So, yeah, so he, you know, for him, I mean, he lost his job. He told me he's an absolute pariah in academia. You know, he is unemployable. He has a lot of kids and including a child with a lot of difficulties who needs a You know, medical care. And yet he doesn't find a road back for himself.

So this is a hallmark of Sandy Hook conspiracy theories, exaggerating the scale of the new security system that the school had put in a few months prior. James Tracy is allowed on this show to just guess as to what the systems were based on his estimations of the money people in town had and his assumption that their wealth must mean that they had the best everything available. This is based on nothing but speculation, and Paul does nothing.

In a more definite way, this strategy automatically provides the new novelty, because it allows people like James Tracy to make the argument that, hey, we've made it clear that we would shut up if they just released this thing. We have our question, and they won't provide the one piece of evidence that would make it all go away, and that that becomes itself the novelty that they need to keep the fire alive. It's a manipulative strategy and is loads of bullshit.

At the end of that clip, you heard Tracy explicitly say that the fleeing nuns narrative was something that he heard for the first time on the Alex Jones show. I might not have perfect recall, but I do not remember Alex covering fleeing nuns on his show.

Every single citation that isn't straight coverage from the AP or CBS, ABC or Fox in the notes section of this post, the first time that he covered Sandy Hook on his blog is a direct link to an InfoWars contributor. Rob Dew, John Rappaport and Mike Adams are listed as sources that James Tracy's first article cites when he started questioning Sandy Hook.

Well, I've seen a lot of activity on my blog as well, the comments and things of the like, and I think that there is definitely a program to sow misinformation. In the stream of information in order to muddy the waters. And in the process, discredit the research that independent researchers and the like are putting together in alternative media. Because if you can discredit it or muddy the waters to a limited degree in one area, you can paint with a fairly broad brush.

I agree with that, but unfortunately, while he's decrying harassment of these families at Sandy Hook, he's on the phone with a guy who's literally personally harassed Sandy Hook victims' families. Now, granted, at this point, Tracy hasn't reached the point that he would eventually get to, where he was literally suggesting that Lenny Posner's son wasn't his son, employing the exact same strategy we discussed with the surveillance footage. His angle was, just do a DNA test to prove he's your son. No way. I have questions. You can clear them up, but I'm just, you know. I'm going to use the fact that you won't give me a crazy person like I am a DNA test to prove he's your son. I'm going to use the fact that you won't give that to me to suggest that I'm right and he isn't your son.

In December 2012, he wrote, quote, while it sounds like an outrageous claim, one is left to inquire whether the Sandy Hook shooting ever took place, dash, dash, at least in the way law enforcement authorities and the nation's news media have described, as I referenced earlier. That's the slimiest fucking way possible to play this game. First, he couches the point in the language of suggestion. One is left to inquire is such bullshit. That's a shitty way to start this sentence. It's the equivalent of that dumb joke, I'm asking for a friend. Or how I'll sometimes preface a question by saying, inquiring minds want to know. I'm doing it as a joke. He's doing it as a dodge. It's a way of saying something inflammatory without having to own the consequences of it. The second thing in what he wrote there with that quote... That is a mess is the placement of the double dashes. He knows that his readers will disregard what comes after, the part where he adds the qualifier to that never took place. They're just going to run with the primary assertion he's driving people towards, which is this shit never happened. He's saying that one is left to inquire whether or not the Sandy Hook shooting ever took place.

And in this next clip, I think you can get another pretty strong sense that Alex agrees with this professor. Moreover, James Tracy, I want to get him on, asserts in radio interviews and on his memoryholeblog.com, I think I've heard of that, that training crisis actors, well, we knew this weeks ago, well, we actually knew it years ago, we sent reporters that they have these crisis actors that go all around the country. And they tell the kids it's a real shooting when it's happening. All you do then is run a drill and, well, you know the rest of the story. Many have been employed by the Obama administration in an attempt to shape public opinion in favor of the event's true purpose, gun control. Yeah, they come in and announce, AP, you can look this up, we're homeschoolers against public education and pro-gun. We're here to kill you. And they go put guns to, like, six-year-olds' heads. I mean, and if you're a new listener, you're like, I don't believe that. Or of your media. You got LexisNexis. You got all the systems. Just go look it up. We did. You're lying. But so that really gives me a strong sense that Alex is trying to... I think it feels like he's responding the way he does a lot of times when something new comes up. It's like, I've known this for a long time. Almost trying to one-up it. Like, we saw him do that with QAnon, with fake Zack. Yeah. His intelligence source, Zack, trying to reclaim the Q storyline. It feels like he's getting ready to do that with this. Yeah. The idea that this professor has come up in his world and saying there's these crisis actors who are actually what's going on, this whole thing is fake.

On a January 1, 2013 post on his blog, James Tracy wrote, A possible reason is that they are trained actors working under the direction of state and federal authorities and in coordination with cable and broadcast network talent to provide tailor-made crisis acting that realistically drives home the event's tragic features. James Tracy, by virtue of being a college professor, legitimized these ideas and helped take them out of the world of what I would call chocolate-loving raptors and into a world of things college professors think are worth considering. Yeah. It's a very big difference to have lunatics on time stream type of blogs. Even though you can have lunatics who are... I think we know one very intimately well. The veneer of respectability and plausibility had been added with the inclusion of a college professor, as well as amplifying the theory well outside the obscurity that it was in before.

He would go on to be fired from his position at FAU, but after he challenged his firing, a jury ruled that his firing wasn't the result of his posts denying Sandy Hook, and thus it wasn't a First Amendment issue and the firing was... accurate and correct. See, he was a tenured professor, and as such, he knew about the rules in place that said he needed to report other subjects. sources of income to the university, which his blog qualified as, since it brought in the required level of money. Additionally, he used university equipment to record his personal podcast without reporting that to the school. They fired him for not following their rules, not because of the disgusting things he said while not following said rules.