- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
What’s America’s view on this Tucker Carlson?
You must log in or register to comment.
The American had touted his sit-down with Putin as a triumph for free speech, asserting that he was heading where no Western news outlets dared to tread.
its amazing that carlson points out his own purpose here is not ‘news’.
Amusingly, even the russian government corrected him on that too - to paraphrase, “we have lots of requests to interview Putin, he just doesn’t want to do it”
deleted by creator
“we have lots of requests to interview Putin, he just doesn’t want to do it”
Because they’re actual journalists who would ask serious questions.
The even more amazing part is that the Kremlin debunked him. They said they constantly get interview requests from journalists. They just never accept them.
Edit: Just saw this posted as a response already.
That’s ok, now I can upvote it twice
Tucker is our most famous right-winger. That’s basically it. He can say whatever the hell he wants, due to our first amendment, which protects both freedom of speech and freedom of the press. This includes a freedom to willfully lie, unfortunately, unless one has been placed under oath.
Hopefully it won’t protect this propagandist from Ukrainian drones.
But it shouldn’t allow him to call what he does “news” or “journalism”. Him, and others like him, should have bumpers before and after every segment that says “the views expressed are purely the opinion of the host and do not necessarily reflect reality or facts” and not at the breakneck speed they used to do those car dealer and drug commercial disclaimers.
That actually existed until Reagan repealed it. That paved the way for Rush Limbaugh and the rest snowballed.
Only covered public airwaves, not private CATV networks.
Would fix AM Radio, but not FOX.
Let’s amend the whole damn system.
He has just posted a video of him receiving gifts from the enemy, and he is giving aid to the enemy. This is not speech, this is an attack on America’s interests.
It’s one thing to campaign in the US and say “I like it when Putin genocides Ukrainians”, but it’s another thing to be paid by a country that we’re indirectly at war with, and provide publishing and broadcasting services to their president, a man who is on the US Sanction list. The illegal thing here is not the speech, it’s the business transaction.
Subpoena Tucker’s emails and phone and prosecute for illegal business transactions.
“Sooner or later this will end in agreement,” was Putin’s message, arguing that Nato was coming to realise that defeating Russia on the battlefield would be impossible.
Does Putin realize that NATO is effectively fighting Russia with both arms tied behind it’s back right now? We’re funding Ukraine (who are doing a phenomenal job, fwiw), but we’re not even giving them the top of the line hardware. If the US actually got involved, Russia would pretty much instantly lose any glimmer of air superiority they have, and Ukraine could advance all the way to Moscow under NATO air cover. Like, the only reason Russia still exists is because NATO hasn’t even tried to fight Russia on the battlefield yet.
NATO isn’t even fighting. NATO gave Ukraine their old boxing gloves and some advice.
And we’re learning that a teenager with a drone can be hilariously effective against modern weapons.
So is Russia. Except Russia is learning how to combat the kids with drones too. They’re gaining invaluable battlefield experience that NATO troops simply aren’t.
Reports vary from side to side, from showing that Russians are curb stomping Ukraine to Ukraine is holding it’s own. So, sure, NATO tossing the kid gloves to Ukraine and putting up a fight is comforting, but it isn’t the whole picture. Russia wins a war of attrition. NATO is made up of democracies and war fatigue sets in fast when it’s someone else’s war. Russia is a de facto fascist dictatorship with deep oil pockets. The only thing that turns their troops around is the head of state dying, or a massive coup. Reports of ether being imminent seem to be rather premature.
War attrition sets in much slower when you’re not at war.
Yes, my government is sending some old equipment and dedicating 10% of the military budget (which is like 2% of the total spending) to help Ukraine.
That is much less shocking than “Dave from school came back without a leg, and my cousin John didn’t come back at all”.
They’re gaining invaluable battlefield experience that NATO troops simply aren’t.
Oh, yes they are. Ukraine is in close contact with NATO countries and sharing intel. NATO countries are also buying drones in bulk right now. And developing ones that Russia will not see until they try to pick a fight with NATO.
How do you feel about Russia’s deep oil pockets now that Ukraine is going after their refineries and porta? Do you think Russia can continue to advance or hold ground while also defending large swaths of the western part of Russia? Genuinely curious
NATO is Doc and Ukraine is Little Mac. Vodka Drunkinski doesn’t stand a chance.
If the US actually got involved air superiority would be the least of our worries. The minute any major NATO nation gets properly involved, the war goes nuclear very soon after
They should have thought of that before co-signing the Budapest accords. At least two NATO countries are already involved.
