Transcript of CIA Whistleblower Jim Erdman Interview: Tucker Carlson Show

So if you’re in the office, you come back and you’re like, “Hey, I collected this intelligence, I recruited this spy, I did this operational act.” The only people who can cheer you on are that small fraternity of people. And so it’s a special— it was a blessing and a gift. Everything good in my life was touched by working at the CIA, which is why COVID woke me up to sort of the mess. I mean, we’re supposed to be—

TUCKER CARLSON: And people laugh when I say you’re not living in McLean, Virginia, at headquarters, near headquarters. You’re like abroad, right?

JIM ERDMAN: For a lot of this time. Oh, most of my career, yeah, it was abroad. Was abroad. And I loved it. I finally came back to headquarters in 2019, right before COVID hit.

And being a CIA case officer, or even any intelligence officer, your job— and people are going to laugh, especially when you say CIA— our job is truth. So we go out, we go into this sea of misinformation, lies, different types of motives, and we’re supposed to pull out that little tiny nugget of truth, write it up and present it to policymakers so that they can make wise decisions. In the most altruistic way, that is what we’re supposed to do.

And what COVID revealed was most of us don’t. Most of the agency, they lost their sense of discernment. They gave up on taking a hard look at what was happening all around them. And I could not believe— I mean, I was running work on financial intelligence against strategic rivals. And I had an office, I was running 2 big branches, and I had like 7 people who’d come into my office every day and like, “We’re not crazy, this masking, this thing where they want to test us all the time, like this shot, we’re not crazy, this doesn’t seem right.”

And that was what started me down the road. There were a few other things before that that opened my eyes, but I’m also a slow learner. I mean, I spent some time in the Middle East looking at dumpster fires saying, “Well, I know we didn’t actually get this done, but thank God we’re here for democracy.” So I mean, I own that.

TUCKER CARLSON: You believe that?

JIM ERDMAN: I did. I did for a long time. I no longer— I think that we probably should take a good hard look at the decisions we’re making on foreign policy. And I think that whole thing about no new foreign wars was probably a good idea.

TUCKER CARLSON: Most Americans were strongly in favor of that plank in the platform.

COVID Origins: The Lab Leak

TUCKER CARLSON: So you come out in this— let’s just start with your testimony before Rand Paul’s committee about COVID origins. So just point blank, where did COVID come from?

JIM ERDMAN: Do you believe it was a lab incident? It was a lab incident in Wuhan, and it spread from— it was already— the cat was already out of the bag. I think if you look at my public testimony, I’m convinced that the intelligence community could have made a pretty sound assessment by mid-2020 that there was a significant chance that this was some variety of lab incident that occurred that caused this pandemic.

And a lab incident changes how we view public health policy. So if it’s a natural incident— I have a feeling, if Americans, and I said this during the testimony, if Americans knew that the basis for the vaccines, for example, came from a nucleotide sequence that was given to us by the Chinese government, and we just took it, put it into a computer model and said, “Well, here’s our vaccine.” And people are like, “But didn’t you just say it came from some lab in China? In Wuhan?” They probably would be a little more hesitant to put that in their body. I personally think any new technology is unwise to—

TUCKER CARLSON: That’s confirmed.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah, yeah. Oh yeah, we got— I think it was— I forget the exact date. It was early January. The nucleotide sequence was sent from the Chinese CDC over to— I believe it was our CDC, but it was sent over to the health establishment here in the United States. We took that and it was put into a computer modeling that— I mean, my guess is there was probably a lot of previous work done on COVID. Sorry, on coronavirus research. I should be precise on that. There’s all sorts of coronaviruses that we’ve been looking at over the years.

TUCKER CARLSON: There was a famous outbreak, of course, in Asia.

JIM ERDMAN: Mhm.

TUCKER CARLSON: So do you believe— so you believe that the virus just escaped from the lab, the famous lab in Wuhan? Do you think it was an accident?

JIM ERDMAN: I think that we need more data from the CIA to actually fill out what Director Gabbard was doing. But yes, I think that it escaped from a lab in Wuhan and it spread everywhere inadvertently. Inadvertently, I think. I think there’s no direct evidence right now that says yes, they did it deliberately.

CIA’s Refusal to Cooperate

TUCKER CARLSON: Well, that’s quite a hedged answer. There’s no direct evidence right now that they did it deliberately, so the possibility exists.

JIM ERDMAN: Possibility exists because I’d love to give you a direct answer, right? But the CIA would have had to have given the information that was requested from Director Gabbard’s Director’s Initiatives Group that probably could have cleared everything up.

When I conduct an investigation, actually an intelligence operation, if I’m going after a target, the first thing I do is put together a timeline, a timeline of events, known things about the target that we’re investigating. If I don’t have everything that goes in that timeline, I can’t give you a full answer, right? And the CIA simply refused to provide the information.

TUCKER CARLSON: And it was obvious early in the outbreak that this was from the lab. I mean, there were Chinese researchers who said it, and then subsequently, as you know, disappeared. But people were saying this from February of 2020.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah.

TUCKER CARLSON: And it always seemed likely to me. But the U.S. government, from the very beginning, went along with this pangolin lie.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah.

TUCKER CARLSON: And then subsequent to that, even when it became obvious that it was a lie we were describing, continued the cover-up. Why?

Fauci’s Role and the COVID-19 Cover-Up

JIM ERDMAN: Well, part of the reason— I mean, Fauci is part of that reason. And I’m going to be very blunt about it. And since I’m going to be blunt and also give my opinion, when I was sitting in front of the Senate, I wanted to make sure I was very accurate in everything I said. I don’t want to give some supposition, but I will give a little supposition here as well, because I have a brain. I think I’ve got synapses that fire off. And occasionally when I see data— if it looked— yeah, quacks like a duck. Right.

So I think Anthony Fauci was fully aware that the funding that had gone on for various types of dangerous research, dangerous gain-of-function research, had been going on for a very long time. Different viruses, different bacteria. And there are, I see connections to, for good reasons as well. Biodefense. I see connections to research that goes on. But I think they understood that a house of cards was going to fall down if this got out too quickly, that there was a distinct possibility that American know-how, American expertise— I mean, we really do. I mean, I take a look at some of these scientists that the IC relies on for expert advice. These people are really, really impressive people.

They receive funding to go do research. They’re involved in health, they’re involved in biodefense. All of a sudden you’ve got a virus that looks— boy, it sure— there’s a couple ties that tie the financing over to Wuhan, China. He had to know. He had to know what that looks like at the end of the day.

So instead, based on everything that’s out there, he gets the “Proximal Origins of SARS-CoV-2” written with his buddies. That paper gets waved around the IC as the end-all be-all, as the paper to prove that yes, it’s of zoonotic origin. And he had to know when he’s pushing these type of experts, a variety of experts that he pushed towards the IC once in February of 2020 and again in June of 2021, he pushes those experts in. He wants to ensure that narrative is pushed at the IC level.

And unfortunately, I’m going back to the comment I made before, some people just appeared to swallow it hook, line, and sinker. There was actually— I read an email where a very senior person— and I wish I could name names— but a very senior person basically waved that paper around and said, “Well, we’ve got our answer.” That was somebody who was in a position to influence, not sort of, in a position to influence how the IC looked at SARS-CoV-2.

TUCKER CARLSON: Why are they covering it up now? Fauci’s gone, new administration.

JIM ERDMAN: I think that there’s an embarrassment piece again. I think you don’t want to be caught with your pants down. I think that—

TUCKER CARLSON: You don’t want to be caught at all covering up for a global pandemic that killed hundreds of thousands of people.

Analysts Who Pushed Back Had Their Careers Destroyed

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah. So I think— hold on, let me be very clear about who doesn’t want to be caught with their pants down causing a global pandemic. The senior people within DNI’s— the part of the DNI that’s responsible for looking into WMD matters and bioweapons matters, and the Weapons and Counterproliferation Center over at the CIA. There are very senior people over there that had a heavy hand in what happened.

And it’s not the analysts, like the technical analysts that were pushing, saying, “Hey, listen guys, this looks like this is a lab leak.” Their careers were destroyed for pushing it. This is the story that I really want to make sure gets out. I want to correct the record. They were not bribed. There was a number of analysts inside the CIA, and they did everything in their power to include writing a little dissent email that went all the way up to the top of WCPMC saying, “Hey, listen guys, we’re technical experts”— and I’m paraphrasing obviously— “We have this much expertise and it looks like a lab leak.” Their careers were destroyed after that. They were no longer part of that establishment. And if there’s ever a—

TUCKER CARLSON: So the entire leadership of CIA swung behind this lie that it was from an animal?

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah. And why are they still doing it? Well, because— I’ll tell you what. When the CIA produces the documents that were requested to help finish the investigation, I think we’ll have a better answer on why.

Congressional Oversight Failures

TUCKER CARLSON: How can CIA get away with not producing those documents, or documents from the Kennedy assassination 63 years ago, which they also haven’t produced, as you know? How— who allows that to happen?

JIM ERDMAN: Oh, that’s a packed question. There’s a few pieces to that. So senior managers allow it to happen inside the CIA, and oversight to some extent lets it— well, oversight has failed. Clearly over the years. I’m not criticizing right now. I just want to be clear. I think actually Rick Crawford is on it right now. I’m definitely—

TUCKER CARLSON: He’d be the member of Congress who oversees the House Intel Committee.

