Assessing Claims Made in Alex Jones’ Interview With Tucker Carlson

Alex Jones, a right-wing conspiracy theorist and founder of Infowars, appeared on the Tucker Carlson Show, the former Fox News host’s video podcast, last Wednesday. The pair made misleading and outright false statements throughout their two-hour discussion on topics ranging from 9/11, the Ukrainian government, U.S. intelligence on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and nonprofit organizations formed in the aftermath of the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings. 

Dick Cheney called for ‘a new Pearl Harbor event’ and ‘race-specific bioweapons.’

While discussing unfounded conspiracies claiming that the U.S. government was involved in the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Jones claimed former Vice President Dick Cheney wrote in 2000 that “we need a new Pearl Harbor event to launch the Pax Americana” and supported the development of “race-specific bioweapons.” 

“In the Project for [a New] American Century headed up by [former Defense Secretary Donald] Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, Dick Cheney wrote in there that we need a new Pearl Harbor event to launch the Pax Americana,” Jones said. “Cheney also writes in that same document, ‘We need to look at, you know, race-specific bioweapons to have control and bring in our power.’”

Cheney did not advocate for a “new Pearl Harbor event” or the creation of “race-specific bioweapons.” Jones is referencing a September 2000 report from the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), a now-defunct conservative think tank, titled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses,” authored primarily by national security expert Giselle (then Thomas) Donnelly, with historian Donald Kagan and former Reagan administration adviser Gary Schmitt serving as the project’s co-chairmen. Cheney did not write the report and, though he signed a “statement of principles” outlined by PNAC at its founding 1997, he was never directly affiliated with PNAC. 

Moreover, the 90-page report does not support Jones’ claim. While the report did mention Pearl Harbor, it was to make the point that a technological transformation of the U.S. military—increasing its capabilities by integrating recently developed technological breakthroughs—would be a long and gradual process, unless a Pearl Harbor-like event were to occur.  “The process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor,” the report stated. That was the report’s only mention of Pearl Harbor. Similarly, Jones claims that the report advocates for the development of “race-specific bioweapons,” when it states no such thing. Instead, the report discussed how technological developments could potentially alter the calculus of war. “Although it may take several decades for the process of transformation to unfold, in time, the art of warfare on air, land, and sea will be vastly different than it is today,” the report said. For example, the report added, “advanced forms of biological warfare that can ‘target’ specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool.” Critically, the report was not advocating for the use of biological warfare, but was speculating on military capabilities the U.S. might encounter decades in the future. Other examples the report noted were the potential for outer space to become a “theater of war” and battles fought by “fleets of robots, some small enough to fit in soldiers’ pockets.” 

Killed Infowars reporter Jamie White was on a Ukrainian ‘hit-list.’

Carlson at one point said he was concerned that the country is “entering a violent stage,” noting that Infowars reporter Jamie White was “assassinated.” 

Jones then provided some context to White’s death. “Well, a month ago, Jamie White—a great reporter, great guy—we were working up there Sunday night till about 9 o’clock,” he said. “I left, he went home and then got shot through the carotid artery, one shot through his neck and then out the back, and then he bled to death.” Jones added that White “was on the Ukraine hit list along [with] myself, you [Carlson], and a bunch of other people.”

On the night of March 9, White was shot and killed in the parking lot outside his apartment in Austin, Texas. A police investigation into White’s murder noted that his killers, who are still at large, were likely burglars. White appeared to have spotted burglars breaking into his vehicle and confronted them, according to detectives. The suspects then shot White and fled. Police responded to a 911 report of a shooting, and White was brought to a local hospital where he was declared dead in the early hours of March 10. Detectives have also said the attack was likely random and that White’s killers were likely involved in other vehicle burglaries in the area. 

The government of Ukraine did not have White on any sort of “hit-list.” That false claim originated from White himself in 2024, before his death. “I’m on the Ukrainian ‘Enemies List’ due to my work at Infowars and with Alex Jones on the Ukraine proxy war,” White tweeted. He included a screenshot of a webpage listing his X username handle and his affiliation with InfoWars. He did not include a link to that webpage. 

The group responsible for the webpage did not compile a “hit list” or “enemies list,” and it was not produced or created by the Ukrainian government. An independent media company based in Ukraine that promotes pro-Ukraine views, Texty.org.ua, published a list of 386 individuals and 76 organizations that oppose U.S. support for Ukraine, including Jones, Carlson, and White. “While our research does not cover every public figure opposing aid to Ukraine,” its website states, “it highlights prominent individuals and common arguments that often mirror Kremlin propaganda.” 

In June 2024, the media organization stated that its list of people was not a hit list or enemies list. “The table of research subjects, which has generated the most controversy, is neither a ‘list of enemies of Ukraine’ nor a ‘kill list,’ as it has been labeled in numerous posts circulating on platform X,” the group wrote on its website. “These data were collected and published solely to demonstrate the evidence supporting the theses presented in the article. The article itself is not an accusation but a study of the political and media context that influences government decisions regarding further support for Ukraine in the Russian-Ukrainian war.”

Pentagon assessment gave 50 percent chance of ‘nuclear holocaust’ if U.S. gave weapons to Ukraine.

Carlson claimed during his interview with Jones that the U.S. Department of Defense, under former President Joe Biden, predicted a 50 percent chance of a “nuclear holocaust” if the U.S. gave weapons to Ukraine.

