re right to question it.
I understand questioning certain things, but when she got into blaming his widow and some Egyptian planes, then she’s just wading into clickbait dollars and loses credibility. Making a circus of his murder is gross. There is going to be a criminal trial of the accused individual and casting doubt over nonsense will turn that trial into the second circus. In my opinion this makes her no better than Alex Jones. I have a good friend whose kids were in the Sandy Hook school, and to think that parents of those murdered kids had to produce death certificates because of the trouble Jones caused them is unimaginable.
Legitimate questions are necessary for everyone who values the truth and benefit all of us. Outrageous money grabs benefit the few at the expense of many.
I suggest you listen to the Joe ROgan with Alex Jones and young Jamie fact checking in real time. Sandy Hook was a huge screw up which Jones admitted, but he is correct more often than not. Alex is crazy, no question, but he is not in the Candace zone. She is malicious.
Very sorry about your friends, that is really rough.
Alex has been right on many things, and he admitted that he was wrong on Sandy Hook. I don't find him crazy at all. He is very passionate, which sometimes comes across as unhinged, but he is definitely sane.
Yeah he’s “not malicious.” Tell that to Sandy Hook families, and tell that to the Judge and jury that gave them a huge judgement.
Exactly right.
"one thing of the 'official narrative' things I list here was proven to not be true so all the other things I've listed that lack one single shred of evidence supporting me are probably also not true"
"when people write crazy people off as crazy they must be threatened by them."
Fertile ground for lying grifting demagogues like Candace. So, so sad
💯
Somehow, you seem to have some points that may be valid. Now I'm going crazy…
That gun and its bullets would have shot his head off. Nobody behind him got a spot of blood spattered onto them. The official story makes exactly ZERO sense- not to mention much of it has been debunked or had video "go missing". You'd have to be sound asleep to believe the official narrative.
Janine, please do just a little research before you make crazy statements. Charlie was NOT shot in the head! The TPUSA employee who dove on Charlie to stick in his hand and dress his wound (yes, I saw the video) had blood on his hands and clothing. The bullet never left his body as it collided with the cervical bones and ultimately shattered while still in the body. Read the autopsy report. You are the one who is sound asleep.
Has the autopsy report been released?? Strangely, no one has been able to confirm an employee stuck in his "hand" to dress a wound as you say -- did you see the size of the neck wound ... a hand makes NO sense! There is no video of a "dressed wound" & as another exercise, do a time lapse, count the seconds, watch the movements & determine the likelihood of enough time/space to perform that act. Further, there is a video of the "employee" purporting to do that shows no sign of blood on his hands in the most validated close-ups. It's like Mikey's father describing Mikey w "blood all over" -- Mikey who walked away w/in a few seconds & was nowhere near Charlie as he was pushed to the ground by security, which shooed away EMTs, btw!
As you advised Janine, "do a little research"! There are many more data points of import in this matter. She misspoke -- you misspoke+
The rifle claimed as the weapon would have blown his head off, EVEN WHILE HITTING HIS NECK. Everyone behind him would have been covered in blood. The autopsy is not public information, so whoever you are parroting about that either has you completely duped or is a co-shill for whoever you are working for. No human cervical bones would have stopped a 30 06 bullet at the distance claimed. Why do you know none of that OR Why are you lying about it?
are there any youtube reenactments with the same gun at the same range and some nice ballistic jelly?
someone should have done something, they love that sort of thing
That & the texts. What young person texts like that? Perfect punctuation, every word written out. Talking like some corny 1930's movie.
A young person like Tyler Robinson, who may be on the autism spectrum, was noted by several people who saw the family video of him reading out loud the full college scholarship acceptance letter. He was bright, scholarly, and articulate. The text messages made complete sense.
That letter was 1st generation AI generated.
So they are giving the death penalty to someone who isn't all mentally there??? Not buying it..
On what planet?? At least listen to som ex fed responses to it!!
My kids. I insist on it with me and apparently they do it as a matter of course.
He wasn't texting his mom..
Just out of curiosity, instead of a lone nut with a gun, how many thousands of conspirators do you believe were involved in the Charlie Kirk assassination (and “coverup”)?
That's not how it works.
It is possible to spot the holes in the official narrative, without somehow concocting an alternative scenario.
Lawyers literally do that every day of their lives to save clients from prosecution -- a number false!
Eight thousand six hundred and two. Current count. Just my theory.
These "bullshit conspiracy theories" proliferate because the official story on Charlie's assassination doesn't make sense -- like virtually every major news event over the past 20 years.
Does it make sense that there were searches in DC and Israel for Tyler Robinson days before CK’s murder? Or in Israel months earlier for the doctors at local hospitals?
Does it make sense the judge appointed counsel for the defendant even though a crack team of criminal attorneys offered their services pro bono because they saw the evidence as being flimsy at best?
There are conspiracies, but Robinson killed Charlie. The conspiracy is who is pushing the trans agenda, assassination ideation and what is the end game- no pun intended. This is the creation of an assassin creed. I’ve been tracking it since Sandy Hook. None of it is “ organic” the killers are being recruited, manipulated, propagandized and trained. All share a personality type. Nerds, wallflowers, weak, medicated, troubled.
Sandy Hook. Parkland. Nikolas Cruz was an outcast. He had issues. Dylan Roof - Charlotte AME Black Church. Tree of Life Synagogue, Uvalde, Tennessee Christian School, Las Vegas Country Music Shooter, Buffalo Supermarket shooter, Strawberry Festival, Ohio Christmas Market Shooter, Ft Lauderdale Airport Shooter,DNC/RNC Pipe bombs,Thomas Crooks Pennsylvania Trump assassination attempt. Mar a Lago would be assassin, arsonist who firebombed Shapiro’s home, the Israeli Embassy aides gunned down in front of museum, firebomber in Colorado,assassination of two national guards in DC, Luigi Mangione, Pulse Nightclub shooter, Ft Hood Shooter, Brown University Shooter, Minneapolis congressional member and husband shooter,New Orleans car ramming. Congressional baseball practice shooter,Texas ICE shooter who accidentally killed the detainees,the judge who’s husband was killed, Colombine shooter
No way ANY of these were not groomed. Look at their photos. You cannot help but see the similarity . It’s as though they have been brainwashed. Their eyes are vacant, they’re all homely but for Mangione. The young ones have bad skin. Very rare in this day and age. The trans thing. Somebody knows something and nobody is doing anything . It is an agenda. But not the idiocy Candace. Tucker Bannon, Rockwell, Max Blumenthal, Greenwald, Roger Waters, Mamdani, Code Pink, Dore ,Massie, Kim Iversen,Dave Smith, Mandy Patinkin, Cynthi a Nixon and now, sadly, Neil Oliver is parroting
Wonderfully summarized.
That is basically the official dialog. The propaganda is pro-porting an inside job.
I agree with you that she is likable. I also think maybe Candace goes overboard and maybe that's the point. She's on someone's payroll for sure. But who? However, something is shady with the Charlie hit just like JFK. I don't believe Tyler shot Charlie.
Oh god you too? “Maybe goes overboard and maybe that’s the point.” Ya think?
Yeah, I don’t really believe it either unless what that surgeon allegedly said about a frangible bullet is true. I’ve also been wondering what her real motive is given the path of destruction she is leaving in her wake. Like Matt said, we dont want to believe in nothing. I think it’s psychologically destructive.
“…don’t add up…” you mean. Check out Immanuel Velikovsky’s books on UFOs, etc; all are written in this style.
She is likable? Do you buy her supplements too? Do you think you might be part of a social problem?
"A neverending Scooby Doo episode..." Internet win for the week!
And to think the left was almost able to cancel her back in the day for praising that Charlie Chaplin mustachioed looking guy.
Disagree. Condemning her gives her legitimacy. She should be laughed at and ignored.
I think if you access X via the web you can mute particular words, and thus reduce the references to Owens in your feed. I muted “Kardashian” years ago to eliminate frivolous nonsense from mine.
How?? Please tell me because I have a list!
https://help.x.com/en/using-x/advanced-x-mute-options
Thank you!
Or cancel your account, which I did. After walking The Camino, social media has started getting removed and X was the first to go. The peacefulness was to precious, so Matt I’m counting on you to keep me informed. You, I’m keeping.
I’m thinking of canceling all of my socials. There’s no other media I trust, and there are a few local news accounts on X I follow that I know are doing the job that the media should be doing.
I trust Matt which is why I’ll never get rid of this account.
I feel the exact same way.
Touche’ Alison!
Really. Maybe the pro bono crack team of attorneys were looking for something? Some form of pay off at some time. But you obviously know way more about the Kirk case than I do
My opinion is still Owens is off on this matter. My wife believes her. It seems women tend to believe her I’m not sure why.
Just a great description of Owens content.
💯
Scooby Doo. Priceless
My question is WHY was she so focused on Madam Macron's crotch. Who cares really, in this world of crazier matches than that, i.e. Bill and Hilly.
But I do wonder why Erika K is spending so much time trying to defend TPA and herself in too many talk shows in Legacy Media and podcast-land when she should be grieving and caring for her 2 kids who just lost a father. Just saying.
Macron crotch: absolutely no idea. It’s the last thing I want to think about. I’ll leave thinking about it to Emmanuel and Candace.
Erika: I suspect she’s forcing herself to stand up and keep moving. If she allows herself to fall apart then those kids lose even more than they already have lost.
No matter what Erika does people will condemn her. Mothers can't win. If they work, they are neglecting kids, if they stay home, they are wasting their lives. I agree that it would help with the grief to carry on the mission. None of us has any idea how much she is with the kids.
Exactly. How Erika chooses to deal with the public execution of her husband and the running of his company is her business. She’ll be judged no matter what she does.
Erika: This is 100% correct. When you are grieving deeply, being intentional gets you through the day.
Maybe diving in is helping her cope. Everyone has their ways. Sitting and grieving may not be hers. She’s in charge now and I think she needs to go full steam ahead
Because it's relevant to the BIGGER story of a major conspiracy that's been being perpetrated against us regular folk by the elite class for centuries - Macron was groomed to become president by the Rothchilds and Brigitte is his handler - Brigitte, formerly Jean Michel Trogneau. Note as well that Owens is reporting on this using a book written by French journalist Xavier Poussard, who has NOT been sued for liable or defamation by the French First Lady. Jean Michel Trogneau transitioned when he was about 30 years old (so 1975 give or take) and many years later Brigitte magically appears on the scene as a teacher at Macron's school. It's clear that she's still undergoing transition in the photos from that time. She/he was 47 (not 36 or 39 as reported) and he was 14 when Brigitte left her existing family for him. The official reports all changed her and his ages to make it sound more palatable and not like what it was, pedophilia. His birth certificate was changed when he transitioned and reports her DOB as 13 April 1953, which "coincidentally" is the date the MKUltra program officially began.
Great comment!
Best response!
This is the worst piece you have ever written….i have enjoyed your writing for years, and I find you one of the few worth following these days.
Having said said, what the fuck was that you just wrote? Ridiculing a podcaster who is raising legitimate questions about a sketchy FBI non-investigation into the biggest political assassination of our century is really below you. All of a sudden, we are supposed to trust the same organizations that gave us the 9-11 bullshit, COVID bullshit, JFK murder bullshit? You trust Kash et al. to tell us the truth? Really? The only reason Candace has hunches and guesses and dreams and what not is because every single piece of relevant information regarding the alleged assassin has been buried, disappeared and so on. I sure as hell don’t know what happened, but I, and every sane rational person on the planet know what did NOT happen, and what did not happen is what the authorities are peddling.
If Candace interests you enough to write an article, how about you examine, critically, some of her theories and questions and compare what she is doing against the crap that the Feds and TPUSA are dishing out? How about going back to real journalism instead of piling on one of the few honest people left on the public sphere? Candace may be wrong about every single one of her theories and guesses and hunches, but at least she is asking the questions, and is sincere in trying to get to the bottom of who murdered her friend. Why don’t you do the same?