JIM ERDMAN: Yes. So historically, they’ve abdicated their role in oversight. Let me give you a very clear example. When I was a young officer— not a young officer, but I had earned my stripes, done my work— and I was going to do my first meeting with a liaison service. Now, most of the time it’s like, “Good luck, buddy. Have fun.” I actually had a senior officer pull me aside. He said, “Listen, here’s how—”

TUCKER CARLSON: In essence, there would be a foreign intel—

JIM ERDMAN: Foreign intel service. So this is where you get declared to the foreign intel service. You’re no longer hiding from everybody, and you’re working together on goals that you both care about, hopefully. And he said, “Listen, this isn’t going to go well. Here’s how this is going to happen. Here’s what I need you to do.” He did what rarely happens for CIA ops officers. He trained the junior officer on how to handle the meeting. I was so grateful. Years later— and I love the guy— he disagrees with me, by the way, on just about everything of substance, but he’s a great officer.

And he pulls me aside. I had gotten a job where I was interacting with oversight on a very regular basis. My job was to ensure that the things that were coming from the CIA that were going over to oversight were truthful, honest. We were producing things that were valuable for them to actually do their job. And I’d never really done that kind of work. I’d dealt with oversight before.

He says, “Here’s how oversight works. Take for example, we have to— we are supposed to report all of the organizations that have human rights abuses that we work with.” I mean, the CIA works with bad people. That happens. By statute we’re allowed to do that, but we have to report it. We have to make sure that they know. So we give them a list— and I don’t know if it’s quarterly or every other year or whatever it is— but there’s a report that comes out.

And he said, “If— ” he was explaining to me, “Let’s say somebody on the other side of the table says, ‘Hey, this service here, I don’t like this. I don’t want you working with this service.’ So how do you handle that?” I’m like, “I don’t know, you tell me.” He goes, “You say, ‘Well, just tell us to stop.'” And the meaning is, we know that you can tell us to stop, but you’ve got to get everybody else to tell you to stop. And if we keep doing it, you’ve got to get everybody else to pull the purse strings, and that never happens. So like, you should just tell us to stop doing it then.

It’s become a kabuki dance, in my opinion, a kabuki dance. I sat in an oversight meeting that was 3 years after a huge failure happened, and they’re asking the people sitting on the other side— the other people are talking to the agency officers. They’re like, “Has anyone been held accountable for something that happened 3 years prior?” And the agency lawyer leans in and says, “We’re holding the system accountable.”

TUCKER CARLSON: So just— how are we doing that?

JIM ERDMAN: I don’t know. Well, if they’re holding the system accountable, they need some work because the system keeps chugging away.

TUCKER CARLSON: System’s not a person, right?

JIM ERDMAN: Right, right, right, right.

Tom Cotton and the Senate Intelligence Committee

TUCKER CARLSON: Where does Tom Cotton, who is the senator who chairs the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, where does he fit into all this?

JIM ERDMAN: Well, I think he’s a cheerleader for everything we do. He has no role in oversight. I think he’s a complete cheerleader, and I’ll give you a very good example. I’ve provided you a couple documents here. After my hearing, Senator Rand Paul sent another subpoena over to the ODNI saying we need all of this information. We want it. Well, Director Gabbard leaves, Pulte takes over, and Pulte gets a letter from Senator Tom Cotton’s team saying, “Hey, listen, here’s what you need to understand. SSCI maintains oversight responsibility.”

TUCKER CARLSON: SSCI is the Senate Intelligence Committee.

JIM ERDMAN: Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. “We maintain primacy on oversight for these sort of matters. And so, hey, Pulte, make sure that you consult us before you decide to give anything over to them.”

And not only that, I said that I had done a 6-hour and 40-minute transcribed interview in a SCIF in March of this year for HSGAC. Republicans and Democrats were both there. Well, let me clarify that. The Democrat tried to leave, but I insisted that he stay. Now, I finished that transcribed interview. They won’t give it back. They won’t give it back to HSGAC. SSCI will not give it back.

TUCKER CARLSON: HSGAC is the—

JIM ERDMAN: Sorry, the Homeland Security Government Affairs Committee, the one that Rand Paul’s on and Ron Johnson’s on. I think some of the Democrats are on there— Fetterman, a few others. Wouldn’t know, they didn’t show up to the hearing.

So SSCI’s saying you can’t have your own transcribed interview. SSCI’s saying we are the ones who have primacy over oversight over the intel community, but they’re not doing oversight. And how do I know they’re not doing oversight? I’ve already sort of mentioned it. I went to SSCI in April of 2024, and I told them a story about 6 of 7 technical experts saying COVID origins— COVID originated in a lab incident— and they did nothing with it in 2024. So of course Tom Cotton doesn’t want somebody else digging into it because it probably just exposes the failure of their oversight.

TUCKER CARLSON: Tom Cotton is so clearly a tool of CIA.

JIM ERDMAN: Oh yeah, yeah. I mean, as far as I can tell, that guy— he’s there to make sure that he protects the CIA.

TUCKER CARLSON: But that’s the opposite of what the job entails.

JIM ERDMAN: That is exactly the opposite, yes.

TUCKER CARLSON: Now, his wife worked at CIA as an analyst in Langley.

JIM ERDMAN: I don’t know, but I believe—

TUCKER CARLSON: I do know, and that is correct. I’ve talked to her about it. And so I’m not blaming him. She’s very nice. I’m not attacking his wife, just to be clear. But that’s a pretty close relationship for someone who’s going to be in charge of oversight of that same agency.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah, it’s sort of like Fauci having his wife in charge of bioethics. That’s an interesting little— right.

TUCKER CARLSON: So that’s just— again, I’m not accusing Mrs. Cotton of anything. She’s a nice person, and I think she’s left CIA. But the point is, that’s weird. And then Cotton’s reflexive defense of CIA against everybody, including the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, is very striking. And his impulse always is to hide more from the public.

JIM ERDMAN: That isn’t what we voted for.

CIA’s Control Over Media and the Whistleblower System

TUCKER CARLSON: I’m very aware of that. And of course, he’s a very weird guy.

JIM ERDMAN: I don’t know him.

TUCKER CARLSON: Let me just say again, he’s a very weird guy. And almost everybody I know on those committees, I know a bunch of members, is— I mean, Dan Crenshaw was on the House Intel Committee. So it’s like, what is going on here? It feels like the IC, CIA probably taking the lead on this, controls these people. How do they do that?

Ratcliffe and Ellis: A Squandered Opportunity for Reform

JIM ERDMAN: I hate to say this, but we’ve squandered a historic opportunity. And Director Ratcliffe and Deputy Director Michael Ellis, I think when history looks back, they’re going to say that they were the worst leadership team the CIA could have gotten. And it’s not because they’re— it’s because of what they’re not doing. They have an opportunity for reform, but they’ve kept all the same people that were involved in covering up COVID, covering up Havana Syndrome. They’re all sitting in senior positions.

TUCKER CARLSON: And why would Trump— so Ratcliffe has been in contact with John Brennan, right? And I’ve heard that. Do you believe that’s true?

JIM ERDMAN: I believe that’s true, right?

TUCKER CARLSON: So Brennan is a sworn enemy of Trump. So why would you ever in a million years— and Trump has said a million times, I hate John Brennan, stripped him of his security clearance— why would you put a guy he’s in contact with in charge of CIA? Like, what the hell is that?

JIM ERDMAN: I don’t know. I don’t know. But what I think— Do you think that’s weird? I think it’s very weird.

TUCKER CARLSON: It’s very weird.

JIM ERDMAN: It’s very weird. And there’s other data points that I think speak to this. John Ratcliffe, take the Trump-Russia collusion documents that Director Gabbard released in, was it late July 2025? So those documents were damning. I mean, it’s treason what they were trying to do. And I read the unredacted documents. I read the documents. “This is our story. We’re sticking to it.” Okay, you can’t unread that and then go away thinking, “Boy, good thing we’ve got great leadership at the IC.”

So that’s all real. The thing is, Director Ratcliffe was Director DNI. He had possession of the documents that were released by Director Gabbard when he was over at the DNI, right? He could have released them. He could have released them when he was at DNI. Maybe he was scared. I mean, I could—

TUCKER CARLSON: But Trump, he ran DNI in the first Trump term. So Trump knew this. Everyone knew that John Ratcliffe is also, by the way, loyal to a foreign power, I would say. And he’s in touch with Trump’s enemies and he’s doing nothing to help Trump on the issues that Trump claims he cares about most. And then the first thing Trump does when he gets elected, is appoint that guy Director of Central Intelligence? What the hell are we looking at?

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah, I can’t get into President Trump’s head on that one, but what I can do is—

TUCKER CARLSON: Can you just affirm again my suspicion this is the weirdest thing that’s ever happened?

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah, this is dumb. It’s flat out dumb. If you want to be followed, he’s proven, President Trump has proven that there are people within the federal government that will go to great lengths to destroy people.

TUCKER CARLSON: Yes. Including him.

JIM ERDMAN: Especially him. If you want to continue to be destroyed, this is exactly what you do. Exactly. So it’s dumb.

Ratcliffe’s Lack of Media Scrutiny: A Giant Red Flag

TUCKER CARLSON: Well, dumb at best. It sounds like it’s made under duress to me. I don’t know why any person would do that, and especially with someone with finely honed self-preservation instincts, which Trump has. Why would you do that? And I also noticed something else. Tell me if you have too, that of all the appointees, high-level cabinet secretaries, big appointees in this administration, Ratcliffe has basically received no scrutiny in the press at all.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah, neither did Rubio for the most part. Sorry, I wanted to add.