“This just came out the other day, the Pentagon wrote an assessment saying that they calculated that if we gave weapons to Ukraine—that allowed the Ukrainian military or our military using Ukraine as a proxy to hit targets within Russia—they judged the likelihood of a nuclear exchange at 50 percent,” Carlson said. “And [the Biden administration] did it anyway.” He added, “At that point, like, you should be in prison for the criminally insane. … They assessed that if we gave certain weapons that allowed the Ukrainians to strike targets within Russia, if we did that, which we did, the chance of a nuclear exchange—nuclear holocaust that killed everybody on Earth—would be 50 percent, and they did it anyway.”

This is mostly false. A New York Times article from March 9 discussed a briefing on the Ukraine-Russian war held between Biden and his advisers, and mentioned a 50 percent prediction. Anonymous officials present at that meeting, which occurred in October 2022, told the New York Times that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) warned of a “singular scenario”—in which Ukraine’s military “decimated” Russian forces and was poised to retake the Crimean peninsula from Russian occupation—that “might” increase the chances of Russian dictator Vladimir Putin using nuclear weapons to 50 percent or higher. “No one knew how to assess the accuracy of that estimate: the factors that play into decisions to use nuclear weapons, or even to threaten their use, were too abstract, too dependent on human emotion and accident, to measure with precision,” the New York Times’ David Sanger, who covered the Biden administration and national security issues for the news outlet, wrote. “But it wasn’t the kind of warning any American president could dismiss.”

So, Carlson made a few sizable errors in his claim. The “singular scenario” was one in which Ukraine achieved a series of military successes against Russia, to the extent that its forces could plausibly regain Crimea, which it lost in 2014. While Ukraine has defended off the majority of its territory from Russian occupation so far, it does not resemble the scenario the assessment laid out. Crimea, still under Russian occupation, is unlikely to be overrun by Ukrainian forces in the coming months. Second, Carlson claimed the 50 percent outcome was a “nuclear holocaust that killed everybody on Earth,” when, in fact, it was just “nuclear use.” Third, while Carlson attributes the assessment to the Pentagon, the Defense Department’s headquarters, the calculation was instead produced by the CIA. 

Justice Department gave $4 million to Sandy Hook foundations.

Jones also levied accusations against nonprofit organizations formed in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings in 2012, in which a gunman killed 20 first-grade students and six teachers. In 2018, some parents of the Sandy Hook victims sued Jones for defamation and emotional distress, after he called the school shooting a “giant hoax” and claimed the student massacre was staged, saying that “no one died.” (Jones later admitted his claims were completely false, and said he only initially believed them because of a “form of psychosis.”) Following a trial in 2022, a Connecticut jury ordered Jones to pay $1.4 billion to some families of the victims and, on April 8, the Connecticut Supreme Court declined to hear Jones’ appeal. On Wednesday, Jones claimed that the nonprofits raked in $4 million in federal tax dollars from the Justice Department in recent years. 

“We get another FBI contact, and they say, “Why don’t you go look at the Federal Register and look for money going to these Sandy Hook Foundations or the people that sued me,” Jones said. “We go look—it’s $4 million plus in payments to them right after they sue me, and then two payments to them during when both trials started.” He added, “Tax dollars over $4 million from the Justice Department were paid to the main Sandy Hook, uh, foundation that is on the board, the head of it, for the people suing me that ran it.” “This is crazy,” Carlson chimed in.  

On Thursday, Jones tweeted screenshots from USAspending.gov—a website that tracks federal funding records—that show federal dollars given to two nonprofits, the Sandy Hook Promise Foundation and Safe and Sound: A Sandy Hook Initiative, Inc. Although Jones cited the Federal Register on the podcast, he was likely referring to USAspending.gov. (The Federal Register is a journal that publishes government rules, regulations, and public notices—it does not keep track of payments given to specific organizations.)

It’s true that the DOJ made payments to those foundations, but they were part of a larger program issuing grants for school safety protocols and the money had no connection to the lawsuits against Jones.

In December 2021, the Justice Department announced it would provide almost $126 million in grants to update and improve safety protocols and security measures in K-12 schools. “These investments will help communities address school violence, create better school climates and set up early detection teams to prevent tragedies in our places of learning,” Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Amy Solomon said in a news release at the time. The Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Assistance would dole out nearly $74 million of that funding, among 78 separate federal grants, to organizations to “support training and education for school personnel and students on preventing violence against others and themselves, including anti-bullying training and specialized training for school officials to respond to mental health crises.” The Justice Department added that “funds also help develop and implement multidisciplinary threat assessment or intervention teams and design technology solutions such as anonymous reporting systems, hotlines and websites.”

The four payments highlighted by Jones came from this funding. The grants’ description on USAspending.gov states that the funds are allocated for specific purposes. Safe and Sound: A Sandy Hook Initiative, Inc., received $612,662 in federal funding  “to develop a specialized threat assessment electronic toolkit (E-toolkit) and a training curriculum to provide support to school-based [Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management standards].” The same group also received a $995,248 grant to develop school safety security measures for Tennessee school districts. Meanwhile, the Sandy Hook Promise Foundation also received two grants: $859,294 for implementing school safety standards for the Dallas Independent School District, and $837,572 for Pennsylvania school districts. 

The Dispatch Fact Check has reached out to Infowars and the Tucker Carlson Network for comment. 

If you have a claim you would like to see us fact check, please send us an email at factcheck@thedispatch.com. If you would like to suggest a correction to this piece or any other Dispatch article, please email corrections@thedispatch.com.