I'm going to answer at length, so people understand why I'm laughing at Candace Owens instead of engaging with her “questions” or comparing her work to "the crap that the Feds and TPUSA are dishing out," as you put it.
Like a million other older reporters I was raised to follow certain rules. The rules are there to protect both the public (from unfounded, irreversibly damaging accusations) and the reporters (from making mistakes). The number one rule is you can't make serious claims without evidence, especially when the reputations of people are involved.
If I wrote an article in the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal or even in Racket saying the FBI, the French Foreign Legion, and Erika Kirk were somehow involved in Charlie Kirk's assassination, and then admitted on national television as she did that this was done without "concrete evidence," I'd be sued into oblivion.
It was once understood that the penalties for this behavior, called "actual malice" in the landmark NYT v. Sullivan case (which made "reckless disregard" for the truth the standard for punishment) should be so high that it would cripple the career of anyone who engaged in it.
Why should the penalty be so high? Because when you print or say things about real people, it can have a devastating impact on their lives. If you’re in the media business you should want to be careful, you should want to be right, because you should fear having a mistake on your conscience. If you lack that fear, there’s something wrong with you, and you shouldn’t have a big audience.
Many years ago I wrote a jokey little sports column for alt-weeklies about crimes committed by athletes. It wasn’t investigative and most of the entries were just 300-400 words based on published items. Once, I ran a bit about a sports figure caught up in a sex scandal, based on someone else’s published report. That other story turned out to be wrong, which meant I was wrong.
The victimized person arranged through lawyers to speak to me on the phone. The agreement was, no lawsuit, but I had to listen to a comprehensive description of all the pain and damage that story had caused this person. I was devastated as I listened to the story of what just this one little wrong story had done to a marriage, a family, a career, the questions it inspired from kids, and so on. This person’s idea was that maybe I would learn something and be more careful in the future.
Thinking of that, I get extremely pissed off when I see “influencers” accusing people not of infidelity but complicity in murder based on “I’m sensing.” That is not the behavior of someone who cares about the truth.
This leads to your comment, “Candace may be wrong about every single one of her theories and guesses and hunches, but at least she is asking the questions, and is sincere in trying to get to the bottom of who murdered her friend. Why don’t you do the same?”
This “asking the questions” trope is just plain wrong. There is a right way and a wrong way to “ask questions.” If you suspect someone of a crime you have to dig, dig, dig until you find something concrete, and if you don’t find that thing, you have to walk away. You can’t just say, “A weird thing happened over here, therefore this person over here is suspect…”
That’s malice. We don’t do that for the same reason grand jury proceedings are secret (another thing people seem not to care about anymore). We’re supposed to care about whether or not we’re hurting people with accusations. If a person is innocent, if there isn’t enough evidence to indict someone, it’s better that no one know they were ever suspected, because in the mass media age, you can convict on suspicion alone.
Then there’s the trope, “If you criticize X, you must believe the ‘official story.’” As you put it, “All of a sudden, we are supposed to trust the same organizations that gave us the 9-11 bullshit, COVID bullshit, JFK murder bullshit?”
Anyone who reads this site knows I look critically at official statements. On the Covid front, I had a lot of questions about what happened, but I didn’t proceed by just lobbing accusations. I worked with people like Michael Shellenberger and Alex Gutentag to put out the texts of the scientists who wrote the seminal Nature article asserting zoonotic origin, showing even they thought a lab leak was “so friggin’ likely.”
Later I worked for months with a CIA whistleblower who was unfortunately constrained for a variety of reasons in being able to speak freely, but still was able to show (again with Michael and Alex) that even CIA investigators were pressured away from the lab-leak story. We did other stories, including some about early Covid patients at Wuhan, but always we printed only what we could back up. It is an agonizing, time-consuming, frustrating process, and one other reason I get frustrated by people like Candace – they make it seem like “investigating” can be an instant procedure.
It isn’t, if you care to avoid getting things wrong about people. If your investigative method is casually defaming people to the point where they publicly beg you to stop, you’re not interested in what’s true, you’re up to something else.
That person deserves ridicule. Responding in any other way tends to legitimize the activity.
I hope that answers your question.
Brilliant story and rebuttal Matt. Thanks for sharing. I wish you had started your article with this personal experience you had, I think it would have added weight to it.
Thank you for your integrity and ethics Matt. Big fan since back in the Rolling Stone days. Keep up the great work. We need you more than ever.
This is not the same courageous Matt who I once followed on Rolling Stone. There has been a major personality change. Matt has become a spokesperson for Israel and Wall Street and a strong supporter of the uber-capialist and imperialist status quo.
Oh, please. Give it a rest, man. You're spamming every comment thread on this post. What are you up to now, 100 comments?
We get it -- Matt isn't adequately outraged about the Gaza "genocide." He falls short of the moral compass you follow. Understood.
Believe me, we ALL understand your take, even if many of us don't agree. Dude, sometimes less is more -- have faith in the articulation of your take and let it gestate.
Well said, but people like this can’t let it go. If you’re that unhappy stay home. (Unsubscribe)
Matt, I appreciate this response, and I'm a loyal reader and someone with a ton of respect for your work over the years. But you need to come out and say it: You either believe there are legitimate questions about this assassination, or you don't.
If you believe there are legitimate questions (why the weird text messages? why no exit wound? why release video of the shooter only after he allegedly pulled the trigger? why did Netanyahu deny immediately?), then you have to admit that Candace is one of the few asking them with determination. She might not be following your preferred journalistic methods (which are honorable), but she nevertheless deserves support as she investigates, not ridicule. At the very least, hands-off curiosity might be the proper approach, as she might just uncover the truth.
On the other hand, if you don't believe there are legitimate questions about this assassination, and you think the FBI is telling us the full story, then why not just let it go? Why not ignore her and let her drive her own truck into a ditch? Instead, you're smearing Candace in much the same way you suggest she's smearing Erica Kirk.
As it is, I don't want to jump to conclusions, but it appears you could be running interference for the establishment and/or one of the many arms of the Israel lobby.
It's perplexing to say the least. To watch this substack go from an anti-establishment juggernaut to trying to cover up both the Epstein files and the Kirk assassination at the same time. Merry Christmas I guess 🤷♂️
Candace is con artist with an anti-Semitic agenda. Have you ever noticed she only asks questions and only ever asks then in a way that furthers her narrative and agenda?
If you care about accuracy rather than tribal cheerleading there is an easy test to run when trying to determine if someone is worth listening to: have you ever heard them admit they wrong, agree with someone based on the merit of their argument despite clashing ideologies or criticize themselves or people in their own ideological tribe when it is going to ruffle feathers?
In other words, does this person ever say or do anything that could hurt them politically, financially or reputationally because it is the right thing to do?
If you cannot honestly say “yes” you are listening to an Alex Jones or an MSNBC talking head that will say whatever furthers their narrative and increases their ratings. That not someone whose words or arguments should ever seriously form your own viewpoints. They are modern day social media Jerry Springers with even less decency yet discussing exponentially more important topics.
If you cannot
Where is your evidence that she is a 'con artist' or antisemitic?
Humility and integrity.
Thanks for that Tony! Finally a rational comment with a legitimate question that won’t be answered….unfortunately.
Thank you for expressing my exact thoughts. Taibbi's current trajectory (not to mention the unfortunate biases of his current readership) has been devastatingly disappointing. After my annual subscription expired, I switched to monthly just to see where he (and they) were headed. After this article, I think it's time to unsubscribe altogether. So sad.
You seem to be a bit dense. Matt answered your questions in the post you are replying to. The point is Candace is not “investigating” anything, she is just lobbing unsubstantiated allegations and smears and hunches, because that produces revenue in the podcast world. Matt’s point is that you don’t run your mouth about what you are “sensing” until AFTER you have done the hard work of actually investigating and have evidence to support your “hunches”.
This from the guy who has said equally outrageous things about mayor-elect Mamdani as well as uttery insane and untrue things about the so-called evils of socialism? This from a genocide denier, who refuses to see what seems obvious to all the rest of the world except for ardent Zionists? This from a man who argues that the Epstein matter is at bottom a nothing burger? I have lost all respect for this journalist I once admired. And I have actually gained a little respect for Candace Owens. For all her faults, she is currently making the world a better place by asking tough questions. Matt isn't.
lol. What equally outrageous things have been said about Mamdani? Equal to accusing someone of murder with admittedly zero concrete evidence?
And there are hundreds of years of evidence, including millions dead bodies, that substantiate the evils of socialism.
It seems to me you’ve lost respect for him because he doesn’t pass your purity tests. That says more about you than him.
Merry Christmas.
Go back and read Matt's scathing takedown of Mamdani after he was elected mayor. It was vicious.
In order to spread capitalism the US has killed more than 20 million people in 37 victim nations since World War II. Since 1945, capitalist America has perpetrated 297 invasions of foreign countries and at least 60 coups. Capitalist US and EU sanctions have killed 38 million people since 1970. Lenin correctly said the highest stage of capitalism is imperialism. Capitalists invade other countries to steal their resources, get cheap labor, and force them into debt. Socialists don't invade other countries. They don't kill for profit. And all this nonsense about Mao killing millions is just propaganda. So as a socialist I am now celebrating the birth of the Prince of Peace. I extend goodwill wishes to everyone, inclulding you, even though you apparently hate what I am.
What specifically was “vicious” and not factual?
Matt lived in the former Soviet Union. He knows more about the horrors of “socialism” and its corrosive effects on society than you could ever care to know.
Matt was in Russia in the 1990s when capitalist shock therapy was being rammed down Russia's throat. It was their worst and most miserable time since the Tsars. Everything was being privatized, sold off to Russian and American oligarchs who didn't give a damn about the common good. Desperate men were on the streets trying to sell single cigarettes in order to buy food for their families. Russians who had lived through Stalin's regime and the 90s almost universally believed they had been far better off under Stalin when they had jobs and govenment services. As someonewho has read Marx and studied socialism at great length, I feel confident in saying Matt, inspite of his high intelligence, doesn't know shit about socialism.
Additionally, this is the guy who loves the first amendment unless it’s enjoyed by genocide protesters on college campuses. He calls Bari Weiss critics “jealous losers “ while praising her work. Which is incessant Israeli propaganda.
He is now riding shotgun in the Michael Tracy pedophile obfuscation clown car. Where if victims are sluts then forget everything you know about black mail and mossad connections exposed daily by dropsite and others. This from the same cunt who told viewers that Gaza wasn’t his expertise. If Taibi, TP USA, Ben Shapiro and Israel are pearl clutching Candace, then knowing nothing else about her, I’d say she’s over the target.
I plan to be subscribing to racket until it goes bankrupt. Hooray for free speech.
Harassing people and trespassing is not protected by the first amendment.
Peaceful protest or writing an editorial is only harassment or trespassing in the delusional Zionist cult when it identifies Israeli war crimes
Lies.
One of the often overlooked attractions of anti-semitism is the self-assured, self-righteous clarity it gives its most ardent adherents. I mean, if you lack the normal gag-reflex decent people feel about racist ideologies, anti-semitic ferver does provide morons a nice, clear, black-and-white view of the world to embrace. I’m sure that is refreshing for people with low-powered brains in a world where nuance and complexity require constant data processing, analysis and adjustments to one’s stances.
Every dilemma can be approached by the simple question, “Are there Jews involved?” If yes, then their side of the debate is “Evil” and the other side is “Good” and nothing else matters.