TUCKER CARLSON: Fair, fair. Thank you. But did you notice that?

JIM ERDMAN: Of course I noticed it.

TUCKER CARLSON: You’re CIA director. You’re one of the most powerful people in the world.

JIM ERDMAN: It’s a giant red flag. It’s a giant red flag to me. If you’re coming into one of those positions, it doesn’t matter who’s in charge. I expect controversy. I want an argument over it. I want to see people get mad about the person that’s going to this day.

TUCKER CARLSON: Most people have no idea who the Director of National Intelligence is, right? And he’s treated like a head of state when he travels abroad. He runs CIA. We don’t know what their budget is, what the— I mean, it’s an incredibly powerful agency, as you know better than I. And this guy, no one says a word about him. So that tells me that the American media are at the very least beholden to, if not controlled by, CIA. Like, where are they? Where’s CNN? Where’s the New York Times on this? Where’s the Washington Post?

The Broken Whistleblower System and a Controlled Media

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah, I’m glad you mentioned the media because the media plays a huge role at this point in American freedom, our future. And take a look at the media blackout, even on— I’ll personalize it here. On May 13th, you would’ve thought every news outlet would want to hear what was happening behind the scenes during COVID. Fox News was the only one that covered it. And that happens all the time. It tells me that the media is controlled. The media is controlled by the government. This thing where we’ve got an independent media, it doesn’t exist. Okay? And that’s a big problem for government oversight.

It’s a big problem because whistleblowers who go through the system— sorry, I’m going to pivot just a little here— but whistleblowers are essential to holding the system accountable, but to honest government. To honest government. So I can tell you, I’ve personally walked through the system, and it’s so broken that now when people come to me and say, “Should I be a whistleblower?” I tell them no. And that’s the honest— I say the only reason you should be a whistleblower is if you’re prepared to lose everything, okay? Because you’re not going to get a gold star when you’re done. Okay? It’s not going to make it good for you personally. It’s not going to make it good for you professionally.

And if you go through the IC system, they continue to investigate themselves and find no wrongdoing. If you go to the ICIG— I went to the ICIG and I tried to get them to—

TUCKER CARLSON: Intelligence Community Inspector General.

JIM ERDMAN: Thank you. I apologize.

TUCKER CARLSON: No, no, it’s all right. The internal watchdog.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah, the internal watchdog. And Chris Fox, by the way, I think is another one I should mention specifically. I think he’s got the spine to try and get something done to clean things up. And I said that in my testimony. But let’s say you go through the whole system and you realize, “Oh my gosh, the system is broken. What do I do now?” Well, that last line of defense, the last line of defense for a free society is a free media. And let’s say you want to— you’re like, “You know what? This is wrong. I have to do something.” And you say, “I’m going to go to the media.” Well, that is Russian roulette. Okay? And by the way, let me be perfectly clear. I am not advocating that people with classified information go immediately to the media and just start spouting their mouth off. That is not what I’m saying.

TUCKER CARLSON: No, they should just dump it on the internet. That’s what I think.

JIM ERDMAN: Put it on the blockchain.

TUCKER CARLSON: Just want to be clear.

JIM ERDMAN: Okay.

TUCKER CARLSON: I am advocating for that. I do think that people with relevant classified information should disclose it to the public.

JIM ERDMAN: They should. They should. But I don’t blame any of them for not. The system is broken.

TUCKER CARLSON: And so do you have any idea why this is the case? Which is to say, do you have any clue how CIA influences the behavior of the Washington Post, the New York Times, CNN, NBC News, the Associated Press, etc.?

CIA’s Preferred Media Outlets and Cheerleading Coverage

JIM ERDMAN: My limited window, because like I said, I’m an ops officer. Up until recently, all I cared about was stealing secrets.

TUCKER CARLSON: Right. In some foreign country.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah. Yes. To be clear, not American secrets.

TUCKER CARLSON: I want to ask you about that in a minute.

JIM ERDMAN: But okay, my limited window is there’s clearly some preferred outlets that they will go to. I mean, I see some of these things and these are puff pieces. These are cheerleading pieces, talking about how great things are, talking about all the things, all the reform that’s— I’ve seen a few recently.

TUCKER CARLSON: The problem with CIA, I’ve long thought this, is it doesn’t get enough money. And so Congress needs to appropriate more money to— every piece is like that.

JIM ERDMAN: No, right.

TUCKER CARLSON: “If only they had full funding.”

CIA Funding, Oversight, and the Problem of Unaccountable Leadership

JIM ERDMAN: Right. Which is a great point. Not only do they not get enough funding, the funding piece is actually interesting that you mentioned it because it’s also— sorry, this might be a non sequitur, but I think it’s important. Part of the reason we failed is the Patriot Act and 9/11.

I was part of the whole system post-9/11. I can tell you I never had a time, even during continuing resolutions, where if I went to the boss and said, “Hey boss, I got this great operation going on, you need more money,” they always found money for me.

And I think we started confusing good managers for good leaders. So after 9/11, the Patriot Act opened up a bunch of authorities, a bunch of operations were opened up. And the good managers are the ones who could juggle a gazillion different things at once. I wish I was one of those people. I was never good at juggling a gazillion things at once. I stuck to sort of a handful of things I knew I could accomplish. But the good managers, they could.

And they were working in a time where there was a ton of money. We’ve always had money. And so those good managers who didn’t really have to get tested about, “Hey, should we do this? Should we save this money for something else? Should we make this moral decision on blah, blah, blah, blah, blah?” They got confused as good leaders, so they matriculated upwards. And they were never really— and this is a generalization— they were never really tested in terms of moral decisions or decisions that were weighty in terms of, “Should we continue doing this operation or not?”

And we had chances to be tested. How many people spoke up during the whole enhanced interrogation piece? How many people came forward and said, “Hey, last I checked, that’s torture?”

TUCKER CARLSON: Well, one did.

JIM ERDMAN: One did, and he was destroyed, right?

TUCKER CARLSON: He went to prison. He went under the subsequent administration, which was the amazing part.

JIM ERDMAN: That’s crazy.

TUCKER CARLSON: So he came forward during Bush, but Obama got there and John Brennan immediately saw that he was indicted and sent to prison and wrecked his life.

JIM ERDMAN: So all these managers who have continued to be moved up, they’ve never had to make hard moral decisions. COVID hits and you got people saying, “Hey, I’ve got religious rights. Hey, I’ve got bodily rights. Hey, this is executive overreach.” And no one knew how to handle that. And it proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, the management, they’re not leaders. The managers in the CIA are not trained to handle conscientious dissent and real moral decisions. For me, that was it. They failed a test of their humanity, and that opened my eyes.

Where Does CIA’s Funding Really Come From?

TUCKER CARLSON: No one asks this question very often, but where does CIA’s funding come from? Well, it comes from the Congress, in part, but that’s not the entirety of its funding. And the part that is appropriated is classified, so we don’t know exactly what the budget is. How can you— and I’m pretty sure the president doesn’t know. In fact, I’m pretty certain the president doesn’t know. So how is that civilian control of an agency if no one really knows how much money there is or even where it’s coming from?

JIM ERDMAN: It’s not. And there are reasons why they want to hide budgets. I understand. And I really believe in sources and methods. We don’t want to see sources dead. We don’t want to see sensitive methods destroyed. But if the naming conventions for the various offices at the CIA are made so indistinct that outsiders can’t understand what they do in that office, well, that’s meant to protect the type of operations you’re running. That’s sources and methods. Of course. But there’s a real question on the oversight piece. How does oversight happen if you can’t go, “What exactly does that office do right there? What does it do? It’s got a weird name.”

TUCKER CARLSON: Where’s the money going? Yeah.

JIM ERDMAN: Why does it need that much money?

TUCKER CARLSON: And you also have to ask, is CIA doing anything that’s so critical to the interests of the United States that you would give up any hope of managing it or having oversight over it, that you would allow it to be its own country in the middle of your country?

JIM ERDMAN: The answer is that shouldn’t occur, period. Morally, ethically, no. Is it occurring? I worry it is.

TUCKER CARLSON: Oh, I think it was definitely occurring. There’s no question about it.

JIM ERDMAN: From my experience, it sure looks like it.

TUCKER CARLSON: Yeah, it sure does. And again, if we don’t even really know— there’s a big debate, which I’ve listened to carefully, about where this money is coming from. And again, it’s not all coming from the Congress. So what?

JIM ERDMAN: Follow the money.

TUCKER CARLSON: And how can you, if CIA is running businesses or engaged in business practices as an agency, which it is? It’s like, I get that this can all be justified.

In-Q-Tel: The CIA’s Venture Capital Arm

JIM ERDMAN: If I were king for a day, if I were in charge and I wanted to start the process— I totally get it, it’s become such a gargantuan problem. Where do you even start?

TUCKER CARLSON: Right.

JIM ERDMAN: But if I wanted to make immediate gains on that question, I would— so the director of CIA, the deputy director of CIA, and it used to be the chief operating officer, they’ve changed names— they have special authorities to grant no-bid contracts under national security auspices. I would come in and I would start auditing every single one of those contracts that were given out by the director and deputy director, particularly in that little window between administrations.

