All Episodes
June 20, 2025 - RadixJournal - Richard Spencer
20:12
Sleazy Feline Accusations

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit radixjournal.substack.comRichard and special guest J.F. Gariepy analyze Tucker Carlson's intense interview with Ted Cruz on Carlson's new media venture. The discussion revolves around U.S. foreign policy, particularly concerning Israel and Iran. They critique Carlson’s interview tactics, which challenge Cruz's unwavering support for Israel and probe into alleged assassination p…

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Let's continue with this.
It's a simple question.
Are APEC's goals shaped by the goals of the Israeli government?
And I'm just going to ask you a question straightforwardly.
And if you say no, I think we both know that's not true.
Hey, are they shaped by?
Are they coordinating with the Israeli government?
Are they talking with them?
Yes, Israel directing them.
You want to talk about Farah?
The law on lobbying on behalf of someone.
It is, I hire you and you lobby on behalf of me.
I direct you.
Does Israel direct AIPAC?
No, they're not lobbying on behalf of them.
Do they care about them?
Yes.
But do you think that, it's just interesting because what you're now describing in a very defensive way, I will say, is foreign influence over our politics.
No.
And you began, and it's so transparently obvious to everybody.
I don't know why you'd be embarrassed of it.
You've said that you are sincerely for Israel.
I believe you.
I don't think you have some weird agenda.
You seem to be sincere.
By the way, Tucker, it's a very weird thing.
The obsession with Israel.
Well, we're talking about foreign countries.
It's hardly an obsession.
You're not talking about Chinese.
You're not talking about Japanese.
You're not talking about the Brits.
You're not talking about the French.
The question, what about the Jews?
What about the Jews?
Oh, I'm an anti-Semite now.
Senator, you're asking the questions, Tucker.
You're asking, why are the Jews controlling our foreign policy?
That's what you just asked.
I am hardly saying that.
That is exactly what you just said.
Well, actually, I can speak for myself and tell you what I...
Yes, exactly.
Because it is about the Jews.
Yes.
And it's a Jewish state.
And there are American Jews who support a Jewish state.
And there are millions of evangelical Christians who worship a Jewish God.
We want the Jews to be in control of the Holy Land so the apocalypse can come about.
This is what it is about.
It's not really about money.
Money makes things flow.
It makes things work.
But it's actually fundamentally about the Jews.
And so when you just avoid that, you're like, Jews?
I didn't say Jews.
I'm not talking about Jews.
It's this feigned ignorance.
It annoys me on some level.
Because you have to say that if you're going to talk about this matter seriously.
Yes.
Because the only reason there's a disagreement here or an unwillingness to connect between Ted Cruz and Tucker is that there is a cloud of nebulous uncertainty around allegiances.
Is a Jew from Texas...
Is he more of an American?
This is important.
So what Tucker is trying to bring in, he's trying to sanitize the issue to the point where it's becoming a bureaucratic ticket issue.
Like, is AIPAC exactly following the word of the law?
Or is it a little bit B-side?
And should we fine them $10,000?
This is a very bureaucratic question.
The actual question is a question of civilization, allegiance, and what is America?
100%.
Let me finish this exchange, and then I'll address these two questions we have.
Good.
On behalf, not simply of myself, but of my many Jewish friends who would have the same questions.
Which is to what extent...
What about that?
God.
This is really the equivalent of, like, my black friend.
likes affirmative action or something.
It's just like...
I have a Jewish friend questioning it back.
My Jewish friend, he's very articulate.
He loves basketball.
I mean, I don't mean it in that way.
Okay.
It's just...
I did not.
Of course you are.
And rather than be honorable enough to say it right to my face, you are in a sleazy, feline way implying it or just asking questions about the Jews.
I'm not asking questions about the Jews.
It has to do with the foreign government.
Isn't Israel controlling our foreign policy?
That's not about the Jews?
And by the way, you're the one that just called me, I think, a sleazy feline.
I'll hand it to Tucker.
That's a good line.
Sleazy feline, that's a good line.
But the weird thing about it is that in a way, I guess I have this contrarian instinct to always give the devil his due.
In a weird way, Ted Cruz is being more honest because, Tucker, the fact that you utter this isn't about the Jews while you're discussing AIPAC and Israel, it just leads me to believe that you're just not serious.
Yes.
There you go.
All right, let's watch just a little bit more, and then I'll get to questions.
It's sleazy to imply that I'm an anti-Semite, which you just did.
No, I just said, why is that the only question you're asking?
You answer it.
Give me another reason.
If you're not an anti-Semite, give me another reason why the obsession is Israel.
I am in no sense obsessed with Israel.
We are on the brink of war with Iran, and so these are valid questions.
But you're not asking about Israel.
