I went as far as I'm going to with this one. I stopped when I got to her coverage of the court cards. She gets the Queens right in accordance with Liber T, but either she ran afoul of the confusion created in the Golden Dawn papers between Kings and Knights, or she intentionally changed their attributions to meet her own viewpoint.
She says that Kings represent Air and Knights represent Fire, that Kings are fixed and Knights are mutable. In my version of Liber T (in Regardie's Complete Golden Dawn System of Magic), Kings ("sometimes called Knights") are mounted on horses and represent the Yod of Tetragrammaton (therefore Fire), and are all assigned to the fixed-mutable zodiacal split (e.g. King of Wands spans the last decan of Scorpio and the first two of Sagittarius).
Knights ("sometimes called Princes") are seated either in chariots or on thrones and represent the Vau of Tetragrammaton (therefore Air); they are all assigned to the last decan of cardinal signs and the first two of fixed signs.
The terminology is convoluted, since Kings (later titled Knights by Crowley) look for all the world like medieval knights and Knights (Crowley went with Princes for those) suggest the traditional seated kings. The key to the riddle is the association with the four elements ascribed to Tetragrammaton. Regardless of their mode of transportation, Kings align with Yod/Fire/"Father" and Knights with Vau/Air/"Son." There is a parenthetical note in Regardie's book on the subject ("All Kings should be on horses and all Knights should be on thrones or chariots"), and another in Crowley's 1912 publication of Liber T ("Note that the Kings are now called Knights, and the Princes are now called Kings. This is unfortunate, and leads to confusion . . . Remember only that the horsed figures refer to the Yod of Tetragrammaton, the charioted figures to the Vau.") These observations seem counter-intuitive in light of modern assumptions about the nature of kings and knights, but nevertheless the basis seems carefully laid out, if not all that well-substantiated for the critical enquirer.
Although Kenner's stated purpose was to follow the Golden Dawn model, it seems to me she went astray somewhere (unless I'm missing some key point in the Golden Dawn material). At least she shows the cross-sign alignment of the courts to decans, and doesn't associate the courts with the entirety of any one sign.
I can recommend this book for its basic astrological content, but I think it falls short of its goal with tarot.