The last time Russian units engaged Americans in combat they were so outmatched that the Russian chain of command disavowed their own guys and pretended not to know them. Nuclear conflagration would be a much better death by comparison.
Putin said that about lethal aid, Putin said that about tanks, Putin said that about f-16s, etc. Will Putin really start Wolrd War 3 over The Donbas and Crimea?
I’m betting there are a lot of people under Putin that don’t want to die for his stupidity.
There are people over Putin too. No ruler can rule alone and without consent, his rich oligarch buddies don’t want to cruise their yachts during nuclear winter.
Really dampens the mood. Not even the model-prostitutes will want to fuck in such dreary weather. Not that their consent matters to the oligarch.
Mutually assured destruction is pretty much why no one will ever actually go through with that if their target also has nukes or is protected by a country that has them. It’s one of the major reasons no country that has nukes wants to disarm.
Ask Libya and Ukraine how that worked out
Sorry… do you think Libya with nuclear weapons under Gaddafi would have been a good idea?
I was thinking of South Africa and I was wrong.
No worries. Libya did give up its nuclear program as well, but it was because all the countries that invaded Afghanistan in 2001 said, “do it or you’re next.”
Gaddafi would still be alive. Dictators now need nuclear weapons to assure survival. Look for the world to get real crazy real fast.
There are 57 dictatorships in the world. Almost none of them have nuclear weapons.
You realize Muammar Gaddafi only died 12 years ago and Russia only invaded Ukraine two years ago? Nuclear weapon programs take at least that long to develop. Ukraine and Libya had programs (Ukraine actually had weapons) and abandoned them, much to their demise. If they kept their programs, they wouldn’t have had these problems.
X
Press (formally Twitter) to doubt.
Remember when NATO beat Vietnam 🇻🇳 by using a nuclear bomb?
Yeah Russia doesn’t stand a chance in Ukraine do they?
Does Putin realize it? Yes.
Does Putin want the people who watch Tucker to realize it? No.
Yeah right, NATO commands far more nuclear warheads than Russia! They’d definitely loose in a thermonuclear exchange!
If the nuke comes out, it won’t make an ounce of a difference who has more of them: if only each side can manage to land a small handful, everyone is equally and utterly fucked.
This principle alone is why NATO has not engaged Russia more directly.
Yeah but they’d loose too! :D
I wonder if people forgot, or maybe gen Z and millenials never really know how bad nuclear weapons are. Even a regional nuclear exchange would probably lead to a nuclear winter and then a nuclear summer, completely fucking the climate. As long as we have them, it’s inevitable that we’ll eventually use them. Just the law of large numbers / Murphey’s law. The wars climate change will cause will make that even more likely. But hey, lets keep playing stupid games.
At the same time, the world can’t just roll over and let every tin pot dictator do whatever they want just because they have a nuke.
Yeah, why take Russia seriously at all? :D
My guess is is does, but he wants the US to lose interest and move on so coloring this as an exercise in futility helps further that goal.
And it’s great propaganda! Unless you are a smart Russian and realize he’ll sacrifice as many Russian citizens as necessary to keep up the hoax.
Propaganda works. Period.
This line of critique is wrongheaded and empowers Tucker. Putin already commands a platform far above Tucker’s, a media figure cannot provide a bigger platform for Putin than the one he already has. Many liberal journalists have interviewed Putin without facing this critique, it’s applied here because Tucker is a reactionary shithead.
The better critique is that you have for-profit entertainment companies capitalizing on this, and how that affects the content.
What liberal media journalists have managed to interview Putin since he began his invasion of Ukraine in 2022? I thought Carlson was the first Western person to manage that.
Adding the qualifier of “since 2022” seems to presume there’s an unspoken taboo between western liberal media that Putin shan’t be interviewed, rather than Putin being more restrictive than he already was and seeing an opportunity in Tucker. Lionel Barber is probably the closest a “real” US journalist could have been to Putin and writes about the increasing difficulty of this in 2020. This includes psychological tricks like being made to wait excessively long to weaken his cognition before the meeting. He has a good piece on Tucker’s interview about how Putin ran the show and used him.
The reason why Putin chose this interview is because Tucker is a locus of division in US politics. Tucker isn’t raising Putin’s platform, Putin is raising Tucker’s platform. This imbues Tucker’s reactionary politics with more legitimacy, which benefits Putin.
I’d argue Carlson also didn’t manage to interview him, apparently Putin just rambled along without answering any questions.