If I can finish, you asked me why I'm obsessed with Israel.
Yep.
Three minutes after telling me that when you first ran for Congress, you elucidated one of your main goals, which is to defend Israel.
And I'm the one who's obsessed with Israel.
I don't see a lawmaker's job as defending the interests of a foreign government, period.
Any government, including the ones that my ancestors come from.
So that's my position.
That does not make me an anti-Semite.
And shame on you for suggesting otherwise, and I mean that.
And that's low, and you know it's low.
So why don't you just answer my question?
Finger has been whacked.
You certainly have the IQ to do it.
Shame on you is cute, by the way, Tucker.
It is.
It's not cute.
I'm offended.
I'm obsessed with the Jews.
You just told me.
It is sleazy to imply that I'm an anti-Semite for asking questions about how my government is wrong.
Do you want to count how many questions you asked about?
What about the Jews?
What about Israel?
What about Iraq?
I never asked about the Jews.
This has to do with a foreign government.
And once again, shame on you for conflating the two.
They have nothing to do with each other.
I'm talking about the influence.
Israel and Jews.
Again, that's just ridiculous.
Ted Cruz gets it right.
All Jews, which I am not, nor would I ever be undertaking now.
I'm not attacking anybody.
By the way, that's who Iran wants to kill, is all the Jews and all the Americans.
And I'm totally opposed to that, okay?
But now because- Specific decisions need to be made.
And I plan to.
Good.
But I just want to get a sense of whether you think, having described yourself as an America-first person whose only criterion for judgment on foreign policy is America's national interest, to what extent you're influenced by a foreign government, which gives you a lot of money through its lobby, and you're claiming this has nothing to do with the foreign government.
They're not courted, and yes, they're spying on us, but it doesn't bother you.
And I'm sort of wondering, like, what is this?
This is one of the weirdest conversations I've ever had.
I'll tell you what, and I'll answer any question you like, but let's try to wrap it up.
Let's try to ratchet down the temperature a little.
You're the one who went to motive.
I'm asking honest questions.
Just asking questions.
Yes, that is what I'm doing.
Let's try to ratchet down the temperature a little bit.
Picture the house of your dreams.
Maybe it's got an outdoor pool, a huge...
No!
How much?
The thing is, anyways, Farah is the wrong thing.
It's the wrong angle to all this.
And what we would need is to sit down with Tucker and say, okay, suppose that there were a bunch of supporters of Guana, three of Guana.
Who never talked to the government of Guana.
There are a bunch of black people in America.
They really, really love the country.
And suppose that they had their fundraising campaigns.
It would be a breach of the FARA's goal, of the FARA's spirit, but it wouldn't be a technical breach that you can prove in court.
And the ultimate reasoning that we have to reach from this is FARA is not aggressive enough because FARA doesn't go at enemies on the inside.
And we need legislative tools to consider it.
Definitely.
And the fact, in a way, that you need this That legalistic mechanism expresses the problem.
The fact that you need money, cash in a bag handed to someone to say something sort of gets at the problem because it should be understood that not only is that illegal, but it's just not done.
It's borderline treasonous.
We're not going to even listen to you.
If we even suspect that you are operating in that way.
AA?
Yeah, it's interesting that this is a conversation between two Gentiles.
Sam Cedar, who's Jewish, he has said many times that Zionism is not Judaism, which is an interesting deflection.
To say it's a settler colonial state.
And then you have Bill Maher, on the other hand, who's an atheist, who's been a Zionist his entire life, who's also Jewish.
He's half Jewish, I believe.
Yeah, go on.
Yeah, Irish and Jewish, yeah.
And he's an atheist, and has been a Zionist and atheist his entire life, and has said numerous times that, well, religion might be bad, but did you know that The archaeology in the Bible actually checks out, which is not even true.
And I think to myself, why would you even care?
You don't like religion.
But apparently you like it in this case.
So these two Sussman Jews, and they don't like each other, they don't seem to get it.
It's like there is no situation in which you would have a Jewish state.
First of all, Jews have never had a Jewish state.
This is a new thing.
There's no archaeology of any kind that would prove that David had a united monarchy.
It is the Bible.
That is the source for all of this stuff.
There would be no Israel without the Bible.
There would be no Israel without Judaism.
And also, to go against Sam Seder, I mean, look, just to give Sam Seder some credit, Sam Seder is a legitimate...
And I don't think he's twirling his mustache behind the scenes and being like, oh, I tricked them again.
I'm actually operating on behalf of Israel.
I don't think that at all.
But at the same time, we're reading Exodus.
We read Genesis last winter.
We're reading Exodus now.
The entire story...
That is what the plot is about.
So this idea that Judaism is not, or Zionism is not Judaism, it's a bit like saying that Christianity isn't about the Gospels.