If you don’t actually care about being correct or joining one of the most loathsome groups in both modern and ancient human history: Jew haters and anti-semitics. 🤷♂️
How dare you call me a Jew hater! I admire the Jewish faith. Here are some prominent Jews who, like me, strongly condemn the ongoing Zionist genocide in Gaza: Medea Benjamin, Max Blumethal, Norman Finkelstein, Glenn Greenwald, Ilan Pappé, Katie Harper, Jill Stein, Naomi Wolf, Noam Chomsky, Daniel Levy, previously a peace negotiator for Israel and now a prominent critic; Gabor Maté, physician-psychotherapist-author; Aaron Maté, his award-winning journalist son; Wallace Shawn, playwright and actor; Amy Eilberg, American rabbi and activist; Peter Beinart,one of the organizers of Jews Demand Action; Naomi Klein, progressive Canadian writer; Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro, author of The Empty Wagon: Zionism’s Journey from Identity Crisis to Identity Theft; Yuval Abraham, co-director of No Other Land, the documentary that won an Oscar in 2024. Jewish Voice for Peace, the Jewish Bloc, The International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network, Jews for Justice for Palestinians, Jews Against the War on Gaza.
Listing a bunch of American Jews(mostly) doesn't mean anything. They are far away from Israel. Why don't you check with the (majority) Misrahi Jews who always lived in the ME? You know, the ones who got purged from Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt,.etc. Ask them how they feel?
Many of the Jews I mentioned live in Israel. Israel is a settler-colonial project filled largely with European Ashkenazi Jews who have no genetic or historical connection to the Levant. The indigenous people of the Levant (the so-called "Holy Land") are the Palestinians. What Hitler did to the Jews in Europe, the Zionists are now doing to innocent Palestinians. Whie Judaism is a beautiful religion, Zionism is pure evil. It acts in defiance of the Ten Commandments. Thou shalt not covet. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not kill. Zionism is a Jewish heresy. The founder of Zionism was actually an atheist. Christian Zionists also are heretics. Now why don't you ask some Palestinians how they feel about being murdered, driven out 0f their homes, and having their land stolen.
Love that picture of your hero Noam with Epstein. Tells you all you need to know about how ethical Chomsky is. And isn’t Epstein Mossad? Why would Chomsky be buddy buddy with a Zionist?
I never said Chomsky was my hero, though I have read him extesively. I admire much of his writing, but not all. If Chomsky was a participant in the sexual abuse of underaged women, I would call that shameful and disgusting.
Racist ideologies? You mean like Judaism?
I think you need medication.
If you’re gravitating away from Taibbi and toward Owens, you’re piloting your hooptie in WRONG direction.
Matt has a much better journalistic history, but currently Candace is moving in a good direction and Taibbi is moving in a bad direction. Matt has become moral coward. He, for example, won't say anything critical of Israel. We should all be asking why.
😂🤣😂Great satire! You're good! “For all her faults she's making the world a better place by asking questions.”
“We are the world! We are the Children!” We're the ones who make a brighter day by asking questions!” 🤣😂🤣
Not satire. Satire is tricky on social media. Too many people think you are being serious.
100%
Maybe this is a bot for Candice as “it” keeps repeating the same thing. I vote to ignore
I ain't no bot, and I disagree with many of the ridiculous things Candace has said over the years. Candice is right-wing, and I am left-wing. But lately she has been right more than Taibbi, who I used to admire. I strongly support your decision to ignore me, so go away.
Right wing, left wing. Here comes the horse shoe theory again. Both of you deserve to be put in straight jackets.
Dude, seriously. You’re making yourself look “ troubled”. Give it a rest for a while
Bravo Matt 👏
The irony of this, "Because when you print or say things about real people, it can have a devastating impact on their lives", after your demonstrably false statement about Candace from the article:
"After spending most of the last few months implying that Erika Kirk somehow had guilty knowledge of the plot to kill her husband"
Baseless claim. Candace had not "implied" jack shit about Erika, and certainly not about "guilty knowledge" of a plot to kill her husband, prior to these recent few weeks of media blast/sitdown/follow up. Megyn Kelly called Ben Shapiro out as a liar for saying the exact same thing, because it's not true.
You don't care about accuracy. This is Bari Weiss level "but she's an Assad Toady" shit.
Nah. Here's a collection of links to reporting on Candace Owen from October, stirring the pot around Erika Kirk, "just asking questions" and raising doubts about her behavior. Owens made no direct assertions of guilt but repeatedly raised implications about Erika Kirk's knowledge and behavior.
https://factually.co/fact-checks/politics/candace-owens-erika-kirk-charlie-kirk-murder-3fdaf2
Your own link clearly says this isn't true: "The available analyses characterize Owens’ rhetoric as personal and confrontational, asserting Erika “can’t handle the truth” or is invested in preserving a particular narrative.... ".
The reality is, the statement: "Candace has spent MOST of the LAST FEW months implying that 'Erika Kirk' somehow had guilty knowledge of a plot" is a completely incorrect thing to say, by all measures. Saying that once or twice, since Charlie's death, that she "veered close to saying Erika was perhaps not letting on all she knew, or trusting the FBI/TPUSA people too much, would be accurate.
This is a falsely framed statement, and he knows it. Unless he doesn't know it, because he has not seen any of her last few months of podcasts and is taking a verbal "she's totally an Assad toady" generalization from someone he trusts but shouldn't. Megyn Kelly looked into after Shapiro first made this false claim, and rightfully called him a liar, at the time.
Bollocks, I enjoyed your cherry pick from the linked article and your picayune parsing of Taibbi's standard hyperbole. Nice try, but... Nah.
In the spirit of the holidaze, I'm going to give you a gift: the slightest clue.
Let's start with the linked article. You concede that Owens was repeatedly critical of Erika Kirk (this was the point of the article). Criticism implies wrongdoing. What sort of wrongdoing? Let's take a look at the sources cited, what Owens said, and the implications.
10/06: Owens questions Erika Kirk: “What Kind of a Widow Would Not Want the Truth?” Implication: Erika Kirk doesn't want the truth, because she already knows what happened (as revealed by Candace Owens).
10/08: Owens asks, "What kind of widow would not want the truths of her husband's murder to come out?" Implication: Erika Kirk doesn't want the truth to come out; in other words, she may be hiding the truth (as revealed by Candace Owens).
10/15: Owens mocks how Erika was doing photo shoots hours after Charlie Kirk's death while Candace was raising crucial questions. Implication: Erika Kirk is more interested in promoting herself than in her husband's death. In other words, Erika Kirk's behavior shows that she isn't particularly concerned about her husband's death, pointing toward some kind of guilty knowledge (of the truth as revealed by Candace Owens).
I think that's enough to make my point. Candace Owens is a vile, self-promoting fabulist. You are her pathetic fanboy, so insecure that you can't possibly admit that you might be wrong, let alone that you have been fooled by a charlatan.
Merry Christmas.
'Saying that once or twice, since Charlie's death, that she "veered close to saying Erika was perhaps not letting on all she knew, or trusting the FBI/TPUSA people too much...'
Implications are vague by definition. What you said above is an implication.
Saying once or twice in the span of dozen's of hours of podcasts, that Erika is "trusting the narrative" is an implication that she doesn't seem to have an interest in finding out who killed her husband. That could be for personal grief/faith, career, or any number of head-in-the-sand reasons. It's not even remotely akin to his quote that she was, "spending MOST of the past few MONTHS, implying Erika Kirk in on some sort of plot".
Obviously, Megyn wouldn't have stood up for Candace if she had been doing that, and Erika likely wouldn't have met with her either...
I have a hard time believing that any decent honest person would have a problem with what you wrote here. It makes sense in a time that doesn't. Nicely done.
“…one other reason I get frustrated by people like Candace – they make it seem like “investigating” can be an instant procedure.”
She never said it is instant and she makes theories and circumstantial evidence public to crowdsource the process.
Charlie Kirk's assassination was a monumental event and you're a damn good journalist. Put your talent to use instead of focusing on the person investigating, which is a distraction. If Candace is doing such a poor job, set an example and do it YOUR way.
She doesn't investigate; she rambles
Thank you for having integrity about these issues, Matt. It is the main reason I, and I suspect others, continue to subscribe.
Excellent Matt. You and a few others are reminding us what a journalist ought and ought not do. I consider this to be important. It’s the reason that I’ve never listened to Owens, turned off Carlson, and become very skeptical of Rogan. Baseless “that’s just a fact” flying everywhere.
I would advise you (if you don’t mind), to not feel obligated to debate the conspiracy guy. You’ll get nowhere, as I’m sure you know. However, for the thinkers in the audience, thanks.
What I hear in your article is contempt. Matt, you called Charlie Kirk an “influencer.” Seriously? He built the most powerful conservative youth outreach organization this country has ever seen. He was responsible for MAHA joining MAGA. He was responsible for Trump picking JD Vance as VP. He was a coalition builder and he was the glue that held the various factions of the republican party together. As you can see they immediately fell apart. He had influence all right, but he was not making TikTok videos about Italian cooking. So you might wonder if any groups of people wanted to wrest control of TPUSA away him. Like the MIC since he spoke against war? Or the Israeli government since he spoke about the odd circumstances around Oct 7 on the PBD podcast? Is it weird to you that freaking nobody seems interested in what really happened except Candace? It does to me.
Matt, I’ve been a longtime reader and supporter of your work. I value both your wit and the civility you maintain during hostile congressional hearings. That said, your coverage of Candace feels like a misstep and diminishes the strengths that usually define your work. I hope you reflect on the direction you want to take moving forward.
I suppose if I were to take a journalism course at a reputable school, I would learn about everything Matt noted in his response, except perhaps, the personal story about getting it wrong and the damage inflicted on an innocent person. It’s a good thing we have people with integrity like Matt who still play by the rules. Thank you.
I appreciate your willingness to be extra careful and truthful. And to base your reporting on actual evidence.
Proof matters. Thanks for your diligence.
Speak it Matt!
Actually I don’t think I do need to express an opinion about that. There will be a trial that either will or will not prove someone’s guilt, and we’ll go from there.
I’ll add that it’s very easy to make piles of suspicious-sounding assertions and much harder to make a coherent case for one version of events. I’m also cognizant that rumors about Israeli involvement spread with light speed through the media world before Kirk was even dead, and that case isn’t convincing to me.
Are you going to do any investigative journalism?
Matt, you expressed strong statements about Russiagate (and I agreed with you on that one) but there has been no trial, no legal proof of guilt. You also expressed strong opinions about Democrats censoring comments on X (Twitter). There also rothing there that has been poven in a court of law, but I support you on that one, too.. Also, you said it was just fine with you when Trump bombed Iran. (That one was pehaps the most disgusting thing you have ever said.) The official narrative about the Kirk assassination has more holes in it than a chunk of Swiss cheese. Perhaps Candace says too much. You say too little.
Well, Matt, asking questions is the first part. Of both journalism and the scientific method. Asking questions is healthy and important, and it generally shouldn't elicit criticism by others in the field unless they have a vested interest in the status quo.
You're right that it's far harder to make a coherent case for one version of events than to point out flaws in the received establishment version. That doesn't make pointing out flaws wrong. Again, it's the first step on the path of investigative journalism.
Many of us here would just like you to do this -- provide your assessment of the facts of the Kirk assassination case -- even if you're unprepared or unwilling to attempt to make a convincing case for one specific version or theory of the event.
But if you don't want to touch the case at all, that's fine too, but then leave it be. Don't cast aspersions at one of the few people willing to stick her chin out for the sake of uncovering the truth.
The insane clown journalist has earned his $7000 dollars again. Save your money. And all the numb nuts stupid enough to work for you should work on their resumes. My contempt for your work reaches new lows every week. You can make an argument that Zionists weren’t involved. The problem is that Netanyahu was denying involvement so vociferously that he interjected Israel into the matter. That’s not a rumor. Egypt jets full of Jews are chasing Erika all over hell. If that’s not true, better tell Tucker, tough guy. Bring your disheveled new friend Michael Tracy. The FBI sucks ass. Go write that story. Looks like the orange savior is going to let comey, clapper and friends shit in your stupid face…again. Write that story. Or would that be awkward for the gypsy and his library of Congress job interview? You worthless so-called journalist.