Once you catch a little bit of wrongdoing, it makes it a lot easier to justify, “Okay, now we’re going to start doing the deep dive. Why don’t we take a look at the other funding mechanisms that are in play for various types of intelligence work?” I would definitely audit In-Q-Tel 100%. In-Q-Tel needs to have a full audit.

TUCKER CARLSON: Can you explain for people who don’t know what In-Q-Tel is?

JIM ERDMAN: In-Q-Tel is the venture capital arm that funds all sorts of stuff that—

TUCKER CARLSON: Venture capital arm of what?

JIM ERDMAN: Of the CIA.

TUCKER CARLSON: I mean, I know the answer, right? I just want to make sure that everyone listening understands. That CIA has its own— and I’m quoting you— “venture capital arm.”

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah.

TUCKER CARLSON: So we thought that’s something that happened on like Sand Hill Road in Northern California. But no, CIA has its own venture firm.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah. There’s real reason to have an insight into things that are tech and things that are about it. There’s good reason to have it. But if you’re going to do it, you better be able to justify every penny.

TUCKER CARLSON: Well, and you have to have control over it by the public through its representatives. What happened in Pakistan— I don’t know if you’ve been posted in Pakistan, but Pakistan did this with its military, and the next thing you know, the military runs Pakistan. And no matter who you vote for, the military still runs Pakistan. So you don’t want that because that’s the opposite of democracy, right?

JIM ERDMAN: I spent 2 years in Pakistan.

TUCKER CARLSON: Okay, then. Yeah, I didn’t even know that. But is that a fair assessment?

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah, yeah, it’s a fair assessment.

TUCKER CARLSON: I mean, how many businesses does the Pakistani military own?

JIM ERDMAN: A lot.

TUCKER CARLSON: A lot. A lot. And they’re the best-funded institution in the country. It’s really obvious when you drive around Pakistan. It’s like all the mowed lawns are the military bases.

JIM ERDMAN: Yep. Yeah.

IC Reform, Tulsi Gabbard, and John Ratcliffe

TUCKER CARLSON: So you don’t want that here, right?

JIM ERDMAN: No, I do not. And the American people don’t want that. What they want, in my opinion, is— we were told that we were going to get some IC reform, and we haven’t seen one lick of it except— sorry, that’s not true— except with Director Gabbard. She did exactly what President Trump said. “I want you to downsize the DNI. I want you to pursue deweaponization of intelligence. I want you to pursue COVID origins. I want you to pursue Havana Syndrome and election security.” She did all those things. She tried to pursue those things, and she got beat up for it.

TUCKER CARLSON: I want to get to that in some detail in just a second, but first, I just want to go back to John Ratcliffe, former congressman who runs CIA. Why hasn’t he pursued reform of CIA?

JIM ERDMAN: That’s a very tough question because I’m not in his inner circle, but as far as I can tell, it’s because he doesn’t want to. He’s perfectly happy to let the people that are running the agency— those managers who matriculated upwards, who were confused for good leaders— yeah, they’re running the place. I don’t know why he’s letting that happen.

TUCKER CARLSON: Everybody I know in that world says that he’s just a pure mouthpiece for Mossad. Everybody says that about John Ratcliffe.

JIM ERDMAN: I don’t know about that. I can’t speak to that, but what I will say is he’s not getting it done. He’s not reforming anything. Right before the administration changed, the DA came up with 3 new ways to write products that only stay inside the CIA. They don’t get propagated out. So what good is that? And so the CIA continues to create products that have no oversight and can be held on to, especially if they’re writing things up that they want to wait.

TUCKER CARLSON: Explain what a product is. You’re not talking about a new kind of toothpaste, right?

CIA “Products” and the Threat of Internal Dossiers

JIM ERDMAN: Right. No. So analysts will write a paper— finished intelligence on some topic— and there’s different types of papers, they’ve got different names. But there’s a new type of analytical product that they can write up now, which is supposed to be shared with the community. That’s the whole point. You write something up, you share it with the community. No, they decided they’re going to keep it inside the CIA and not propagate it outwards.

If oversight wants to look at something, look at those papers that are being written that are meant to stay inside the CIA and not go anywhere. My gut tells me they’re just going to hang onto them until they can make them go somewhere, maybe the next administration, who knows?

TUCKER CARLSON: Right. I mean, you’re describing the ability to create dossiers on people.

JIM ERDMAN: Dossiers on all sorts of stuff.

TUCKER CARLSON: So here’s the reform that I would institute if I had the power to do it. The President of the United States asks for information that is held by one of his agencies that he oversees— because he’s one of only 2 elected officials in the entire executive branch of government— and the CIA does not produce that information. And then that’s the point at which you call John Ratcliffe and you say, “Listen, b, you’ve got 24 hours to do this or I’m having Kash Patel have you arrested.” But there’s none of that. It’s like the president’s proxies ask for information from CIA and they’re like, “We can’t find it.” Yeah, when everyone knows that’s a lie.

JIM ERDMAN: Well, election security— here’s a good one. Kurt Olson is the guy.

TUCKER CARLSON: But like, would that work? Why couldn’t you do that?

The Deep State, Document Declassification, and 9/11

JIM ERDMAN: You could in theory.

TUCKER CARLSON: What do you mean in theory? He— the president— this is the president’s agency. He was elected by the public. No, no, to run CIA. Like, I’m missing something.

JIM ERDMAN: Sorry, no, you are 100% right.

TUCKER CARLSON: CIA, like, it’s a foreign power that he has to negotiate with.

JIM ERDMAN: I can’t understand why.

TUCKER CARLSON: It’s the craziest thing I’ve ever seen.

JIM ERDMAN: It should work like that, but it’s not. It’s not working like that. Frankly, Director Gabbard shouldn’t have to negotiate with Director Radcliffe over some of this stuff. She had people in her team that have all the intelligence background to handle the type of products that were coming out of CIA, operational traffic, those sort of things, and had to negotiate. Everybody’s got to negotiate. Why do we have to negotiate? Why would President Trump—

TUCKER CARLSON: Where’s the president in this? The president issues an executive order January 23rd saying, I want all available documentation on these number of historical incidents, including the assassinations of the ’60s, but not limited to those. He doesn’t get it.

JIM ERDMAN: He does not. And, you know, I—

TUCKER CARLSON: So why doesn’t Trump say, okay, it’s been a month, I want it by this afternoon, where is it, or you’re under arrest? I just don’t—

JIM ERDMAN: I don’t—

TUCKER CARLSON: What is going on?

JIM ERDMAN: I wish I knew. I wish I knew, because we expected— and I, when I say we, I mean the American public voted for the greatest disruptor in American history.

TUCKER CARLSON: It’s not hard, is it?

JIM ERDMAN: But he’s not— for some reason, he’s not being the greatest finisher, in my opinion.

TUCKER CARLSON: He’s a colluder with the system. I don’t get it.

JIM ERDMAN: I don’t understand because we really want to see him successful.

JFK Documents and the Limits of Executive Power

TUCKER CARLSON: So how hard is it to get— and I’m just going to pick the most benign of them all, and that was Kennedy’s murders because it’s so old, right? It’s not possible you’re revealing sources and methods. Everyone’s dead. Like, I don’t really see the legitimate impediment to producing these documents after all these years and all these votes by the Congress to do it, multiple executive orders, including this one. So they don’t produce those documents, which they have not.

JIM ERDMAN: They have not.

TUCKER CARLSON: Why would it be hard for Trump just to say, time’s up, I want them now?

JIM ERDMAN: There is a sea of lawyers who covet and say, here’s all the reasons you could be sideways with the law. Trump has full power to do all this, correct? He could just do it immediately. But for some reason, the bureaucrats, they all sit around kvetsing over all the legal ramifications, I think.

TUCKER CARLSON: And Tom Cotton too is—

JIM ERDMAN: Tom Cotton too, he does not want disclosure. Does not want disclosure at this point. Like, if we’re serious about reform, we just got to lay it all out and let it— like, if the documents that come out, these operational records come out, and they show all sorts of wrongdoing that happened decades ago, maybe we can finally start correcting those mistakes that happened and improve the institutions.

I physically handled the MKUltra documents, okay? They were about this high in the office. And again, I was hired labor that day. I just needed to move the documents for somebody into another office. But those were the MKUltra. I thumbed through them, and there’s no reason— there is absolutely no reason to not just put that out.

Okay, I think those documents that are JFK— there was no daring daylight raid or anything like that, that was incorrect. DNI was locked out of getting access to those documents, and some of those documents— they’re going to use bureaucratic doublespeak to talk about why DNI doesn’t need certain documents, why some of these documents probably need to stay behind closed doors. It’s all bullpucky. It’s too old, it’s too long ago. It has to be released.

TUCKER CARLSON: There’s an executive order with the force of law requiring the release of these documents with no caveats in it.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah.

TUCKER CARLSON: So they’re breaking the law by holding these.

JIM ERDMAN: You could say the same thing with the COVID Act of 2023. That was unanimously passed. Said we want all of it disclosed.

TUCKER CARLSON: Was it?

JIM ERDMAN: No, no. There’s thousands of documents that are still sitting there, and I pray that Pulte or whoever else comes after him, or even Ratcliffe, I don’t care who does it, declassify them. There’s thousands of documents.

TUCKER CARLSON: Well, that’s of course not going to happen, and I’m sure Tom Cotton would jump up and prevent it.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah, and it’s too bad because the people who put this administration in office are going to look at that and they’re not going to be happy.