He did his best to show what an idiot Tucker was though, which is fun:
At another juncture, Carlson asked Putin if he saw God’s design in world political affairs. With a bored look that seemed to imply he was talking to someone with a below average IQ, Putin merely said “no” before explaining that international laws governed world events, not a deity.
https://gizmodo.com/tucker-carlson-x-elon-musk-vladimir-putin-russia-interv-1851244271
(Sorry for all the Twitter embeds in that link.)
My view as an American is that Tucker Carlson is a traitor, white supremacist, and known propagandist, fuck that guy, in the ass, with a cactus.
As I said when some one suggested that with Putin. Don’t do that to a cactus.
The only way I’d watch Tucker Carlson on purpose is in a cage fight with Mike Tyson. Pay-per-view is fine, but I’ll travel if I have to.
Unlikely to happen considering Mike Tyson’s relationship with Alex Jones.
deleted by creator
I fucking hate making fun of that horrible incident, I can’t imagine it’s easy for him to constantly be reminded about his ear being bitten on live tv.
That being said, AJ’s sheer shock when Tyson handed him a mushroom gummy and Alex thought it was an ear and initially didn’t know how to react was pretty fucking funny.
But fuck all these grifters.
Alex is an unhinged junkie grifter, but Tucker is an evil arrogant pseudochristian grifter propagandist with a much larger fan base.
“Mike, we need you to take the tongue this time”
removed by mod
Russia should end its unjust invasion and leave Ukraine alone.
Just block the troll and move on everybody.
Do go on, I’m sure your explanation will be insightful.
I know that it was a mistake to let nazi germany have the sudetenland without a fight.
I’ll take “people who should take their own advice” for $500, Alex.
It of interest, why has this been moderated and what rules did this comment break?
I understand why people disagree with it and how it could upset them but I’m doubting whether it breaks any rules
Mods just delete what offends them. The worst flaw of lemmy compared to reddit.
That’s really sad if true. Mods feelings should be separate from the community rules they are volunteering to enforce.
I’m the kind of guy who plays devil’s advocate but unfortunately I feel like I could get moderated or banned for even this commemnt (although I have not broken any rules)
I’ve had comments that were deleted with no cited reason.
No. That’s a lie.
If you would check my screenshot you would also see that your post was reinstated and then removed again, this time with the proper explanation. You violated Rule 7.
You seem awfully happy to talk about domestic American politics. Maybe you should take your own advice and shut the fuck up.
He can’t, he needs the money
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The American had touted his sit-down with Putin as a triumph for free speech, asserting that he was heading where no Western news outlets dared to tread.
Carlson’s claim also ignored the fact that Russia’s president has spent the past two decades in power systematically stamping out free speech at home.
He talked about a Russian “patriot” who had “eliminated a bandit” in a European capital, seeming to confirm previous reports that Russia is demanding a prisoner swap with Vadim Krasikov.
It’s all part of how Putin justified his full-scale invasion, almost two years ago - along with “de-Nazifying” Ukraine, which he claimed is still a work in progress.
“Sooner or later this will end in agreement,” was Putin’s message, arguing that Nato was coming to realise that defeating Russia on the battlefield would be impossible.
The American did not push Putin at all on political repression at home, which includes locking up vocal opponents of the war in jail.
The original article contains 999 words, the summary contains 160 words. Saved 84%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Useful Idiot.
Outright fascist.
Why not both?
I was expecting the interview to be over tea on the balcony.
I expected nothing less.
The part where he claims to have asked Bill Clinton if Russia could join NATO was hilarious, whether he ever asked Clinton or not. Other than that most of the interview was “We’re just reclaiming Russian land from over a century ago” and “China is the real enemy”.
what a waste of a great assassination possibility…
For the both of them
Putin really missed his chance.
Ah, the old Lemmy switcheroo!
Ah, the ol’ reddit switcheroo on Lemmy.
Rogen and Franco should make The Interview 2 and have them killing Puti.
But attack can take strange forms. And you will remember the tooth. The tooth. You will remember the tooth.
Tucker Carlson don’t got that Seth Rogan build type for a mission like that…
It takes days or weeks for the polonium to kick in. He might look to be in the clear for now, but don’t count all your chickens before they get defenestrated.
deleted by creator
I’d say that an AI must have wrote this, but even LLMs are more eloquent and coherent.
I shouldn’t have read this full comment during work. Now my coworkers are going to smell stupid all over me because of how contagiously idiotic that was.