Poor Joe ...
Weep not for me, but for yourself and for your children.
Good argument
Joe has to be Candace under a fake name, right? No one can really believe this crap. Matt is spot on to skewer her, although I'm a little concerned it just gives her that little more attention. I'm convinced the whole phenomenon is mostly a case of people wanting to see what she/does says next, a la Jerry Springer.
Candace’s “arguments” are the verbal equivalent of hitting somebody in the face with a folding chair.
😂
People like you and Candace are afraid of how chaotic reality is. You and she need to believe that someone is in control, even if that somone is an evil cabal of Jews/reptiles/illuminati etc. The reality that no one is really in control, and that bad things can be done by bad people even in the most powerful nation in the world, is too unsettling. The idea that some loser can just kill someone like Kirk, for pretty mundane reasons, and that no one could have stopped him, just cant be real to people like you. You're deeply afraid of chaos and vulnerability.
You are pathetic if you cannot see that our government- especially Congress is controlled by outside forces and is not doing the will of the people. And how do you suppose those outside forces operate, by calling the Congressmen on the phone and talking to an intern maybe? Stop being so naive. Charlie Kirk wasn't even hit by a bullet from the gun they are claiming. Wake up already.
Meds Janine. Stat.
Ad hominem much?
Listen pal at some point there is nothing left other than “name calling”. If I saw a child stumble into the street I’d holler. If you think what Owens and her ilk are selling is worthy of being considered go ahead and cough up. But you’re nuts. It’s just as simple as that.
Not a single intelligent rebuttal of the claims- only insults. The issue is not those who question the narrative; the issue is those who blindly swallow it and then shout down the thinkers.
Jan. You might want to keep this comment between you and the cat
You might want to read the comment and come to a little better understanding of the world you actually live in as opposed to the fairey tale world in which the FBI tells you the truth about political assassinations.
"Congress is controlled by outside forces and is not doing the will of the people."
I think Janine has a valid point there. Consider the Epstein vote. It was nearly unanimous. But individual members of Congress had to pass a discharge petition to get a vote. Think about that. They had to override leadership to get a vote on something that was near unanimous. Okay, contrast Epstein with the carried interest tax loophole. Obama and Trump both said, when campaigning, they wanted to eliminate it. If we have a congressional vote, it would be eliminated in another near-unanimous vote. But we don't get the vote. No talk at all of a discharge petition to repeal the carried interest tax loophole.
It's seems clear to me that Congress itself (supposedly a reflection of the will of the populace) is not calling the shots.
P.S. I pretty much ignore all the wild speculation about "what really happened." I think most of the time what happened is what appeared to happen. People are bored with reality so pretend to believe nutty stuff to spice up their lives. 9/11 Truthers being the quintessential example.
What in God's name does all that have to do with Kirk's murder?
Self-appointed comment police. Ms. Elaine Eeek is taking it upon herself to reinforce the regime narrative up and down Matt's page. Rediculous
That you have actually taken the time and effort to count the number of someone commenting, fits right in with in with Candace.
She would say it is no coincidence that you are both on the same chat - how sinister! Lol
Calm down. My comment was very clear. I even pulled a quote from the comment to which I was replying. If you have a point to make, you should make it. I can't read minds.
I am with you. More than obvious it was an inside job. The same people who think Tyler killed Charlie still believe Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK. 🤪👌
I was alive in high school when JFK was assassinated. We all know Oswald was not the shooter.
Kirk was assassinated by a lone gunman on the roof of the college, and by videos of him leaving the scene. Fingerprints on the remaining bullets and rifle are Robinson's. Usually, the simplest explanation is the correct one. If Charlie was just an ordinary apolitical man, there would be no controversy
No, we all don't know that. Oswald did it.
Elaine: "We all know Oswald was not the shooter" 'But after that the government would NEVER lie to us. "If Charlie was just an ordinary man" he would not have been assassinated.' Why the heck do you presume you are accomplishing here Elaine Eeek, with your 22 comments?
Wow, this article sure made things interesting, especially the back and forth comments. One things is certain all media engages in some form of speculation and assumptions. Candace Owen’s is on the extreme end of speculation and assumptions. She attracts those folks who need to belong to a group that believes that they have some form of inside knowledge, some inner revelation that others just don’t see or understand. Yes it is Cult like thinking, and it is reinforced the rare times they are correct, but as they say, “even a broken clock tells the correct time twice a day.”
Which group is in the cult? It's a good question. Questioning the proclamations of the FBI and government agencies is not cult-like thinking, it's probably independent critical thinking. Don't take anyone's word for it, that's the key. Think for yourself. If you agree with Candace (as I do) that there are unanswered questions about the Kirk assassination, that doesn't make you part of a cult.
Now, if you believe everything Candace has ever said, and you're handing over your intelligence and a portion of your wealth to her, then yes, you might be in a cult.
All of us here are giving money to Taibbi, so it's probably wiser to ask whether those of us on this forum who blindly believe what Matt is saying here are part of a cult. It is worth considering.
I recognize many of the readers on this thread. Most don’t blindly agree with Matt and/or Walter all the time. There’s debate, it’s part of what I love about this subscription. But honestly. Some of you are whacked. The other thing. If Matt discovers additional info that might convince him alternatively, he’ll freely admit it and report. I’ve witnessed that too.
Agreed, and I'm one of those like you who agrees with much of what Matt writes and has written, and I too do not blindly agree with Matt nor Walter all the time.
I'm a huge fan of independent media in general and my most recent book (Red White & Blind) is on this topic.
I have agreed nearly all the time with Matt on topics ranging from covid to Russiagate to free speech, the Twitter files, censorship, etc. At times I've celebrated his writing and directed friends and colleagues to his work.
It's because of the high esteem with which I hold Mr Taibbi that, in this case, I'm so surprised to find him undermining and smearing a fellow independent journalist who is asking questions of the FBI and other nebulous government authorities. The Kirk assassination, like covid or Russiagate, is a seminal event of our era, and it's essential we understand it accurately. I find it frankly disappointing and weird to see this attitude from this substack, in particular combined with this space trying to minimize the Epstein files earlier this month.
It could just be a place (or two) where I differ with a couple of his honestly held opinions. Sure. But I suggest we also must consider that it's a case of calculated deception by Matt. I'm hoping it's the former, of course, but I'm keeping my eyes open in case it's the latter.
Actually, the cult-like thinking is among the pro-zionists who claim Candace is the crazy one. Consider for a moment that "inside knowledge" might just be from (the MANY) reputable sources who are doing actual investigative work on this issue, unlike the author of this article.
Once again, you are repeating Candace Owens' lies. I will again remind you to do research, like the autopsy report. The bullet came from the Robinson rifle. Period.
There is no publicly available autopsy report. Despite your ignorance, here you are up and down this page pummeling commenters with your misinformation. Over and over and over again. You are in here TWENTY TWO times. Whatever on earth you presume to be accomplishing, not a soul in this chat can figure out.
OMGosh! Keep counting.
Lol
Jan, learn how to use computers. Cmd F counts for you.
See? You crave order and predictability, which reality can never give you...so you concoct a fairy tail in which scary (but orderly and predictable) forces are really behind everything
So you are admitting that the usual suspect did it, but you want to use that fact to cast shade on me because I don't believe a completely fabricated chaos theory? Is that really what you are going with? BTW, if they were going for a chaotic-looking assassination, they failed miserably.
Randomness is meaningless. Some people cannot or will not wrap their head around that.!
You’re crazy, lady.
“outside forces”
You heard Marco, people. “Outside forces” is now a conspiracy theory. There is henceforth no such thing as outside forces in any setting. Everything from now on is organic- no matter what. You heard him!
Go outside and touch grass, cat lady.
🤡
Oh, Janine. Are you leaking something from the investigation or are you just full of shit.
Holy cow.
Sounds like a description of yourself.
“evil cabal of Jews/reptiles/illuminati”. Nice crowd has gathered here to comment LOL.
Kearney, you forgot to mention Iraq, Hamas, cartels as someone that is evil.
🤣🤣🤣
I am with Joe:
How does a gangly kid who doesn’t look like he has ever held a gun climb up on a roof at a crowded TPUSA event with supposed security on duty. He then assembles a 30-06 rifle on the roof, takes one shot and hits Charlie in the side of his neck, the bullet doesn’t even exit the neck, and then he climbs down from the roof and is seen by no one, not even a university security camera, and then hides out for two days before confessing to his father? Really?
Maybe he shot Seth Rich too??
Good news: unless you're going to sit on the jury your opinion doesn't matter. We try cases in courts, not podcasts.
Unless the patsy mysteriously dies. They use that one ALOT!
Sirhan Sirhan is still alive in prison since 1968. RFK Jr and coroner Thomas Noguchi have pronounced Thane Eugene Cesar the real assassin based on evidence (fortunately for Cesar the US has courts of law!)
MK Ultra is just a made-up conspiracy theory?
TERF Owl, how much are you being paid to defend the establishment narratives? It's pitiful and not going well, but I'm just curious because I'm between jobs and might need the money.
Don't bother.
I believe Tyler Robinson grew up in a rural area of southern Utah and his grandfather taught him how to shoot as a kid. Wasn't the 30-06 was a gift from his grandfather?
Lee Harvey Oswald.
I can see you may never have lived in Utah. They are some of the most naive people you will ever meet. Security was low because,"No one would do anything like that here"
You do realize investigators (the real ones, not podcast grifters) present evidence in something called a court of law to people called "jurors," with standards of evidence, where the accused are innocent until proven guilty. These are fundamentals of our justice system. What she's doing is the opposite of that. The only people who need to be convinced of ANYTHING are the twelve jurors when Tyler Robinson's trial happens. Candace Owens is not necessary for any of that. She's in fact undermining the process by making it fodder for clicks, where she rambles on about vibes. "Theories" are not evidence.
She's also pretty much demonic for attacking a widow and getting her insane clown posse of followers to spread the worst shit about Erika on X.
I try not to hate people, but she is loathsome. I hope she's ruined in the Macron case, and that Erika and TPUSA file suit against her as well.
You are in for some huge disappointements because you are on the wrong side of every issue you mentioned. Get better media.
Yeah. Read what Janine reads! Tea leaves!!
Janine’s head is in a dark smelly place, so she can see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, unfortunately she can still text. She needs mittens.
Who's texting? You can't even get THAT simple reality straight? Pathetic
You can’t be that dense you don’t know I got that simple reality straight. Oh wait, of course you can be.
Well, whatever media you are listening to, Janine, is dead wrong. Probably some purveyor of click bait with no actual proof of anything they are saying.
Meanwhile Katherine has all the proof she needs, given to her by her super-honest and trustworthy social media feed. Or the people who pay her paycheck for shilling regime narrative online.
Yeah, it’s totally normal to behave like how Erika Kirk has behaved. She’s above criticism because she’s a widow selling books, merch, and doing the podcast circuit. That’s the expectation we have for how all widows should act, monetizing the death of their husbands.
She is CEO of TPUSA bc Charlie wanted it. His last book was published. Perhaps she feels a duty to do all this to carry on his legacy. May you be spared this kind of vicious judgement of your own life. You will have to answer for the things you’re saying about her to God someday.
You are completely insane. You think an internet random writing mild criticism of a public figure invokes the wrath of God? Do you worship these people like they are gods, or what exactly is wrong with you?
I don’t just think it. It’s said in the Bible, my friend.