TUCKER CARLSON: It’s not a democracy if you don’t know what your government’s doing.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah.

Questions About 9/11 and Building 7

TUCKER CARLSON: And what about 9/11? Because as you just said yourself, it was the Patriot Act in the wake of 9/11 that changed the whole structure. Changed the country forever. There’s never been a meaningful push to declassify after 25 years.

JIM ERDMAN: There was no push for 9/11 during my time at the Dig to declassify anything as far as I know.

TUCKER CARLSON: I’m very aware of that. I wonder why.

JIM ERDMAN: I have my theories. What are your theories? All these people who are out there that say the government can’t keep a secret and you’re a kook if you think that there’s a possibility there was something, some underhanded thing happening behind the curtain— I can tell you we can keep a secret. I know I’ve kept secrets. I am keeping secrets. Okay? Morally, ethically, I’m keeping secrets. And if somebody says that a group of people can’t keep a secret about 9/11, that’s not true. Okay? I have questions about Building 7. That for me was a wake-up call.

TUCKER CARLSON: That’s where the CIA office was.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah. And so I have a real question about Building 7. It does not make sense. And again, I used to be a normal CIA officer.

TUCKER CARLSON: That’s such a great sentence. “I used to be a normal CIA officer.”

JIM ERDMAN: It’s true.

TUCKER CARLSON: Assuming that’s a category.

JIM ERDMAN: You know, it is a category.

TUCKER CARLSON: I’m just joking. I know it’s a category.

JIM ERDMAN: I still love the agency, but there’s something off with Building 7.

TUCKER CARLSON: Something off? Yeah, like how’d it fall down? Why was it announced on television before it fell down?

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah, those are real questions that need real answers.

TUCKER CARLSON: Because the CIA— there was a CIA office in that building, they admitted it. I didn’t misremember that.

JIM ERDMAN: No, you didn’t.

TUCKER CARLSON: Did anyone ever talk about this? Well, you mean at CIA?

JIM ERDMAN: At CIA, over the course of my career?

TUCKER CARLSON: Yeah, like what happened to our office in Building 7? The building that no plane hit but somehow it fell down.

JIM ERDMAN: So when I say I used to be a normal CIA officer, for most of my career no one I knew talked about that, right? And it wasn’t until COVID that I started running into people that started asking those questions. And I was listening to them going, first, I had a—

TUCKER CARLSON: CIA employees?

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah, CIA employees. I had a visceral reaction when I first heard that. I was like, what are you talking about?

TUCKER CARLSON: What are you talking about?

JIM ERDMAN: They can’t— that didn’t happen. And as time has gone on, I had the same reaction, by the way. I’m a slow learner. I’m a slow learner, and there’s a lot of questions that need—

TUCKER CARLSON: So what were other CIA employees who had thought about this before you did, what was their theory about how that building came down?

JIM ERDMAN: Oh, well, put me on the spot here, but it doesn’t mean it’s true and you’re not endorsing it. I’m not endorsing.

TUCKER CARLSON: I’m interested to know what actual CIA employees think about the destruction of the CIA office in Building 7.

JIM ERDMAN: A lot of people had questions about the folks that were dancing on top of the building and selling—

TUCKER CARLSON: Israelis, the Mossad officers. Yeah.

JIM ERDMAN: So a lot of people had questions about that. A lot of people had questions about, was it an insurance policy? I believe you did a whole segment. That’s right, you did a whole segment on this.

TUCKER CARLSON: Yeah, we did a documentary.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah. There’s an insurance policy that was taken out right beforehand, which is pretty fortuitous, pretty prescient. They’ve brought up a whole bunch of things, and from my perspective, these are good questions that deserve answers.

TUCKER CARLSON: So was the feeling that that building was brought down by someone?

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah, I mean, some have said that explicitly that I’ve spoken to. Yeah, they said explicitly, yes, it sure looks like that thing was a controlled explosion and fell in on itself. And these are, yeah, these are active CIA officers.

The Bigger Picture: What Else Is Fake?

TUCKER CARLSON: I mean, it’s pretty obvious if you filter out the propaganda, the screaming in your ears from Jake Tapper, like, “Shut up, conspiracy nut,” and just ask, well, how did that happen? You can’t get an answer because obviously it was brought down with explosives. It sure was some kind, right? So, but who did that and why?

And by the way, that building collapsed in exactly the same way that the first two towers collapsed. So it does raise a bigger question. If that was fake, well, what else is fake, if anything? I mean, we don’t know.

But anyway, so all of these questions— if you’re a former normal person and your colleagues at CIA, presumably also these normal CIA officers you describe, who I love, they’re great officers, of course they work hard, totally kidding, well-chested freedom fighters. And I’ve known a lot of people like that in various federal agencies who are good people. Not everyone’s bad, right?

However, if they’re coming to the same conclusion, then it seems like 9/11 would be the number one thing you looked at in the Dig.

JIM ERDMAN: I would have liked to have taken a look at it. I would have liked to have taken a look at it.

TUCKER CARLSON: It seems obvious to me that because unlike the MLK assassination— I’d love to know more about it. Clearly it was a conspiracy, I think. But like, in the end, it didn’t change the world in the way that 9/11 did. Maybe it’s just too big to investigate.

JIM ERDMAN: Maybe. Maybe.

TUCKER CARLSON: Have you ever heard anybody say, hey, we should just declassify the 9/11 documents?

JIM ERDMAN: Well, yeah, some of the people in the Dig said that a couple of times. But I mean, we have to be direct.

TUCKER CARLSON: We were doing only what we were directed to do, what the EO told you to—

JIM ERDMAN: The EO told us to do. We’re trying to follow the law. Trying to follow the law, trying to make sure that we accomplish the mission that was put in front of us and get that done as quickly and as effectively as we could.

And we found that, well, the deep state exists. I mean, I don’t know what you want to call it. I love Mike Benz’s description of it, “the blob.” I think it’s the most accurate description.

TUCKER CARLSON: I agree with that. Because it’s amorphous.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah.

TUCKER CARLSON: There’s no medium.

JIM ERDMAN: It’s everywhere. And it just rolls in and fills space and fills the cracks. It pops up everywhere. Miserable.

The DIG’s Investigations: JFK, January 6th, and Beyond

TUCKER CARLSON: So the DIG was the Director’s Initiatives Group. And that’s the group within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, ODNI, run until recently by Tulsi Gabbard, that was charged with producing these documents that Trump had called for in his executive order. Is that all true?

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah.

TUCKER CARLSON: So what were the, if you’ll just jog my memory, the cases, the events that you were looking into?

JIM ERDMAN: Well, a lot of them are listed in that Rand Paul subpoena, so if it’s okay.

TUCKER CARLSON: Oh, of course.

JIM ERDMAN: Yes.

TUCKER CARLSON: But do you say— so it was the JFK assassination?

JIM ERDMAN: Oh, the declassification effort. And they sort of lumped MLK, JFK, Bobby Kennedy in that category. There was election security issues, there was January 6th, there was COVID, Havana Syndrome, UAPs, and a couple other issues. They tried to compartment out things so like everybody wasn’t working on the same things. So there’s some things that I wasn’t—

TUCKER CARLSON: Those are all super interesting topics. So let’s just go through them really quick, and I’m going to ask you, do you learn anything new about the JFK assassination?

JIM ERDMAN: So I have to admit, I’d never really followed it. So I was just hoping we’d just release it all, and I assumed there was a lot of people who were into it and they would pull the documents and make those conclusions, right, for me. So I don’t have any revelations that I was following very closely.

TUCKER CARLSON: I was shocked to know that the CIA was running Oswald. Yeah.

JIM ERDMAN: And yeah, that’s true.

TUCKER CARLSON: He defected, but that was all a scam. Yeah. The Russians were very paranoid about Lee Oswald. He was a Marine Corps corporal, I think, and he shows up in Russia and they’re like, you’re a secret agent. But he actually was. So I didn’t know that. MLK, anything come to mind?

JIM ERDMAN: I wasn’t following it.

TUCKER CARLSON: Sorry.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah.

TUCKER CARLSON: January 6th.

Steve Baker’s Information and the CIA’s Reaction

JIM ERDMAN: I think your interview with Steve Baker covered quite a bit with that, and I think the only thing I want to add to that is Steve Baker’s provision of information to The Dig. I think that was sort of the first step to The Dig being shut down. And I’ve never seen a reaction quite like what I saw from the agency.

TUCKER CARLSON: Tell us what Baker did just so we have context.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah, sure. So Steve Baker provided information based off gate analysis that indicated that a current CIA officer, former Capitol Police officer, may have been the person who placed the bombs that were outside the RNC and DNC. On the evening of January 5th, early morning, whatever it was, and provided it to the DNI.

Now, he provided it to the DNI because— and I didn’t realize this till much later— you know, as we’re doing these investigations, sometimes you just need to bring in an expert. And he had been following it for so long, somebody— and I’m not sure which part of the team did it— they asked him, hey, would you like to help us with this? He deferred. He said, listen, I’ll be glad to give you anything you need, but I don’t actually formally want to be part of the investigatory work because he wants to be a journalist. Yeah, he’s actually a musician, which I find great.

And so he provided that information and a memo was typed up. The memo went to the PDDNI, the Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence, Aaron Lucas. And it got scanned in and sent over to Michael Ellis, and that thing got shot—

TUCKER CARLSON: Number 2 at CIA.

