Vivek Ramaswamy Busted By Actual Tape After Claiming He Was Misquoted on 9/11 Conspiracy Theory
The Atlantic‘s John Hendrickson released the unedited audio and transcript of an interview he conducted with GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy on Tuesday after Ramaswamy claimed that he was misquoted by Hendrickson.
Hendrickson noted in a long profile of the first time politician that he had wondered aloud how many federal agents were present on the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.
“I think it is legitimate to say how many police, how many federal agents were on the planes that hit the Twin Towers,” Ramaswamy told Hendrickson after the reporter asked him what the truth about the January 6 Capitol riot was. “Maybe the answer is zero. It probably is zero for all I know, right? I have no reason to think it was anything other than zero. But if we’re doing a comprehensive assessment of what happened on 9/11, we have a 9/11 commission, absolutely that should be an answer the public knows the answer to.”
Ramaswamy insisted to CNN’s Kaitlan Collins on Monday night that “the quote is wrong, actually.”
Hendrickson begs to differ, and released the audio to prove it.
Here’s the transcript of the exchange:
HENDRICKSON: When you talk about all the things, We can handle the truth about X, you know, and you list off a bunch of stuff—one of them that you said last night is: We can handle the truth about January 6. What is the truth about January 6 that you’re referring to?
RAMASWAMY: I don’t know, but we can handle it. Whatever it is, we can handle it. Government agents. How many government agents were in the field? Right?
HENDRICKSON: You mean like entrapment?
RAMASWAMY: Yeah. Absolutely. Why can the government not be transparent about something that we’re using? Terrorists, or the kind of tactics used to fight terrorists. If we find that there are hundreds of our own in the ranks on the day that they were, that they were—I mean, look …
HENDRICKSON: Well, there’s a difference between entrapment and a difference between a law-enforcement agent identifying—
RAMASWAMY: I think it is legitimate to say, How many police, how many federal agents were on the planes that hit the Twin Towers? Like, I think we want—maybe the answer is zero, probably is zero for all I know, right? I have no reason to think it was anything other than zero. But if we’re doing a comprehensive assessment of what happened on 9/11, we have a 9/11 commission, absolutely that should be an answer the public knows the answer to.
Well, if we’re doing a January 6 commission, absolutely, those should be questions that we should get to the bottom of. And there can’t be hush-hush, separate, it shouldn’t be outside the commission, leaked to some media personality the hours of footage. No, this is transparent. These are the doors that were open. Here are the people that opened the doors, to whom? Here are the people who were armed. Here are the people who were unarmed. What percentage of the people who were armed were federal law-enforcement officers? I think it was probably high, actually. Right? There’s very little evidence of people being arrested for being armed that day. Most of the people who were armed, I assume the federal officers who were out there were armed. And so, I don’t know the answers. We deserve to know the answers, right?
We did a Jan. 6 commission. There are certain questions you can ask. We did a 9/11 commission, and if there are federal agents on the plane we deserve to know. And if we’re doing a Jan. 6 commission and there are federal officers in the field, we deserve to know. Just tell us the truth. Tell us what happened.
And it’s not just that, right? I think it’s also the reflective, the reflection on the truth about the underlying motivations of people. What were the sources of the frustration? Right? Is it really just, Donald Trump riled them up in an eight-week period? Or are these people who have been lied to and suppressed for a longer period of time? I think it’s clearly the latter, right? And I think that the failure to recognize the whole truth—we want the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. That’s, that’s really, when I say we deserve—and I don’t think we’ve gotten it on any of those questions. On the Jeffrey Epstein client list, on unidentified flying objects, on January 6, on vaccine—on COVID-19 vaccine—on the origin of the pandemic, which we now know, by the way, systematic efforts by people who had no idea what the origin was to shoot down the origin. And I remember this at the time there were people in sort of the, uh, like, in the sort of the greater Harvard/MIT space, the Broad Institute and otherwise, who were sort of talking about, Well, there’s a decent chance it could have, but we should be careful about talking about this or It could undermine, erosion of trust in science. There’s no such thing as a noble lie. That’s my view. The noble lie is nonexistent. No lie is noble.
HENDRICKSON: I think it’s interesting to compare and contrast 9/11 and January 6.
RAMASWAMY: Oh, yeah. I don’t think they belong in the same conversation. I’m only bringing it up because it was … I am not making the comparison. I think it’s a ridiculous comparison—
HENDRICKSON: I’m not comparing—
RAMASWAMY: But I’m saying that I brought it up only because it was invoked as a basis for the Jan. 6 commission.
HENDRICKSON: Of course. What I’m saying, though, is that I think Democrats and Republicans would agree that 9/11 is a day that’s like Pearl Harbor day, where there are good guys and bad guys and America was attacked. I mean, I think that’s very clear—
RAMASWAMY: I mean, I would take the truth about 9/11. I mean, I am not questioning what we—this is not something I’m staking anything out on. But I want the truth about 9/11.
Ramaswamy previously told The Blaze’s Alex Stein that he didn’t believe the U.S. Government was telling the truth about the 9/11 attacks after being asked if they were an “inside job.
Have a tip we should know? tips@mediaite.com