“I tell you, on the day of judgment you will have to give an account for every careless word you utter.” Matthew 12:36
Tim, I agree that, while I think everyone mourns in different ways and we should not judge them, I am uncomfortable with Erika Kirk and the way she is behaving. I think she is a self-promoter. I simply cannot understand it. I know she has a desire to keep Turning Point going, but she has gone way beyond that.
That said, it is a stretch to exspouse "questions" (more like unfounded claims) about Kirk's nearest and dearest friends and his wife. You and I both know that Candace Owens is saying these things to be provocative and to further herself.
It is odd that you are ready to think that perhaps Erika Kirk had something to do with her husband's murder, but unwilling to think that Candace Owens is acting the provocateur to further her career.
For Fuck’s Sakes. What a maroon.
That was Bugs Bunny’s put-down wasn’t it?
Yes, and I still use it.
….what an ignoramous, what a nin-com-poooooop!
It’s a handy guide on who to block on substack. When they show you who they are, believe them!
I prefer to mute. But yes.
A MAROON?? 🤣
Says the maroon!
"She is asking questions." No, she is vomiting garbage and implying connections with zero evidence and rationality. She vomits garbage all day and then demands she be proved wrong, a tactic to twist into us a pretzel trying to prove a negative, which is an exercise where one never reaches the end.
To Joe and his "likes"
I am dismayed (and worried) that subscribers to Matt's Substack are this fucking stupid.
They’re either purposely stirring the pot or not real. I wouldn’t worry. You’ll begin to recognize the normal folks that like debate and enjoy w/o nastiness what Matt shares.
Matt isn't even framing the idiotic aspects of Candace's podcast correctly, and chooses to repeat the Shapiro lie/talking point that she's spent "most of the past few months accusing Erika Kirk of being involved in a plot", which is just patently false.
Candace accused/implied zero to do with Erika, until she started on her grieving widow Sabbath book tour a few weeks ago, and started doing canned interviews with Bari Weiss and Fox and friends, mentioning Candace by name...
I'm nearly convinced that Matt is actually being paid by pro-Israel voices at this point. This is pure propaganda about the most popular podcaster in the country (followed by Tucker). It reads very much like his Anti-Mamdani piece- just wrong on core facts and willfully ignoring the obvious reasons for his popularity. Candace did a long sit down with Gaza scholar Norm Finklestein. Tucker recently had on the censored/sanctioned-by-Trump UN rapporteur Francesca Albanese. The reason these folks are so popular is because THEY are the ones standing up and allowing for dissenting voices in a MSM environment that is still actively lying to the American people and denying genocide.
Mr Bollocks. One thing we do know is that Matt puts his name behind his accusations. So now you are “nearly convinced “ that Matt is being paid by pro Israel forces? And your proof of this accusation is what? I can see why you like Candace so much. You have the same moral compass
For those of you interested: Expanding on Candace’s work is Ian Carroll (also excellent reporting on Epstein), Baron Coleman, James Li. Reporting parts of Candace’s work is Jimmy Dore and Kim Iversen. Max Blumenthal has done some investigative work on Charlie’s life.
Thank you for these references 👍
Max Blumenthal was the first person I heard to suggest that the Israeli lobby was interested in silencing Charlie Kirk. I think it was on a JudgeNap podcast.
I’m trying to understand why “Owens didn’t even accuse the widow until the widow brought her up” is a point in Owens’s favor.
Same. “Candace accused/implied zero to do with Erika,” until she did. Framing it as some mean-girl pissing contest isn’t exactly proof of validity.
"I'm nearly convinced that Matt is actually being paid by pro-Israel voices at this point."
But are you SENSING it? If not, then it's probably not true...
Get off the internet and Tik Tok lol
100%. Nicely stated.
I didn’t know who Charlie was prior to his death nor had I ever heard of TPUSA…, nor Piers Morgan! I dislike Piers’ style of “talking over his guests” journalism. I subjected myself to listening to the whole hour before commenting on the short clip Matt posted. Candace stood her ground with him. Matt tends to shut up as do I when talked over.
Thank you for writing this. I have liked and trusted Taibbi on so many things for years, but I honestly don't know what to make of this piece. This is shocking, weak, poor, disgraceful, name calling. I'm stunned actually that Taibbi would be running interference like this for a ridiculously obvious FBI coverrup.
The honest intellectual thing to do is to attempt to answer the questions Candace is asking, or to shut up and let the honest ones ask questions.
Name calling and "conspiracy theory" this and that is anti-intellectual blather that I had hoped was below this gifted writer.
It's pathetic. Either actually jealously for her popularity (as he claimed was the case for those pissed that the idiot/noob Bari Weiss got tapped for CBS, despite having no actual popularity) or something worse.
Also, this and the stuff on Epstein have been some of the weakest, least accurate, "whataboutism" style things I've ever seen published on Racket.
Agreed 💯
It's perplexing to say the least to watch this substack go from an anti-establishment juggernaut to trying to cover up both the Epstein files and the Kirk assassination at the same time. Merry Christmas I guess 🤷♂️
Omg that's right, that's actually pretty funny. I remember when he was like "ya'll just jealous of Bari"....now look who's writing bullshit hate pieces about the most popular podcaster...
He’s saying her popularity carries a responsibility to tell the truth. Someone speaking to millions of people shouldn’t speculate based on hunches and unsupported theories. Maybe you’re right, she’s a podcaster not a journalist. But presenting speculation as investigative reporting can ruin lives and reputations. Do you think podcasters should start using basic journalistic ethics? Matt makes a pretty strong case that they should. Not sure why he’d unpack and weigh all her statements, though. It’s her job to find corroborating facts to prove her arguments, not Matt’s.
You guys do remember what he discovered after digging into Twitter right? Influencers who were allowed to freely spew BS and those that tried to combat it were blocked. Remember Covid. The Barrington Declaration, blocked. He has the right to combat her crap, yes crap, because mostly it’s outrageous. It can cause insurmountable harm. Maybe pull up the old Paul Newman movie Absence of Malice. It will show you what smearing people for gotcha news can do. I agree, the Macron thing is out of line. The Erika Kirk too. The. More outrageous influencers are, the more money they make
Ella, she is not the most popular podcaster. Second of all, all she does it espouse lies to draw in the most gullible. Guess that is you.
Oh nice one, you really got me there
Indeed.
Please enlighten us as to Taibbi’s inaccuracies.
Wow. Please tell me what Owens’s questions are based upon besides her “feelings” and making money libeling others?
Joe has a valid point, Matt. Real journalism today is mostly hunches, theories and zit-brained, conspiracy bullshit. You need to get with the program and support Candace in being wrong about everything. At least she’s sincere in her dogged pursuit of wrongness. Bong-hit speculation is the new hard-hitting news. Why the weird obsession with verifiable fact?
The Fifth Column guys have the same take on Candace. Unfortunately there is no amount of bullshit people won't believe. The asking questions is nonsense.
“You trust Kash et al. to tell us the truth?” He is part of the Vast Conspiracy now?
“At least she is asking the questions …” Matt points out Candace routinely goes beyond “asking questions”, to making (often deranged) assertions and accusations.
“… and is sincere in trying to get to the bottom of who murdered …” How do you know she is sincere?
“… her friend …” Smearing the mother of his children seems less than friendly. As far as I can figure, Charlie Kirk had kept Candace Owens at arm’s length for years.
Maybe if her arguments weren't even more absurd than the official narrative, you might have a point. She is an attention whore whose sole purpose is to get clicks and constantly create content with no investigation of any sort. It's all her "feelings" about things with zero evidence. Then you attack Matt for focusing on evidence, unbelievable. People can be so gullible.
How is it that you know what didn't happen? Are you a prophet sent by God or just another sheep who lacks the lucidity to deal with conspiracy nonsense?
Speaking of what didn't happen... how about Netanyahu announcing the very next day that he didn't kill Charlie? Not suspicious at all...
Please provide a link supporting the assertion that Netanyahu made an announcement "the very next day that he didn't kill Charlie?"
I tried searching and the closest I found was video released (on either 9/17/25 or 9/18/25- one week after the assassination) of Netanyahu denying Israel's involvement (not stating that "he didn't kill Charlie"). This was in response to the conspiracy theories which quickly sprung up after the shooting. Much different that implying it was a preemptive deflection move by the actual perp...
[Ben Affleck smoking "For Fuck's Sake" meme]
Are you in the Candice school of influencers training program.
Yes! And I'm on the honor role!
I can tell!
CBS is the IDF.
Matt Taibbi, one of the Kings of Sarcasm. Nicely done.
I always love seeing your Substack handle. Zevon would be proud! ⚖️🔫💲
Thanks Erin! And thanks for the Emoji handle!
CBS is owned by the single biggest American donor to the IDF, yes. https://israelpalestinenews.org/israels-biggest-us-donor-now-owns-cbs/
I laughed so hard when I read that line
It’s like he just slid it in sideways, after the editors had signed off.
There was a time when if you told me about the Twitter Files I would have called you a crazy bonker conspiracy theorist. Would love it if you went through all/some of her theories/clues on Kirk and examine the 'receipts' (as presented) and poke holes in them. Now THAT would be helpful. Generalized mocking tends to leave my thinking she may be onto something. Check out Jon Aaron Bray's analysis on X and a few recent podcasts. It's interesting!
Without Candace, we’d still believe Charlie Kirk’s magic bones stopped a 30-06. Because of Candace, we learned no doctor ever told Andrew Kolvet Charlie had bones is steel.
People are lying in the Charlie Kirk story. I’ll accept Candace may not yet have the right story, but she’s breaking apart really bad fedslop, and I’m grateful for that.
Be sure and catch podcasts with Jon Bray, you'll find his forensic analysis most intriguing. He has been on Trigger Smart ( I think it is) and Baron Coleman this past week. With his technical background, his hypothesis makes the most plausible sense. It's the most important information yet.
I hear you, but the thing that pissed Peirs off, and triggered Matt & Walter on Friday, was Candace wouldn’t declare a hypothesis. I think she’s right not to. I’m a lawyer, so maybe biased toward this thinking, she just needs to create reasonable doubt in the fed slop. She doesn’t need to establish anything.
Piers wasn't authentically listening--just seemed to be gunning for shooting down any response with that tactic. Clearly, he hadn't done his homework.
If you're really a lawyer don't you think the best place to assess whatever evidence (against the guy whose OWN FAMILY recognized him) is a court of law, with standards of evidence, the right to a defense attorney, etc? We even know the full extent of the evidence they've collected. Again, the only people whose opinions on the evidence we see in the TRIAL (the only place justice is served) are the jurors.
You have obviously no experience with the court system. It's complete theatre.
"We even know the full extent of the evidence they've collected." WHAT???? That's a real headline for those observing follow-up! The locals can't even produce a copy of his "confession'!
Now an honest retort … as stated by another in this thread. So much is theater. When the narrative must be maintained, the courts will convict. There’s no way a jury will ever see this. There are two procedure books the courts use. The normal one, most of us see most of the time and the special one they pull out when they need to get you.
This Tyler kid is going to be convicted, plead guilty or mysteriously die. His lawyer won’t do what Candace is doing for the same reasons _Manufacturing Consent_ was written. But that doesn’t mean the doubt (in the fed slop system) Candace is creating is bad.
If you’re really an owl, don’t you have enough wisdom to be suspicious of the courts?
Watching JB now. Totally interesting.
Actually, human bones are as strong as steel. In Google AI mode,
"Strength-to-Weight Ratio: Gram-for-gram, human bone is significantly stronger than steel. This is because bone is highly porous and lightweight, while maintaining a compressive strength similar to some metals."
If we are in a simulation, maybe Kirk had God Mode turned on
There are different types of strength Elaine. Bones are not as stronger than steel with regards to shatter-proofness. Stop. Reallly, you are humiliating yourself.
She’s not onto anything, except a great flood of money going her way.
There are no receipts to examine, that’s the point you missed. Unless bee people control everybody, including Matt.