JIM ERDMAN: Number 2 at CIA. Shot all over the CIA. And next thing you know, people were losing their minds.

TUCKER CARLSON: When I say people, they were so excited to get to the bottom of this, right?

JIM ERDMAN: Right, right. We finally figured it out. No, they were pretty upset. They’re like, what are you doing? This is defamation. And people were pulled in front of other people and— Defamation in what way? Well, they’re saying, listen, this person who was named in this investigation, that individual was not the person who did it. And you could get yourself in a lot of trouble. You could get sued.

TUCKER CARLSON: How do they know that person didn’t do it?

JIM ERDMAN: They don’t. They don’t know that. And we know—

TUCKER CARLSON: They’re a bunch of liars is what you’re saying.

JIM ERDMAN: That is definitely one way to say it. But yeah, I mean, they don’t know that. And it’s weird to me because the CIA’s job is to take in information.

TUCKER CARLSON: Exactly.

JIM ERDMAN: And by law, if there’s a chance that there is some illegal activity that occurred, we have to inform the CIA that, hey, listen, there’s an employee that might be involved in this. Take it seriously.

TUCKER CARLSON: But you’re saying that CIA did not respond coolly or analytically to this information from Steve Baker as provided by ODNI? They did instead what?

JIM ERDMAN: They decided they were going to investigate the Dig. And I, like, for what purpose?

TUCKER CARLSON: People who provided the information?

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah, gave it to them. And to me, it’s insanity.

TUCKER CARLSON: Were they upset about this information?

JIM ERDMAN: Sure seemed like it, because you don’t send somebody for— you don’t call somebody up and say, we’d like you to show up at this facility for an interview, and that facility is for polygraphs, by the way. Which is basically an interrogation tool, and say, hey, listen, come on by.

I mean, there was a fella sitting next to me, he asked me, you know, how do I deal with this? And I said, well, you tell them that you work for the DNI and that you would like them to send a full list of the questions they’d like to talk about, maybe send it to your lawyer, and you make sure you CC everybody in the DNI front office on that email chain because you want them involved in fixing this.

It was insane. The reaction we got from them was a visceral reaction. And so if you—

TUCKER CARLSON: I mean, you were practicing tradecraft your career at CIA, so you know that that kind of reaction suggests, oh yeah, not good, not good.

JIM ERDMAN: I immediately assumed that there’s wrongdoing. And like, right or wrong, that’s what I assume. If you’re going to react like that, well, hold on a second. What are you protecting? Why are you— Of course. And so everybody, I’m not a genius here. You don’t need to be a CO to have the exact same question.

So what I’ll say about this was the CIA decided that that was the end of it. And so they put up, they made every obstacle they could to try and prevent us from conducting our investigations. And it was simply refusing things, slow rolling things. Even within the DNI’s Office of General Counsel, there are things that we want to push through there to make sure that we’re street legal. Somehow they managed to slow roll even the stuff we were trying to get over to, for example, Senator Rand Paul’s committee. There was questions and follow-ups that sat with that group for months.

The Pipe Bombs, the Gait Analysis, and a Suspicious Death

TUCKER CARLSON: And wait, but on the specific case of January 6th, so there are a couple things that jump out. One, that of all people in the world to be identified by a distinctive gait, apparently it’s a product of a sports injury.

JIM ERDMAN: Sounds like it, Baker says.

TUCKER CARLSON: But whoever was in the picture had a weird gait. The woman Steve Baker says he thinks is that person has a sports injury. She’s a Capitol Police officer. But of all places to wind up working, it’s CIA. How did she wind up? Right.

JIM ERDMAN: According to the court documents, she had applied for a job prior to— six months prior to January 6th. I can’t remember. But I mean, it’s possible to get a job over there. It’s not easy to get hired by the CIA.

TUCKER CARLSON: What does she do there? Do you know?

JIM ERDMAN: She works in security. I don’t know the specifics of her exact job.

TUCKER CARLSON: Is it possible that she provided security to the director?

JIM ERDMAN: I don’t know. It is possible, I suppose. They pull people in if they’re short. So they’ll pull people in— like, there’s a special group of people that handle security for the director, deputy director, the COO. Maybe not the COO. Well, the COO’s changed names, but like the director and deputy director.

TUCKER CARLSON: Oh, I’m sorry. No, just kidding. It was a little CIA joke. Yeah, yeah, you guys know coups. We know there’s a different coup. Yeah, yeah.

JIM ERDMAN: Okay. So yeah, I suppose it’s possible. It doesn’t matter whether she did or didn’t. What really matters to me was that reaction. And it’s worse because the information— there was a Homeland Security investigator that was given the information and asked to pursue this.

TUCKER CARLSON: What was his name?

JIM ERDMAN: Osborne. And so he was found dead weeks later in his apartment, in his condo. And that’s worrisome. It’s worrisome because there’s questions about how he died. And there’s a lot of people who don’t want to talk about Mr. Osborne and his death. Why don’t they want to talk about it?

TUCKER CARLSON: There’s no obituary, I noticed.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah. It’s still an open question about how he died. We don’t know. Did he commit suicide? Did he—

TUCKER CARLSON: He was killed by a gunshot.

JIM ERDMAN: He was killed by a gunshot. And it’s worrisome because if he was pushing to pursue this investigation, and people don’t want to talk about it because they say, well, listen, we got to let the system work, work the investigation. We got to let the system figure out whether or not there’s something to this.

My issue with that is if there is nefarious intent, which I hope to God this is just some horrible thing that happened to this poor man, or if it’s suicide, I hope his family isn’t suffering. All those things, you know, I pray for him. I pray for his family. But if there was nefarious action that occurred with that, this is not something you want hidden behind a wall of secrecy because it’s not safe for anybody else who was aware of what was happening with that. It has to be talked about publicly. And I hope that Fairfax County Police, because that’s where the investigation is going on, I hope they’re getting to the bottom of it.

TUCKER CARLSON: I really do, because it’s just interesting that as someone who spent his adult life working for CIA, and you said you’ve loved it and got so much out of it, but you seem to believe by what you’re saying that the CIA would at least be capable of killing this guy.

JIM ERDMAN: Well, I don’t know who did that. I’m not saying the CIA did it, but something happened. Something happened. He was killed. And you could make that supposition that, well, it might be the CIA, could be other people with interests.

The Arrest of a Suspect and Questions of Justice

TUCKER CARLSON: And I also find it fascinating that within a very short period of that Steve Baker piece coming out saying, we found the woman who placed these pipe bombs, the Department of Justice, after, well, I guess 5 years of not finding a suspect, arrested some autistic Black kid and charged him with the crime.

JIM ERDMAN: It’s crazy. I don’t believe that for one minute.

TUCKER CARLSON: That the autistic Black kid did this?

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah. No, I don’t. Not for one minute. And the other issue, I don’t know—

TUCKER CARLSON: Do you think the Department of Justice is capable of framing someone like that? Apparently.

JIM ERDMAN: I can’t speak to motives.

TUCKER CARLSON: I don’t want to— That’s so evil though.

The Autistic Suspect and the Pattern of Deception

JIM ERDMAN: If this is what happened, it’s pure evil. And there’s other data out there. People should go take a look at Kyle Seraphin’s podcast and what he was on the surveillance team surveilling person of interest 3. There’s other data out there that seems to indicate that this is not the full story. I don’t believe that that kid, in my— this is just my opinion, but I don’t believe that that kid is the one, the guy that got arrested, the autistic kid that has feet that are 6 sizes too big to be the same person. Uh-uh. It doesn’t add up. But I will say—

TUCKER CARLSON: Is the NAACP involved in this? All the professional defenders of Black people out there who were out in force 5 years ago, I love Black people. Now is the time for everyone who stood up 5 years ago during the George Floyd insanity and said, I love Black people. What about this Black guy? This autistic Black kid? Who’s defending him? Anybody?

JIM ERDMAN: Nobody. Nobody.

TUCKER CARLSON: Nobody. Oh, all the “I love Black people” are absent on this?

JIM ERDMAN: Apparently. I mean—

TUCKER CARLSON: Not surprised.

JIM ERDMAN: It’s sickening to me.

TUCKER CARLSON: It is sickening. I never said “I love Black people.” I never treated Black people like gods. They’re people like you and me. But I’m offended by this.

JIM ERDMAN: Well, I’m offended because it’s a human being. If this poor kid, he sounds like he’s got some spectrum issues. I’ve got people very close to me with mental health issues. And to think that you’d be like, you know what, this is a throwaway person. That’s what they’re saying. If this really is as bad as it looks to me, they’re basically saying it’s not the first time.

Mary Pinchot Meyer and the CIA’s History of Framing Innocent People

TUCKER CARLSON: When Mary Pinchot Meyer was murdered on the towpath right near my house, childhood home in Georgetown, Cord Meyer’s wife, they grabbed some Black guy and put him on trial for her murder when they knew, when CIA was perfectly aware that he didn’t do it. And they allowed the DC police to arrest this guy and put him on trial.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah. Well, what I’d say about all of this—

TUCKER CARLSON: Sorry, it just makes me mad.

JIM ERDMAN: It makes me mad too.

TUCKER CARLSON: I mean, it’s so mean.

JIM ERDMAN: Well, it’s every single one of these acts that they’re in our face. It’s so obvious and they’re throwing it in our face. It’s meant to demoralize us and make us feel like there’s nothing we can do against this giant blob that does whatever they want.

TUCKER CARLSON: Run by, yeah, John Ratcliffe.