It's like, okay.
Maybe, but it's just fundamentally dishonest.
Or in Sam's case, I think he might not want to face that reality because he has a residual, totally understandable connection to Judaism.
It's how we grew up.
But, you know, it's just, yes, Zionism is Judaism.
Yes.
That is more accurate.
To say that it has nothing to do with it and it's a European colonial state or something.
You know, and I remember, I don't know if you remember this, but during the first Trump campaign, there were a lot of evangelicals, you know, once they got on the Trump train, it took them a while, they were calling Trump the modern-day Cyrus.
Yeah.
Which is interesting.
Now, that's from Chronicles, where Cyrus is a king.
For people who don't know, Cyrus was a king.
He was a Gentile king who ended the Babylonian captivity and allowed Jews to come home.
And he was seen as, he's not Jewish, but he's a sort of vessel for God's will.
And it's interesting because American presidents, if you read the sort of history of the Zionist lobby, American presidents have actually been called a sort of heirs to Cyrus.
There's actually a book, it's called American President's Religion in Israel, The Heirs of Cyrus by Paul Charles Markley.
And he actually talks about this.
There is within the sort of dynamic between American presidents, the Zionist lobby, and Israel.
A sort of King Cyrus complex.
And a sort of, you know, we're allowing the Jews to come home through a sort of Goyim Empire, namely the American Empire.
You're allowing Jews to escape a sort of what happened with the Holocaust and the Second World War, which is their sort of excuse for this.
It's just interesting that the dynamic constantly plays out.
And to say it's a settler colonial project, well, yeah, sure it is.
But it wouldn't exist without the Bible and without that inherent dynamic.
I couldn't say it better.
Yes.
It's also interesting of Trump saying he's king of Israel, which he also said.
It shouldn't be equated with being king of the Jews, which, of course, is the moniker that was placed on Jesus as he was crucified, and why he was crucified, by claiming that he was king of the Jews.
Being king of Israel is almost something different, and it does imply a kind of non-Jewish Gentile who is building the temple.
Or it might apply Herod, I mean, in some ways.
Cyrus is absolutely the best metaphor.
And remember, Cyrus is also described as anointed.
That is, Cyrus is a messiah, the anointed one.
But it's obviously a different type of messiah than David or Jesus.
Right.
And I think another thing is that, I mean, if you look at Luke's gospel with the parable, the persistent widow and the unjust judge, that Jesus relates to the crowd, he's basically explaining the dynamic between the Zionist lobby and the sort of American empire and the American Congress and sort of American political power in the sense that the Zionist lobby and Israel,
domestic policy towards the Palestinians has been incredibly persistent and there has been no sort of negotiation or diplomacy.
We're going to defy international law.
We're going to commit war crimes.
We're going to do genocide.
We're going to buy politicians.
We're going to do it shamelessly and stop us.
You know, it's sort of a big giant dare to stop us.
And it works.
I mean, in the story, of course, in Luke, you know, the widow obviously does get what she wants.
And Zionists have also gotten what they want.
Unfortunately, the problem is that, you know, she's still a widow and the judge is still a judge.
You know, there's still this power dynamic of, you know, you still have to go to the goyim for the martial aspect of this.
Yes.
Otherwise, you're powerless.
That's the interesting part of it.
It's like you could just say no to them, but there's no will to do that.
And they believe it so strongly.
I think that's the other problem.
I don't think you can call American presidents who have supported Zionism, and they all have for a very long time.
I don't think you could call them, like you could say, mustache twirlers.
No, they actually believe it.
Yeah.
I think they really do because it's a Christian moral ethos.
This is one of the fundamental insights of Mark Brahman and REM theory.
Christians like to have this convenient and sort of self-serving notion.
Christian nationalists are right-wingers.
The Jews just hate Christians.
They hate Americans.
They hate whites.
And I can see that from a certain angle.
But the fundamental reality is that they desperately need Christians.
They desperately need whites.
They desperately need Americans.
Israel cannot exist without the British Empire and Harry Truman and the United Nations and American power and all that kind of stuff.
And that is the dynamic.
It's more insidious.
It's more difficult.
It's more complicated.
And it's more ambivalent, you could even say, than they just hate us.
It's one sort of insight that I think we all reach is that they don't hate us.
It would be sort of easier if they were the cartoon version of Khomeini and they just desperately want to slaughter as many white Bible-thumping Iowans as they can.
They just hate Americans.
Jews don't have that perspective towards this.
You're engaging in a sort of convenient self-serving in this blind A conception of Jews if you think that.
They need you.
They love you.
And therefore, we inherit our responsibility to learn to say no.
Yeah.
And I think the Jews do hate us.
Export Selection