So you basically know nothing about any of the investigatory leads she has followed and possible evidence she is looking at, asking for crowdsourcing to rule out or add information to her hypotheses. She may be way off, partially onto something or anywhere in between. You merely sound a fool. I assume you're being intentionally silly. But...you bee you 🐝😉
She's not an investigator. Investigators don't make merch to grift off their work, like she did with Macron. We don't know what evidence has been collected because, and I repeat myself, that's presented IN A TRIAL to JURORS.
Remind me again what motivated Thomas Matthew Crooks to shoot Trump in the face?
You need a 12 step program for conspiracy theoryolics
Bill, you really don’t like journalist or podcasters to ask questions, do you? Questions are so dangerous!
As Matt pointed out, she's not asking questions: she's smearing people.
You’re an amazing mental gymnast. I know nothing about her investigative leads or evidence because she presented none.
Fine, but don't be mean to Matt.
There are, though. You can exclude some of her leads but many have been proven. I know it’s hard to sort it out, but it doesn’t change the facts. 1. Charlie was unwavering in his support of Israel (FALSE) 2. Charlie had a miraculous neck that stopped a 30.06 as stated by surgeon/Kolvet (FALSE) 3. Erika has had ‘Egyptian’ planes land in tandem to her 77 times over the past two-ish years (TRUE) 4. Donors were pressuring Charlie (TRUE) 5.there are more, but I can’t type them all it.
Nbd.
I see your name has "Bee" in it. Isn't is possible you are trying to deflect attention away from the bee people right now by being here asking questions about Israel, Egyptian planes, the people in maroon shirts, Britney Spears (didn't she have a Britney angle briefly?), and TPUSA? I mean, that's the buzz anyways.
Isn't it time for shills to punch out? Isn't your USAID money dried up?
Haha- good one!
There’s also a long list of lies and discrepancies among TPUSA employees not to mention complete lack of transparency. When did Dan Flood leave TPUSA? (If firing/resignation can’t be discussed), is Brian Harpole still a contractor for them? (If we’re playing semantics game “he doesn’t work for TPUSA”), many other fair questions.
Is it the pollen? What’s with the Bee people? Am I losing my grasp on reality?
Nah, you’re fine. The bee people just fantasized that da Jews flew on a fleet of Egyptian planes to commit the assassination. And they also fired bunch of TPUSA people using that famous mind control device.
Whew! Thought I had gone nuts…
I don’t know much about Candace, don’t listen to her. But I do listen from time to time to Megyn Kelly. And I thought I heard Megyn say in AmFest interview last week that major Jewish donors to Turning Point were pressuring Charlie Kirk to speak out and condemn voices on the Right (like Tucker) who were not friendly enough to Israel. And this had been going on for a while, ramping up and it pissed off Charlie. Kirk was behind the scenes throwing up his hands in frustration that these Jewish donors were trying to coerce him into cancelling others.
Is this behind Candace trying to tie Israel to Kirk’s assassination?
If Charlie Kirk was being pressured this way behind scenes, it seems it came out from behind the curtain when Ben Shapiro gave his recent AmFest speech, a part of which was calling Megyn a ‘coward’, for her not condemning anti-Israel voices on Right - and why she’s now unfriended Shapiro.
Megyn Kelly has lost her mind. I used to listen to her daily for over two years. She's a total coward. If she was a true friend of Charlie she wouldn't have wanted Erika to submit herself to 4 hours with her narcissistic abuser.
So, if you support free speech and oppose cancel culture you have now ‘lost your mind’?
How dare you!
Candace should be called out on her lies and innuendos, not cancelled. That is the essence of free speech. Megyn Kelly defends Candace and does not address the elephant in the room, the lies and innuendos. MK has also become a knife-wielding, F-bomb-throwing, angry Mean Girl. It may be a result of her use of Ozempic before her Grand Tour. She has become unwatchable.
Nailed it. I went from really liking Megyn to despising her. Wish she could see how much she acts like a middle school mean girl on social media. She really needs to get out and touch grass. Imagine lighting your reputation on fire for an antisemitic psychopath.
That's because there are no lies and innuendos to address. Just Elaine Eeek not getting it.
TERF Owl, how much are you being paid to defend the establishment narratives? It's pitiful and not going well, but I'm just curious because I'm between jobs and might need the money.
Shapiro should run for the Knesset.
I think he’s currently applying as the admissions ticket-taker into the GOP tent. Which is not a suitable role for him.
Shapiro thought he was speaking at IsFest, not AmFest.
I miss the days when you people lived under bridges.
Loving watching all the sentiment go against TERF Owl, who is wrong but still here because he's paid to sell a narrative.
The evidence for Israels is Charlie's own words on PBE podcast as well as some text messages that have been aired.
https://www.compactmag.com/article/the-return-of-the-jewish-question/
Yes. We know this because Candace brought the receipts. Not Megyn.
I'm noticing a pattern with the folks (as exemplified in this thread) who were once loyal followers of _____ [fill in the blank - Megyn Kelly, Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, etc] UNTIL those "once-respectable" journalists/podcasters started re-examining their blind support of Israel. Hmmmm...
Along with the personalities involved, the blatant, in OUR face, "warning shot" to the throat drove me immediately to military snipers on-line. It's not my wheel-house never having even seen a gun before, I knew living in Texas during deer season, there would be little left of a human neck after being hit with a 30.06. Myriad videos replicating the scenario seem to prove that thought reasonable. Watching further rollouts of the Robinson narrative, "slo-mo" vids of staff responses during/after the event & emerging podcasts of Baron Coleman, Jon Aaron Bray, George Webb, Ian Carroll & others prove more insightful about the world we live in than some here, so I wouldn't discourage those who may have some curiosity. If nothing else, there is a good deal of collateral information that emerges.
Much of the same attitude arose following the JFK assassination that occurred in my freshman year of college a hundred miles down the road. Low info news reports didn't make sense with the bits & pieces that emerged the first decade following, but after 40,000+ books written over ensuing decades, the original narrative certainly has suffered in authenticity. It was this event, for which the intel agency developed the term, "conspiracy theory", & is still used to heartily wallop any thought straying from the narrative.
The Warren Commission had lots of evidence, but as we now know much of it was made up (like the autopsy photos and X-rays-- why would they do that?) and much more relevant stuff was shredded or lost. And witnesses were dying like flies. Seems standard in high visibility cases in the US, or maybe not noticed as much in other cases?
It was designed to cover up.
Wonder how often the evidence is tampered with in more common cases?
The US is generally in the lowest 20% in homicide rate in the Western Hemisphere. And yet we have one of the highest incarceration rates and the most people imprisoned:
Top 10 Countries with the Highest Rate of Incarceration
El Salvador 1,659
Cuba 794
Rwanda 620
Turkmenistan 576
United States 541
American Samoa 538
Panama 522
Tonga 516
Guam 513
Bahamas 482
Top 10 Countries with the Most People in Prison
United States 1,808,100
China 1,690,000
Brazil 888,791
India 573,220
Russia 433,006
Turkey 378,657
Thailand 274,277
Indonesia 273,697
Mexico 235,461
Iran 189,000
Well, that is a bit off-piste for the specificity of my comment that is well-documented when one sifts through the myriad of publishings on the topic. However, I will point out the national clearance rate (crimes resulting in arrest and charge) for homicides is reported as a record low, with only about half of all homicides being solved, a rate that is even lower in some major cities. As Prof MacDonald notes, officials are notorious for under reporting... and bid you farewell to enjoy the celebrations of the season!
Except with the Twitter Files there was this stuff called "evidence."
You don't want truth. You want to be entertained. Maybe read a book and give X a break.
Maybe but you probably thought doctors and epidemiologists warning that the covid shots were dangerous was a conspiracy theory too.
Yeah, these doctors totally talked about bee people giving people myocarditis
You totally missed the point.
He dodged it because that what shills do when you call them out.
I did not miss anything. I cannot in a good intellectual faith compare empirical observations of respectable doctors to a crazed speculations of an engagement farmer.
💯
It wasn't?
Oof. She goes off on some mad tangents. Annnnnddddd here comes the but…. she has also brought receipts to bear against lot of half-truths and misdirection by leaders at TPUSA & the threadbare results of the FBI investigation ie Kirk’s stance on Israel being unwavering (false), the Superman-type analogy made by the surgeon (false), that Charlie texted friend “they are going to kill me” the night before UVU event (true), the oddity of Egyptian planes at 77 stops coinciding with Erika Kirk (true), the shady lack of ephemera from Brigitte’s own history, the journalists that have been threatened or died covering the Macrons’ oblique history, and more.
I don’t buy a lot of her side riffs…. but hey - I don’t buy the trash output by LE that Charlie Kirk was killed by a 30.06 (suddenly frangible), the rapidity with which they paved over the crime scene; the lone, 4.0/Near perfect ACT gunman that texts like a caring lover from the distant past but has a psychopathic desire to expunge “hate” from public discourse by assassinating someone in broad daylight; the idea that his father seeing a stock image of the gun supposedly used online and reckoning it was the family heirloom and that the grainy images/Spider-Man roof commando looked like his son; the weird turning away of the First Responders as they wrangled his lifeless body to a getaway SUV (who, WHO has ever seen such mishandling of a critical medical emergency?); et cetera, at al.
I suppose both versions lead us to the conclusion that once AGAIN we will be snowed over by bullshit cleverly disguised as evidence. In the meantime, I’m just gonna keep watching the “Conspiracy” theories.
Unlike his gaudy, attention-starved widow, I just can’t let it go yet.
Best comment here.
Gee, thanks!
It would help if you got your facts straight.
And by "your facts" Elaine means the slop she is being paid to enforce on Matt's comment section.
Yes, Janine, I have taken issue with you a few times. I wish I was being paid to comment on posts.
Are you serious with that response. I hope not Either that or please cite some evidence and sources for your conclusions so they can be verified
Which parts would you like me to cite? I don’t mind helping if you need it.
1. Charlie texted friend “they are going to kill me” the night before UVU event
2. Egyptian planes at 77 stops coinciding with Erika Kirk
3. The journalists that have been threatened or died covering the Macrons’ oblique history
And did you miss the part from Robinson where he texted he did it as well?
The "77 Egyptian Planes" narrative has been proven false by a YouTuber who invested $900 in a flight log that showed some of these planes were on another continent, etc.
Oh wow! We have a YouTuber folks! For that one that disproved, I got five that proved, Elaine. Get out of the comments with this weak shiza.
But he couldn't have just been looking at other planes. And he certainly couldn't have been an agent working to dissuade people from following Candace. Like what Elaine does, all day every day.
I guess Elle Bee doesn't have the "receipts".
The strange part is five people liked her comment
I’m waiting lol
I’m sorry, I was off living my life. I didn’t realize the urgency with which you wanted the these sources- I would think your zeal would have inspired you to click open a tab and find it for yourself, but alas… I know that your are not interested in finding out, but rather proving people wrong and making quick comments to tap some receding, disappear adrenalin in your brain, most likely. Anyway, some of these sources are articles, so you’ll need to be able to focus and spend time reading. If you are a knee-jerktionary, then I’m pretty sure this is a pointless ask. But here goes a few to get you started. I’m sure you will take umbrage with everything here & just slander me & the rest of us curious people because you can never convince a fool that he has been fooled, right? Who is the fool in this scenario, though? 🤷🏻♀️🙋🏽♂️. Feel free to share your thoughts and anything new you have learned after reviewing this stuff. Do some digging yourself. It’s a great big world full of things to make you go hmmm. Cheers!
