What specific 9/11 conspiracy claims has Tucker Carlson publicly made and when?
Executive summary
Tucker Carlson has publicly revived and repeated several longstanding 9/11 conspiracy themes in a five‑part series called The 9/11 Files (released September 23, 2025), alleging government knowledge and cover‑ups — including claims that the CIA knew hijackers were in the U.S. and tried to recruit them, questions about World Trade Center 7’s collapse and reports of explosive residue, and insinuations that foreign governments had foreknowledge — and he has called for a new 9/11 commission [1] [2] [3]. Critics say the series mostly rehashes familiar unproven insinuations and avoids producing concrete physical evidence, while Carlson has also asked whether some people “knew more than we’ve been told” in interviews promoting the series [4] [5].
1. Carlson’s central claim: “People did know more than we’ve been told” — timing and platform
Carlson framed his skepticism repeatedly in 2025 publicity and interviews around The 9/11 Files, stating plainly that “people did know more than we’ve been told” when discussing intelligence failures and agency awareness; that line appears in interview transcripts and in the series’ promotion released in September 2025 [5] [1]. The series itself debuted September 23, 2025, on the Tucker Carlson Network and YouTube and was positioned as a bid for a new, independent 9/11 commission [1] [3].
2. Specific allegation aired in Episode 1: CIA knew hijackers were in U.S. and tried to recruit them
Episode 1 foregrounds a claim by former FBI agent Mark Rossini that the CIA was “fully aware” that certain 9/11 hijackers were in the United States and, rather than inform the FBI, attempted to recruit two of them for an operation that went wrong — an account the series frames as evidence of agency malfeasance or concealment [1]. Carlson presented that allegation as central to a broader “CIA secret mission gone wrong” narrative in the episode released September 23, 2025 [1].
3. Recycled Truther themes: WTC‑7 collapse and explosive residue (Episode 4)
Episode 4 explicitly raises classic “truther” questions: the mysterious collapse of World Trade Center 7, reports of explosive residue in the rubble, early media reports about the attacks and why some foreign governments seemed to know more than U.S. intelligence [2]. The series collects those questions into a companion watch guide, signaling Carlson’s intent to reframe lingering anomalies as potential evidence of a broader cover‑up [2] [3].
4. Calls for a new commission and casting doubt on the official report
Across the series Carlson argues that the 9/11 Commission Report is insufficient and promotes the idea of a new commission not “interested in protecting politicians,” using declassified documents and the commission’s own report to mount his challenge — a theme visible in the series’ messaging and IMDb summary [3]. Townhall and other critics note he repeatedly labels the official report a “joke” and urges renewed bipartisan inquiry [6] [3].
5. How Carlson positions evidence and sources — and how critics respond
Carlson’s series relies heavily on interviews with former officials and declassified documents rather than new physical evidence; City Journal and other critics say the work largely rehashes familiar claims and “unproven insinuations,” noting the program avoids producing firsthand admissions of a government plot and tends to advance questions rather than conclusive findings [4] [1]. Supporters suggest assembling this material justifies renewed scrutiny; detractors call it a polished revival of long‑debunked lines of inquiry [4] [3].
6. Past statements and perceived inconsistency
Before producing the series, Carlson had publicly criticized some 9/11 “truthers,” once calling those who spread conspiracy theories “parasites” and saying there “isn’t any” evidence that 9/11 was an inside job; nonetheless, by 2025 he launched The 9/11 Files promising to expose what “you have been told” [7] [4]. That shift has drawn attention — and criticism — from commentators who see the series as an about‑face or as adopting truther rhetoric while avoiding the more extreme claims [7] [4].
7. Noted insinuations beyond U.S. agencies: foreign foreknowledge and Israel
The series and Carlson’s public remarks also raise questions about why foreign governments appeared to know more than U.S. intelligence, and some reporting notes Carlson suggested foreign actors had knowledge in ways that echo older, more inflammatory claims [2] [5]. Townhall and other outlets summarize that Carlson suggested, without establishing new proof, that foreign governments (and in some commentary Israeli links were implied) had advance awareness — an element that drew particular public backlash [6] [5].
Limitations: available sources describe the claims Carlson aired in The 9/11 Files and linked interviews from 2025, but they do not provide a comprehensive, dated catalog of every prior public statement he made about 9/11 before 2024; for earlier specific dates and verbatim quotes beyond the cited items, available sources do not mention them [4] [1] [2] [7] [5].