JIM ERDMAN: And so, as far as The Dig is concerned, as far as Steve Baker’s story is concerned, that was the death knell for The Dig. And I think—

CIA Involvement in January 6th

TUCKER CARLSON: But it’s got to make you think, if CIA is this involved in it, clearly they were this involved in January 6th. I mean, why else? If I’m John Ratcliffe, and I find out that someone on our security team has been identified by gait recognition software as the person who planted the pipe bombs on J6, I would say at least we’ve got to look at this.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah.

TUCKER CARLSON: I wouldn’t say let’s shut down the investigation that produces information.

JIM ERDMAN: Right, right. And if I were— I’ll take Kyle Seraphin’s surveillance team. If I were on the surveillance team that was surveilling all these people that were in the vicinity, as soon as that new information came out from Steve Baker, I’d be calling up my surveillance team and I’d be saying, “Hey boys, we’ve got some new information. Let’s go over the old files.” I’m an intelligence officer, I’m not law enforcement, but as an intelligence officer, if I were doing something overseas and it had some shades of what this is, I would immediately call my surveillance team together and say, “Let’s get on the target again. Let’s start getting some brass tacks of what’s going down. Go through the old files, figure out what is happening.” None of that’s happening.

TUCKER CARLSON: I mean, this person who— look, I don’t know anything. I was not involved in investigating this. I’ve just talked to Steve Baker and you, that’s it. So I’m not alleging anything, but Dan Bongino at FBI was defending this person and attacking Steve. That’s correct.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah.

TUCKER CARLSON: Can you verify that?

JIM ERDMAN: Wait, attacking Steve Baker?

TUCKER CARLSON: Yeah, Steve Baker. “I’m going to help fund a libel suit against you,” and all this stuff, supposedly he said. But he was certainly attacking Steve Baker. What does Steve Baker do? He used gait recognition software, which the federal government uses, by the way. It’s not a crackpot technology.

JIM ERDMAN: No, no.

TUCKER CARLSON: It doesn’t prove anything, but it moves you closer, like anything else. Facial recognition, right?

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah. I mean, it breaks things open so that you can start conducting more investigations.

TUCKER CARLSON: Okay, so you’re an expert in human behavior, of course, because you’re recruiting spies. If this were happening in Pakistan, not your country, you’d be like, “This agency must be involved.”

JIM ERDMAN: Yes, yes.

TUCKER CARLSON: The event in question, J6.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah, yeah. I mean, and that’s the problem. I keep seeing parallels to third world countries, of things like this happening where I’m like, if this were happening in another country, I’d run an intelligence operation. I’ve monitored elections in foreign countries as part of that process. And here’s another example. If I had seen the anomalies that had occurred during our election that caused January 6th in some foreign country, the State Department would probably be sending out a démarche. So there’s enough—

TUCKER CARLSON: Will you explain to people who don’t know what that means?

JIM ERDMAN: Oh, it means we’d be criticizing that country for their election practices. We’d give them a formal statement saying, “You have done wrong and we think that you need to stop doing X, Y, and Z because your elections are fraudulent.” That’s what I’m saying. So that’s another example. I keep seeing these parallels. If this had happened in some foreign locale, it’s kind of weird if you take 3 steps back.

The 2020 Election, the Butler Shooting, and the Iran War

TUCKER CARLSON: I’m not alleging anything at all. I just happen to notice the pattern that this happens in 2020. No one’s proved that the election was stolen, so far as I can tell, but the evidence that this was not how you run an election, this is how a fraudulent election is run, it’s overwhelming. And then Trump gets shot in Butler and then decides to hire Marco Rubio as Secretary of State, Steve Wallace as National Security Advisor, and critically, John Ratcliffe as Director of Central Intelligence. And then he wins the election with the majority of the popular vote and you don’t have any of these problems. I mean, if this were happening in a foreign country, what would you say?

JIM ERDMAN: I’d have some questions. I will say part of the reason President Trump won was because he managed to capture the MAGA vote, and he should probably be a little more cognizant of what MAGA—

TUCKER CARLSON: He shouldn’t be endorsing mRNA technology and stuff like that.

JIM ERDMAN: But that’s separate from your point.

TUCKER CARLSON: It’s just kind of weird. Like, if you wanted above all to have a war with Iran, not just to get rid of their nuclear program, but to reset the world order, right? Get the US out of the Middle East and the US dollar and the petrodollar. And that was your plan. Clearly that’s the plan that’s happening. And no American president would go along with that because that would destroy your legacy and your nation, right?

JIM ERDMAN: Especially for someone who campaigned on no—

TUCKER CARLSON: Of course, and clearly didn’t want to do it. But let’s say that was your plan. And that’s a big plan. That’s a history-changing plan. You would do whatever you could to make it clear to that guy, like, “There’s a carrot and a stick here. Maybe you get elected, maybe you don’t get killed if you go along with it.” Has that ever occurred to you?

JIM ERDMAN: If I’m being honest with myself, yes.

TUCKER CARLSON: I don’t know that that happened. Nobody has ever bothered to explain what did happen. If that’s not what happened? Like, oh, it’s just totally normal that we invaded Iran after 6 months after saying we ended their nuclear program, to restart again without trying to convince the public, and then just do this thing that we know is going to wreck our country, which it now is.

The Dismantling of the MAGA Coalition

JIM ERDMAN: What I very much dislike is the alternative voices that came together to form this coalition. Because whatever MAGA is, whatever MAHA is, all these people came under a very big tent and they offered their voices, their support for President Trump because he was—

TUCKER CARLSON: What a great coalition it was too.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah.

TUCKER CARLSON: It was awesome.

JIM ERDMAN: It was awesome. These people came forward and then the alternative voices have been systematically removed from the pool of people that are supposed to be advising.

TUCKER CARLSON: Is that true?

JIM ERDMAN: I think so.

TUCKER CARLSON: Sorry, I’m just laughing. I was one of them. No, that is definitely true.

JIM ERDMAN: And, like Joe Kent, for example.

TUCKER CARLSON: Oh, the best.

JIM ERDMAN: He’s a wonderful human being who—

TUCKER CARLSON: I agree.

JIM ERDMAN: I look at the reaction to him resigning the way he resigned, and I have friends who I deeply respect, I love them, and they’re like, “Oh, he shouldn’t have done it that way because it criticized President Trump.” I’m like, for many years when people resign from office, a lot of times they’d resign on principle and they’d write a letter just like that. Joe Kent was not disrespectful to President Trump at all. And if you can’t get through to a president, you can’t get your message across, say, “Hey, listen, I need you to listen to me.” At some point, doing the right thing is writing a respectful letter that says, “Hey, I disagree with this policy. I’m leaving for this reason.” This happened all the time before.

TUCKER CARLSON: The thing that bothers me is, what’s the option? Leaking to the media, subverting the president’s program. Those are clearly less honorable responses.

JIM ERDMAN: Completely.

TUCKER CARLSON: If you can’t carry out a job consistent with your own values, don’t. I mean, how is that bad? Isn’t that what we ask our children to be?

JIM ERDMAN: It’s exactly what we ask. And Joe Kent did exactly what many, many other people have done in many other administrations. My problem is the screeching and the gnashing of teeth that came from people associated with this administration. They treated him worse than if he was some kind of leaker. Well, actually they claimed he was.

TUCKER CARLSON: Well, they claimed he was a criminal.

JIM ERDMAN: A criminal?

TUCKER CARLSON: That he was under criminal investigation when his security clearance was unimpeded till the day he left. So we know that that’s just not true. It’s a lie. They admitted it was a lie, but they trashed the guy’s reputation. They trashed his wife.

JIM ERDMAN: I mean, he has sacrificed for this country, and he did an honorable thing. He spoke with respect to the president. He couldn’t get through, so he decided to leave. I keep seeing these indications that there are blast doors up around the White House, around key figures, that you can’t get through. You can’t talk to them. And again, I wish I was part of the inner circle so I could see what was happening. But as somebody who was maybe 1 or 2 layers below that, it sure looked like blast doors were going up around a whole lot of people. And I don’t know how we got on that, but I think it’s important for those—

The Coalition, Betrayal, and the Fight for Reform

TUCKER CARLSON: Well, I mean, just because it’s sad and the coalition that brought Trump back to the White House in 2024 was a beautiful thing. It wasn’t organized around a race or even a political party. It was organized around a kind of idealistic hope that the country could be better and that some measure of power would be returned to the citizens who own it. These are not radical ideas. They’re foundational ideas.

JIM ERDMAN: Well, now that I am—

TUCKER CARLSON: It wasn’t a hate-based thing at all.

JIM ERDMAN: No.

TUCKER CARLSON: And now it’s totally blown up because a small group of true haters, the genocide defenders, have all basically committed to destroying this coalition. And it worked. And it’s really—

JIM ERDMAN: It has worked. And truth— now that I am not a government employee, I can speak about my personal political beliefs. I am a lifelong conservative. I voted for Ross Perot. I gave you Bill Clinton at one point. I’m a lifelong conservative, and I was going to vote for Kennedy. I was going to go that— like, I am a lifelong conservative that was going to go the distance for President Kennedy.

And in my opinion, he did one of the most presidential things that I’ve seen in my lifetime. He chose the American people over power. He said, “Listen, I’ve got an opportunity. If I work with this administration, I’ve got an opportunity to make America healthy again.” It was the most noble thing I’d ever seen. I was really pissed off that he pulled out. I really was going to go the distance.