1. the texts: https://www.msn.com/en-us/entertainment/entertainment-celebrity/candace-owens-claims-erika-kirk-owned-that-charlie-feared-they-would-kill-him/ar-AA1SxAZq
2.Egyptian Planes: https://www.michaelrcronin.com/post/candace-owens-alleges-egyptian-surveillance-plot-in-slain-conservative-leader-charlie-kirk-s-assas
-https://recapio.com/digest/i-made-a-calendar-to-make-sense-of-all-these-flights-part-3-what-s-egypt-s-game-here-by-ian-carroll
(A lot to look at here. Hoping you’ll do it yourself so that I don’t have to hold your hand.)
3… Brigitte Macron harassing journalists 3. https://www.transports-express-caraibes.fr/blog/en/affaire-natacha-rey-investigation-trial-and-request-for-political-asylum-in-russia/
-https://finishtherace.com/senay-pembe/this-journalist-unveiled-the-biggest-political-scandal-in-french-history-and-it-involves-brigitte-macron/
-https://www.marianne.net/politique/macron/mort-dune-ancienne-gilet-jaune-brigitte-macron-encore-dans-le-viseur-des-conspirationnistes
Did Tyler text that he did it? Were those texts? They were delivered to look(-ish) like texts and we were told they were texts, but no dates or times were included. Normal, for investigation purposes, wouldn’t the just black that part out? Now, Tyler sits in court awaiting a trial presumably because he is going to argue that he is not guilty? Why the complete flip? Yet again, LE’s story is extremely suspect…. Dare I say it again? IT DOESNT MAKE SENSE.
The "77 Egyptian Planes" narrative has been proven false by a YouTuber who invested $900 in a flight log that showed some of these planes were on another continent, etc.
Bruh, Elaine, dude- we got dozens of YouTubers that “prove” it. You gotta go the logs yourself. Stop parroting sides and do the research yourself.
"Elle Bee"... I can't help wondering if you're part of that shadowy conspiracy that Candace Owens was sensing 😎
Maybee! ; )
A great example of fear based reasoning
Can you explain what you mean by “fear based reasoning”? I just want to know what I’m afraid of in your opinion. No smarminess intended here.
Not sure fear based is the correct term but she has issues
Do the animals speak to you in English with a Jamaican accent, too? 😺
Matt, I’ve been rolling with you and Walter for years now, and - I was a little put off by yours and Walter’s minimization/dismissal of Owens last Friday. I heard Dave Smith say that for all her misses, at least because of her - we know of Kirk’s issues with Netanyahu just before he was killed, if for nothing else - and for that he is grateful. Me, too - for that glimpse behind the facade. Plus… your pal Jimmy Dore seems to be taking her pretty seriously. I know both of them (and Glenn Greenwald) are reflexively anti-Israel, but for me - I’ll also always be grateful to - for her exposing the hypocrisy of The Daily Wire, and especially - Ben Shapiro. It’s fun to see everyone acting like a bunch of ‘pansy hairdressers’… Get the reference? You should with all the references you ASSUME we all share with you. I’ll still rock with you guys, and - I think you’re both overdoing it. And - is Walter maybe letting his proximity to all things Kirk muddy his POV? You can’t judge what ain’t you. Applies to both of you, and, of course - to me judging you guys in this case. Cheers…
Right, the government is untrustworthy on pretty much everything. Except this one thing.
Lol
💯I was also surprised especially with Walters take. He usually listens to his Roma gypsy inner voice...
The optics alone just don't make sense in too many instances in this matter.
Among the reasons I’m a paid subscriber to Racket is Matt’s ability to dig down through the surface BS, the politics, the propaganda, and provide us verifiable facts plus analysis.
This hollow and snarky piece just shattered that trust.
The questions about Ckirk’s assassination are legitimate.
Yet all that Matt cites here is combing through the pics on CO’s website, her comments to Piers Morgan, her perspective on Brigitte Macron, etc. etc —but there is zero focus on the legit questions swirling around this ghastly event or any effort on Matt’s part to answer them.
He’s really giving us the PR statements from some companies? Wow.
Frankly, this piece just doesn’t fit Matt’s dog-with-a-bone temperament. The same temperament that has made him a great journalist.
This reads like a very persuasive “don’t believe your lying eyes and ears” issuance that we got during Covid regarding Ivermectin.
Matt plays it safe unless he has an exclusive. He fancies himself an old school well sourced investigative journalist. What Candace is doing is crowd sourcing, exploring possibilities, and taking chances. I watch her show and honestly don’t know what the truth is. But, based on what she has covered I don’t know if she knows what the truth is. What I do know is the official story stinks. CK was not shot with a 30-06, the photo they put on line was not the murder weapon (composite stock didn’t exist in WW2) so his parents couldn’t have made the connection from the photo, and TPUSA has been acting really strange ever since. Matt, why don’t you do an interview with rifle experts and prove to your readers that you are willing to challenge the mainstream narrative?! Maybe challenging Russiagate has you shell shocked.
PS…..Sticking up for Piers Morgan is a joke.
No dude, what Candace is doing is whoring out her integrity to drive engagement….she earns a living that is directly proportional to the number of eyeballs she draws. Shes crazy, but crazy like a fox. This whole saga is going to make her a ton of money
No way!?
Will, many hunters with WW2 vintage rifles change out the wooden stocks to synthetic because the old wood stocks are beaten to hell from 70 years of use, plus the synthetic stocks weigh much less, which helps a lot when trekking through the mountains of Utah for hours in pursuit of game. So, the photo of the murder weapon could have easily shown a synthetic stock on a WW2 rifle. I suspect Grandpa upgraded his old 30-06 to make it more accurate and comfortable to use. I have done the same thing with my WW2 30-06 rifle. One more thing, the shot made by Robinson would have been easy for any average hunter with a scoped rifle.
I am fully aware that replacing the stock is possible. But, that is not how it was discribed.
True that
Don’t confuse them with reality. It messes with their tenuous grip on madness.
For the record I was screaming about SARS-COV-2 being a lab leak in February 2020.
What we should have learned from covid is discernment. Instead, some learned simply that there is no upper limit to how suspicious we should be. That truth only lives in the deepest recesses of the rabbit hole.
Ask yourself “what if Candace is wrong?” Think about the lasting damage she will have caused to those she is effectively smearing. And there is no doubt that she is smearing them, for in the eyes of the merely suspicious, they cannot ever be exonerated now. Think about the distraction from the changes we desperately need to make in this country. Think about priorities.
If Charlie built a movement, but every single one of those hand-picked trusted advisers are dark agents, what did he actually build? What kind of a fool would he be?
Candace is making real money from floating innuendo and “just asking questions”. Do you think this presents a conflict of interest that perhaps propels the “investigation” forward, drip by drip, episode by episode?
Think, people. Or the powers that be, those that have run world events for decades, really will have broken your brains, just as they set out to do.
I like what you're saying about finding discernment and not falling for every suspicion.
But then you have to ask, why is the FBI lying? Why did they manufacture those text messages? Why did they release the video of the guy on the roof but not the video (from the very same camera at the same angle) when he was actually lying in place and shooting the weapon? Why did someone abscond with the chip from the video camera behind Charlie? Why did they tell us such a large bullet left no exit wound because Charlie had a "superman spine"? There's literally a dozen impossible elements of the story, and simply no chance that Tyler Robinson did this on his own.
I agree that what we should have learned from covid is discernment. Yes. Discernment pretty clearly in this case shows that, yes, again, the government agencies are lying to us to cover up something that is probably very dark and dangerous. Same as during covid. If we pretend that's not the case, I fear we've learned nothing.
Candace could be wrong, sure, but she's actually asking the right questions, and we should take them seriously. Some of her conclusions will be wrong but I think that some -- probably many -- will turn out to be correct. That's discernment. I hope we indeed can learn it together and continue to practice it as events unfold.
This nuttery also prevents us from finding out if the perp was intentionally radicalized online. I can picture that and there have been cases like the Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping where gullible people were used. This does not require a grand international conspiracy.
Logical conclusion based on what we know, at this point. Thanks
Agreed. Shockingly poor piece after all his great work during covid and with the Twitter files and on free speech and Russiagate, etc. So odd. Almost like he's held hostage or something.
Matt, blink twice if there's a gun to your head.
Perhaps, or at least some kind of wink to let us know you are under pressure.
Yes, something, please. Otherwise we'll have to consider this another compromised source.
Just because you disagree does not make Taibbi's writing poor or his take on Candace Owens wrong.
True. The mechanics of his writing remain just fine. In fact I remain a huge fan of Matt's writing in general and his take on many, many issues.
I'm saying the angle he's taking here, on this one issue, is poor, anti-intellectual, and needlessly defamatory.
Many of us would like to hear his honest appraisal of Candace's questions about the (to me) obviously ridiculous FBI version of the events of the Kirk assassination. But it seems he deems them unworthy of even consideration and he levels tasteless ad hominem attacks at Candace and calls her a "conspiracy theorist." This is a poor take in my opinion and anti-intellectual to boot. To undermine someone who is questioning government agencies after a high profile assassination is akin to when people shouted down critics of the lockdowns or the vaccine during covid.
If he's not interested or not willing to provide us his appraisal of the gaping holes in the assassination case, that's fine and his prerogative. I wish he would, but at the least he might refrain from criticizing one of the few independent voices who is.
Why should he address questions that have no basis? Owens an absolutely made up the entire thing! How do you go about dealing with something made up out of the ether and her fevered brain?
No, most of Candace's questions are legitimate questions. For instance, why didn't the FBI release all the video from the campus camera? They've only released one small clip showing what might be Tyler Robinson, but it's too hard to tell. Release the whole thing, including when he supposedly fires the rifle.
“The same temperament that has made him a great journalist.”
Sadly, those days are gone.
Matt has to be shattered by the knowledge that Tree disapproves of his journalistic approach. Christmas ruined
💯
Almost as if it was written by Bari Weiss. Hmmm...
Candace Owens is just one more political nut case. NONE of them have an ounce of sense. They just to to show that people will believe anything.
Love the analysis. She is bat shit crazy like a fox.
Yep, and raking in the $$$$$$.
The key point!
Matt, this doesn’t seem like your angle. What are you doing here? Investigate her or forget her. This is just giving oxygen to her flaming, unprincipled showomanship.
He is going full on Israeli apologist. Gaza, Epstein Charlie Kirk assassination. He has become the anti-journalist. Very sad. Used to be the best. Not him and Greenwald are worlds apart.
I am a full on Israel apologist.
I have no illusions about the self-interestedness of Israel but I lived in Muslim countries for nine years. And I’m a fanatical Christian. Enemy of my enemies.
Israel is a terrorist state founded by terrorists, committing terrorism against Arabs and Christians and Jews for 80+ years so that they can steal more land. By way of deception.
Yeah, I have been SO AFRAID of Israeli terrorists knifing me in public, or killing me if I criticize their religion, or carrying out a suicide bombing, or raping my daughter, or forcing me to obey their religious demands.
Right guys?
🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄
By way of deception. Be scared of the evil Muslims!
I think the thousands of women and girls raped by Muslims across the UK and Europe are rightfully scared.
Brian's middle name is Tinfoil.
Another deep thought by Jack Handy!
All I want for Christmas is for folks like you to slither back in to the ooze you crawled from.
Oh offended by the fact that Israel is a terrorist state founded by terrorists? Any arguments or just garbage from your mouth? I'll be hanging with my family and opening presents and making some family recipes, and watching a new Candace episode. While your types get emotional about people trying to find the truth.
Back in the day journalists used to care about the Truth above everything else. Good times.
What do you think about the Bondi Beach murderers? Are they also terrorists or freedom fighters? Is anyone outside of Israel a terrorist?
Candace is nice to look at but not listen to. Merry Christmas
This is such baloney, or bologna, if you are an Oscar Meyer fan
Yes. We all duck when we hear the words "Baruch Hashem."
Oh, wait. That's wrong. It's Allahu Akbar.
Palestinian children dont have time to duck while theyre being sniped in the head by israelis
Thousands of them.