And I had never— if someone had asked young Jim, “Hey, someday are you going to vote for a Democrat?” I would’ve been like, “That’s crazy talk. I might vote for an occasional libertarian or Ross Perot, but probably not a Democrat.” And I was going to go the distance with him. That coalition that he brought in, I don’t think President Trump would be president if he had not brought that in.

And so for me, if we’re talking about the coalition that said no more war, make America healthy again, we’re losing. The promises are being broken. The promises are being broken.

TUCKER CARLSON: Mocked.

JIM ERDMAN: Mocked. Openly mocked. And I’ll still go the distance with anybody who wants to protect religious rights, bodily autonomy, all those things. Somebody needs to wake up this administration and say, “Hey, listen, if the person who owns the MAHA agenda at the polls, they’re probably going to get those little bits of votes that are going to put them over the edge.”

Betrayal and the Breaking of the Coalition

TUCKER CARLSON: It’s too late. Betrayal is hard to recover from. You get in an argument with your wife and you can get past it. You catch her in bed with the pool boy and you’re never going to see her the same way because she betrayed you, on a very deep level. Not that that happened. I hope it never does. But you know what I mean? That’s what this is. You caught Trump in bed with someone. It’s like he cheated on you. And then to lecture you about your lack of loyalty is too much. You’re disloyal? Joe Kent was disloyal?

JIM ERDMAN: Really?

TUCKER CARLSON: Joe Kent’s wife got killed in Syria because of the neocons.

JIM ERDMAN: Yep.

TUCKER CARLSON: And rather than whine about it, he kept going and tried to serve his nation and did. And he was right, by the way, on the merits. And then he calls Trump, tries to see Trump on his way out because he likes Trump, actually. He’s a respectful guy. And Trump trashes his wife and says, “Oh, he got remarried awful quick.” Really? Because it was under your administration that his first wife was killed because you didn’t have the balls to get American troops out of Syria because you’re controlled by Israel. That’s a fact. So then to lecture Joe Kent about getting married again after you oversaw the death of his first wife, I was like, oh, can’t deal with this anymore.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah, there’s been a lot of disappointment. I know that’s the understatement of the year, but a lot of disappointment. And I have disappointment— to bring it back around to the conversation about the agency and everything else— I have disappointment with the agency. I wanted reform. I wanted real reform. I’m okay with getting rid of some of the chaff. I’m okay with making some big changes. And it never happened. Never happened. In fact, this administration is just letting it move on.

Feds for Freedom: Suing the Government Over Vaccine Mandates

JIM ERDMAN: I’ve left government service now. I co-founded an organization. If it’s okay, I’m going to talk a little bit about that because I think it’s important. At some point I’m going to go into the private sector. But the thing about being a government employee, if you’re in military or forward-facing, you want to have a mission. You want to have something that you’re like, “No, no, I want to be part of something bigger.” And that’s the hardest part of leaving government service. That, and you realize that there’s a lot of people in the private sector who are incredibly impressive and you have to compete against them. So some of these government schlubs are afraid to leave.

TUCKER CARLSON: Yeah, of course.

JIM ERDMAN: I co-founded an organization that sued the federal government over vaccine mandates. We got together, we didn’t know what we were doing. We built the cars, we rolled it out of the garage, but we were successful. We got a nationwide injunction that shut down the vaccine mandate for all staff federal government employees throughout the entirety of the Biden administration. Done. Succeeded.

We filed 17 class action EEOs. Towards the end of my time at the Dig, the last year in the Dig, turns out that the CIA decided that every single person who was non-compliant with those vaccine mandates— yeah, they weren’t just insubordinate, they were spies. So they had all of them investigated by the Counterintelligence Mission Center’s counterespionage department.

TUCKER CARLSON: Not really.

JIM ERDMAN: Oh really? All of them. So I personally filed an OP, an Office of Privacy and Civil Liberties complaint, and I blind CC’d every single unvaccinated officer in the CIA. And then when nothing happened after 40 days, I sent it up to the Intelligence Community Inspector General. I said, “You need to investigate this.”

My problem is they’re purposely waiting longer than a 45-day period because as soon as I CC’d all these unvaccinated officers, they have a 45-day window to file an EEO complaint. I know a lot about the complaint process now. Never used to, never made a complaint until COVID. And I wanted to give them the chance, if they were upset about it, to actually file those complaints. A bunch of people filed the EEO complaints, but all we really wanted was— and again, this is under Director Ratcliffe— all we wanted to do was to expunge the records. See, when you have a counter—

TUCKER CARLSON: John Ratcliffe okayed counter-espionage investigations?

JIM ERDMAN: The investigation occurred in 2021, right? Okay, it was discovered. So after it was discovered, we said, “Hey, listen, new administration, this is an easy fix. Here’s what we want: just expunge the records. Just get that off your permanent security file because that, that’s—”

TUCKER CARLSON: You were investigated as a foreign spy because you didn’t want to take the death shot?

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah, because you didn’t want to take the death shot. And that was a simple request. Hey, please, just— we asked.

TUCKER CARLSON: Did Ratcliffe do it?

JIM ERDMAN: No. So now we have to sue. And I found pro bono legal support.

TUCKER CARLSON: Why is Ratcliffe so vested in—

JIM ERDMAN: I have no idea—

TUCKER CARLSON: —slander against people who didn’t take the vax?

JIM ERDMAN: I have no idea. And I don’t know, maybe he’s incompetent too.

TUCKER CARLSON: I—

JIM ERDMAN: He should have— his staff were aware. I made sure that both the deputy director and the director’s staff were aware that this was occurring. I wanted them to just fix it, and they didn’t. So we’re going to sue them. And I got out of government service, but I’m still working the—

TUCKER CARLSON: Good.

JIM ERDMAN: Feds for Freedom. Feds for Freedom is suing the CIA over this, and we are still actually litigating class action EEOs, and this is a half decade later. So we’ve got an FBI class action EEO, we’ve got a— there’s a couple others, DOD, NASA. We’re still litigating this stuff a half decade later, which is absolutely idiotic. It’s this administration. They said flat out we shouldn’t have to have—

TUCKER CARLSON: Well, it’s just an attack on Christians. That’s what it was. Here’s a shot with aborted baby parts in it. Can you take it? The people who said they can’t, they get investigated as spies. Get all the Christians out.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah. So at some point I’m going to go find a normal job, but for right now I’m going to—

January 6th and CIA Involvement in Domestic Politics

TUCKER CARLSON: Let me ask you one final question, or one final category of questions. So back to January 6th— based on everything you’ve said, without any other evidence, I would find it very likely that the CIA was involved in January 6th, just by their reaction to it, or is aware that DOJ isn’t covering for DOJ or something. The government, clearly.

JIM ERDMAN: Based on their reaction, it’s actually the worst possible conclusion. If I’m just going off reaction, I have no data, I can’t prove anything, but it means that the Capitol Police, the FBI, and CIA were all in bed. And they perpetrated a hoax of such colossal proportion. January 6th, you had people rotting in these jails for a very long time. If CIA was involved in that, maybe that Four Winds thing, maybe that’s where we should be going. Certainly a Church Committee 2.0.

TUCKER CARLSON: Just shut it down at that point.

JIM ERDMAN: Or shut it down. Yeah.

TUCKER CARLSON: But that raises the question— the firewall always was involvement in domestic politics. Yes, we did overthrow Mosaddegh. Yes, we did this, that, and the other thing abroad, but it was in the service of American foreign policy goals, and so it’s okay. But what we’ll never do is start tampering in our domestic politics, our democracy.

JIM ERDMAN: Right, right.

TUCKER CARLSON: And yet I know for a fact that there are CIA domestic influence operations.

JIM ERDMAN: I’ve never seen one, but all the indications are— when you take a look at the media, media blackouts, what media covers, it starts looking like something’s happening.

TUCKER CARLSON: And they’re pretty obviously involved in the Monica Lewinsky thing. Not that I’m pro-Clinton, never have been. But do you think that’s fair to say?

JIM ERDMAN: I think it is.

TUCKER CARLSON: Yeah.

JIM ERDMAN: Yeah.

TUCKER CARLSON: So that’s pretty shocking that they would be involved in our politics, don’t you think?

JIM ERDMAN: It is shocking. And like I said, I used to be different. And the variety of things that I entertain as possibilities are much, much wider than they used to be. You can’t read an email that says, “This is our story and we’re sticking to it,” and not— you can’t go back. You can’t go back to that. So yeah, it’s disturbing. We’re not getting reform, and I have a feeling we’ve got more pain ahead for us if we don’t make some changes.

Closing Remarks

TUCKER CARLSON: I agree with that. Thanks so much for taking all this time, Jim, to talk to us.

JIM ERDMAN: My pleasure.

TUCKER CARLSON: Congrats. You’ve been out of the CIA less than a month and you’re already doing good work, as far as I’m concerned. Thank you.

JIM ERDMAN: Thank you. Thank you.

Related Posts

• Transcript of Shawn Ryan Interview: Trump’s Betrayal – Tucker Carlson Show
• Transcript of Manish Tewari Interview: ANI Podcast with Smita Prakash
• Transcript of Annie Jacobsen Interview: Biological Warfare on Shawn Ryan Show #323
• Transcript: Mayor Mamdani Interview on Weekly Show
• Transcript: Tucker Interviews Dr. Chris Martenson on Global Energy Crisis