Sigh
Israel doesn’t need apologists.
It sure does. It spent two years bombing tens of thousands of women and children on video and destroying its reputation for generations to come.
Not as long as it keeps controlling American government to give it billions of dollars every year to kill children.
I need Israel.
In which universe? Not ours.
No. It needs destruction.
Genesis 12:3.
Every power which has made war on the Jews has ended up in real or metaphorical flames.
If I were you I'd be careful about my freedom with assertions.
Yeah, because everything in the Old Testament has been proven totally true, right?
Read Isaiah 53. Who is that a biography of? What is Psalm 22 about if not a prophecy of the crucifixion? Isaiah 7:14 prophesies the virgin birth. Micah 5:3 anticipates that Messiah will be born in the boondocks, Bethlehem, Zechariah ( 12:3, I think ) prophesies that the Jewish people will look upon "Me whom they have pierced."
If you want to find a reason to reject truth, be confident, you will. Be assured that you have at least one spiritual doppelganger this morning who is desperate to find truth, and he will.
Interesting.
Another believer in the mythical sky god of Bronze Age sheep herders heard from.
You're so 2003.
As it says those who bless Israel will be blessed, those who curse Israel will be cursed.
But exactly who is Israel? Not the country called Israel today.
The real Israel are a people who rejected their diety and have lost their identity. They will always reject their "mythical sky god" until they are almost totally destroyed.
Call me superstitious, but I'll show respect for the Most High El.
And they call us crazy.
Stick it in your ear, Bobby.
Everyone makes his choice. I hope The Holy Spirit will be relentless with you.
Well, he did have the nice “CBS is the IDF” note.
Hundreds of journalists murdered with US taxpayer money and weapons.
"No comment."
- Matt Taibbi
Journalists holding Israeli hostage in their apartments?
Yes the Hamas journalists who got blown up along with the Hamas children and the Hamas babies.
It's quicker for you to just admit you'd like to genocide them since they are all Hamas.
Was is not genocide. Placing yourself among a civilian population in a war while remaining an active fighter, using them as shields, is a war crime.
Several months back, there were those upset Matt hadn’t come down on Israel like Greenwald did. I defended him, reasoning that it’s not his “beat.”
Now I’d really like to know what he thinks.
He doesn't think much about murdered Palestinian journalists, that's for sure.
You mean "journalists" that worked for Hamas?
Yea yea, everyone's Hamas. We know your type. Great input.
60 percent of them were Hamas members, many of whom participated in October 7th.
Thousands of Americans imprison themselves by being dumbasses. Have you asked Trump for a pardon?
You eat up quite ridiculous and scurrilous, and poop (write) bullshit.
I’m sure Matt is devastated to have lost the support of Brian hat
I'm sure he's not. But I'm not the only one.
And I'm m sure Bari Weiss tells him he's doing the right thing, so he has that...
maybe it's just his "angle" and you(we) have not heard it before..and are deep into the ruts of the usual take on things.
This is what They do. Here's an example of Dershowitz and Epstein, in 2006, going after John Mearsheimer.
https://t.me/geopolitics_prime/60250?single
Mearsheimer called out the Israeli Lobby. Now he's not allowed on State Media. Too many insights?
Unreadable
Investigate what exactly? Bee people?
WTF are bee people?
One thing for sure, Owens and her ilk are proving that Charlie Kirk was the glue holding MAGA together. Within a couple of weeks of his assassination, the whole “big tent” was being blown apart, no doubt to the great joy of Trump-haters and anti-Americans everywhere.
With respect, whatever Owens and her ilk can destroy is definitionally almost inconsequential and without substance.
MAGA is many things but in terms of influence a transactional coalition of self-interested voters keen to avoid proven incompetence and distrustful of all claims of future competence.
Think MAGA has a hole in it? Ask Europe, Asia, Central and South America. Think MAGA is weakening? Look at the 4th quarter growth rate, etc, etc.
Mistaking personalities, especially the most grandiose and self-serving, for policies and focusing on hot air instead of substantive action isn't the best use of anyone's time.
Voters took back their republic back in 2016, tried to protect it in 2020, and succeeded in 2024. The victories belong to the voters, not any politician, pundit, or political party.
Happy Holidays!
Agreed! And the take that Candace is tearing apart Republicans and/or
" MAGA" is laughable. Liberal projection at its best! Most ignore the Bull💩and live their lives.
Merry Christmas , GOD BLESS US EVERYONE!
You seem to subscribe to the theory that individuals do not matter in historical terms, that large forces determine everything and the people who arise are really just riding the wave.
On the whole, I think there is a lot to recommend that approach... but then I come up against examples where an exceptional individual did matter, for better or worse, and there is little reason to believe that there was anyone in the wings who would have played the same role to the same ends.
Clearly, there were factions and cracks in MAGA, but I do not believe it is mere coincidence that those cracks became large, maybe unbridgeable gaps within a few weeks of Kirk's death, especially as we see how much effort he was putting into keeping the factions talking to each other in the weeks before he was shot.
You don't mention Trump by name, but it is pretty clear you are talking about him as a "grandiose and self-serving" person, and I do not disagree. Even as I voted for him back in 2016, I knew that a "movement" that revolves around one aging and somewhat volatile personality with no clear personal political base and no succession plan is hardly a movement, at all. I do think Trump tried to set up a succession with Vance, but at this point, as MAGA seems to be devouring itself, it is fair to ask what, exactly, Vance is succeeding to.
There may ultimately be a great irony in all this, as for all the attention paid to Owens, and Fuentes, and even Carlson, none of them have ever received a single vote in an election, and we all know how images and causes and personalities can be Astroturfed. They gain attention and access based on clicks and viewership numbers, but those are easily manipulable--- Disney does it with every major movie, Nike with every new shoe line, and politicos increasingly do it with every election and in between. I have no idea what is actually going on, but wouldn't it be a hoot to find out, say 5 years from now, that 70% of Owens' or Fuentes' clicks and viewers were bots and troll farms? There are smart, strong, and deep-pocketed entities that would love to see MAGA tear itself apart, so why would they not give it a nudge? We are now seeing how China has pushed Net Zero for decades, with great success in Europe that is now deindustrializing. Why not accept the mere possibility that someone, somewhere, has an interest in kneecapping MAGA using proven tools?
Call it a conspiracy theory, except I really am not arguing that, merely noting that we don't know. Which seems to be the state of almost everything, these days.
Thanks for the reply. Change agents arrive and absolutely unlock the possible in ways others cannot. That's not a theory, but an observable fact. Some will see Obama that way.
I was not, btw, thinking of Trump, nor do I see any upside in linking my observations to any theory, individual, or political label.
As for "what's happening now", you rightly note that we're in the midst of information vacuums in what I consider largely meaningless respects. If anyone thinks governments, banks, institutions, have ever been keen to freely share information you're living in a different world to me.
Access to extremely high-quality information on subjects of interest to me, on the other hand, has never been better I'm delighted to report.
Sites worth following and very reliable:
https://x.com/CARAA_Center/status/2003508409660743939
https://x.com/UffiziGalleries
How we fill our days and our heads is a choice. Happy holidays.
And when all else fails, let a little David O. into our lives.
Brahms - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFkSiNp4CRQ
Tchaikovsky - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJ6g7FKfqZI
Sibelius - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNyaAdNtXBY
Hopefully Matt will some positives for us all rather than....
Unfortunately one man does not make a movement. There are so many corrupt, evil people both elected and unelected in our Government that it truly is a sisyphyian task. I fear we are too far gone, but pray we are not.
I would be very happy if all the “tariffs will be the end of us all!” takes are proven wrong. But careful boasting on GDP growth, as an awful lot of consumer spending is being done by the upward-trajectory folks in our K economy.
Clearly that was the purpose.
Dont believe you eyes and ears everyone. Believe the FBI and the lone gunman theory, unless the FBI says there's 1,000 epstein victims. Then believe Michael Tracey.
Interesting point. We're supposed to believe the feds about Kirk, but not about Epstein. Which is it, Taibbi?
💯
Uh, you are trying to conflate two very different events. No two periods in the history of the FBI's history are the same. Technology has improved. And, I have every reason to believe that the FBI had nothing to do with Kirk's murder.
If your parents turn you in it's unlikely the Jews got to them
If the media says something it must be true! Where and when did they turn him in? Where are they? Who says so?
If they didn't turn him in, through another law enforcement acquaintance, as reported, you'd think they'd be saying so. They are still alive.
They havent said anything. You are repeating mainstream media stories.
And whose stories are you repeating? You weren't there either, but you think Candace Owens has it all figured out? That's sad. I guess if they have a trial you're gonna believe the Jews got to the judge, jury, lawyers and witnesses too? You're a delusional fool. Get a hobby that doesn't include a computer.
I haven't repeated any stories. The slop that has been fed to the public regarding this public assassination is obviously not true. Same as trumps near assassination. To make fun of people searching for real answer is to be an anto-journalist. Matt's buddy Walter will question every single shooting, as long as it doesn't relate to Israel in any way.
Have you considered the possibility they aren't speaking out because they know the truth? That their son killed Charlie. They're even closer to all of this than anyone on this thread.
The never-ending "prove a negative" game. If the shooter's father stood in front of you and said his son told him he did it, then it would be Mossad paid off the father. Anything for the continuous conspiracy titillation.
Are they out in the media denying it? No.
Why would they want to be out there? They got their son to turn himself in because they recognized him. They're probably horrified their family member took another person's life.
Using logic against Jew haters? Silly you.
If you're this blackpilled against the criminal justice system you're practically a Mamdani supporter.
I don't get it... I support most anti establishment candidates though. But I've never cared about NYC politics.
I'm sure you don't get a lot of things.
💯
The problem with Candace is that if you actually follow her argument it's genuinely convincing. No not the bees or the dreams or statements like "I'm sensing" or "I know know"--and she doesn't have definitive proof of a conspiracy--but she has completely dismantled the Tyler Robinson lone shooter narrative, caught many people outright lying in the wake of Charlie's death, and makes a very compelling case that the truth is being covered up by the federal government.
If you follow her series from the start and aren't put off by her style it becomes impossible to ignore the mountain of mutually reinforcing evidence she's mustered. Matt doesn't appear to have done this, or if he has this article doesn't suggest it. And I get it. Matt's a busy man who does great work, he has a family and investigations of his own. I don't expect him to have watched a fraction of the last 70 hours of Candace's podcast. But Matt, we can tell that you aren't taking her argument seriously and you haven't put the time in to understand it, or else you would be steel-manning rather than straw-manning. Does Candace say wild things? Yes. Does she get out over her skis? Yes. Is she weaving a Charlie Kirk assassination conspiracy fever dream out of thin air? It turns out that in this case she isn't. But if you won't really engage with her argument then you aren't in a position to know.
💯
Exactly!
It would be immensely helpful if Candace would simply write an article or series detailing her hypotheses with citations and links to the evidence that support those hypotheses, just like Matt Taibbi does. If she was a serious journalist, that is exactly what she would do (and you should demand). Doing so would allow the rest of us, including Matt, to objectively evaluate what she is selling and come to our own conclusions. If she's not willing to do that, then why should we take her seriously?
I most certainly am not going to invest 70 hours of my life trying to figure out what she thinks she knows.
Unlike Taibbi, Candace is not a journalist. She's a political commentator.
Matt, I’m just asking questions here, but is it completely stupid to think that, given all we see from Bibi and crew, they could have a hand in something like this?
I mean, we’re all supposed to condemn Pete Davidson and Bill Burr for performing at a Saudi comedy festival because the Saudis KILLED A JOURNALIST!
But can someone tell us how many journalists has Israel killed in the past 26+ months?
“Journalists”
C’mon, you know it’s true.
Quite a few Hamas operatives that’s true.
But now they took out Kirk?
And we aren’t supposed to laugh?