St av
Do you realize that news sources you use are enemies of the truth. What you do not realize is that Washington had become a sieve = there are loyal to t he US A Constitution public servants that turn to whistleblowing and leakage of documents because they believe the USA are being betrayed by their own Government. Nothing is a secret anymore in Washington. So what the media sources you believe in says is mostly easily proved not to be true.
"How would you know?
Because other news sources reported on what was said in it."
...so you're prepared to listen to other news sources but not the actual interview...bizarre.
Pakie
I am afraid you are misinformed - I do not think Biden will remain as President until the end of the month."Listening to Tucker is equivalent to listening to Lord Haw Haw in WW2. "
Nonsense...and you should know better...I don't know what your game is, but your discernment has disintegrated.
The principal is exactly the same….a war is going on, people are dying….and Tucker and his ilk are spinning it in favor of the aggressor. A modern Lord Haw Haw
Why don’tcha just come out with the Russia bots Draad, you know that’s your comfort level.
Hell HasBeen says the establishment wants to kill 7 billion people and not a peep from you, but rightly calling Tucker Lord Haw Haw offends you.
"and Tucker and his ilk are spinning it in favor of the aggressor. A modern Lord Haw Haw"
Utter horse shyte!
‘Not only did it border on journalistic malpractice, but it opened Carlson up to appearing as if he were cavorting with the enemy as well as aiding and abetting Putin — a wanted man who has an active International Criminal Court warrant for his arrest in connection to crimes against humanity in Ukraine.
For many of us who came of age during the Cold War, Tucker Carlson’s decision to travel to Moscow during a time of war remains inexplicable. He seems to have forgotten what it was like to hide under school desks preparing for a Soviet nuclear attack. Nor did he remember that the Kremlin had militarily crushed democratic movements in Hungaryand Czechoslovakia in the 1950s and 1960s.
It would have been one thing if Carlson had challenged Putin’s war narrative. Instead, during the interview, Carlson blindly and repeatedly lapped up Putin’s persistent Tarzan-like argument of “Me good, NATO bad.” In doing so, he played into the Kremlin narrative and contributed to Moscow’s web of disinformation, which will be replayed throughout social media indefinitely — as Putin undoubtedly planned.
There was much to challenge. Putin began his war justification by arguing that Russian history is identical to Ukrainian history — that modern-day Ukraine was always Russia going back to the 9th century. As justifications for war go, this would not be very impressive in any case, but it does not even enjoy the benefit of being true. The proto-state of Kievan Rus’ in central-eastern Europe to which he referred formed in 879 under Oleg, a Nordic Viking. Russia itself did not begin to form until the 13th century, in what was then known as the Grand Duchy of Moscow.
Based on his first untrue premise, Putin then went on to assert that Vladimir Lenin, the first leader of the Soviet Union, had erred in creating an independent Ukrainian republic. Even if this opinion could be labeled as true, it is irrelevant. Ukraine is not a possession because the country declared its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, in an act that the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, the immediate predecessor to the Russian Federation, also recognized.
He was eating it up every time Putin blamed the CIA or NATO for the decades-long deterioration in U.S.-Russian relations. Not content with Putin’s false accusations, Carlson even suggested the CIA was at fault, and even went so far as to suggest one of his favorite conspiratorial lines, that the so-called ‘Deep State’ was making the key decisions when it came to Russia and not our “elected officials.”
Notably, Carlson failed to ask Putin why he had claimed he would not invade Ukraine in January 2022 — a position shortly thereafter reaffirmed in a TASS communiqué, just weeks before Russia began its “special military operation” Ukraine.
Putin’s aim in agreeing to the interview was clear. He was once again trying to inject himself into a presidential election cycle. He was able to raise hot domestic U.S. election topics, including border security, deficit spending, and war funding without Carlson challenging him. Those are issues Americans deserve to decide for themselves.
That Carlson willingly gave Putin that platform without asking the hard questions makes you wonder where his loyalties reside. Putin was trying to weaponize Americans against each other. Carlson, blindly or not, coldly played right along’
……..
In short Lord Haw Haw.
I reckon the 'interview' was fostered by the Russians.
Pliant T uck their willing goon.
Listening to Tucker is equivalent to listening to Lord Haw Haw in WW2
Well said.
“Does Tucker really think we journalists haven’t been trying to interview President Putin every day since his full scale invasion of Ukraine?”, wrote Christine Amanpour, the veteran CNN correspondent, in response to his video on Tuesday evening.
“It’s absurd – we’ll continue to ask for an interview, just as we have for years now.”
I wonder why?
Any comments on the actual interview...who actually watched it?...
Did anyone but yourself watch it?
lol....sometimes I almost miss Rudehole.
This pandering of Americans to a Russian leader is to a large extent a symptom of the abysmal level of political leadership in the USA and the West in general. A certain group will always look up to a perceived strong leader, especially male, who creates the impression of taking no shit. Compare that to the cackling Harris and senile Biden or for that matter most of the Western leaders right now. For all the good and for all the damage she did, Maggie Thatcher had more balls than all the male leaders in NATO countries today combined.
Maggie Thatcher had more balls than all the male leaders in NATO countries today combined.
The UK's response to the war in Ukraine has been quite good actually. Its often lead the way in supplying certain weapon system to Ukraine. Not sure if Thatcher would of gone much further.
How do you the think West and NATO should have responded?
Not so much referring to the war as to more domestic issues, like immigrants being allowed to invade countries to the point of crisis and to the detriment of the citizens of those countries. Leaders all singing from the same hymn book like a flock of parrots, playing toady to one another, and the shift towards the right that is evident even among young people in certain parts of Europe shows that people don't feel the current leadership has their best interests at heart. Putin shouldn't have the support he has in the US, and nor should Trump who has some smarts but is mostly a divisive, egotistical buffoon. There is a strong desire for the strongman who can get order back into an increasingly chaotic and lawless society.
As an example of leadership: Trump calling Germany on their reliance on Russian gas a few years ago. NATO responded like crybabies, "oh how dare he say that, he is jeopardizing NATO". Few years down the line the man looks like a prophet. Leaders must be willing speak uncomfortable and unpopular truths. Toadies don't make good leaders, and the West is full of back scratching toadies right now.
Not so much referring to the war as to more domestic issues, like immigrants being allowed to invade countries to the point of crisis and to the detriment of the citizens of those countries. Leaders all singing from the same hymn book like a flock of parrots, playing toady to one another, and the shift towards the right that is evident even among young people in certain parts of Europe shows that people don't feel the current leadership has their best interests at heart.
Invade is such a loaded term. Look immigration both legal and illegal is no doubt a genuine issue, but stopping immigration is not a panacea for all of modern societies problems. But I would agree that moderate politics has consistently failed enough people that it leaves the door open for populists.
Putin shouldn't have the support he has in the US, and nor should Trump who has some smarts but is mostly a divisive, egotistical buffoon. There is a strong desire for the strongman who can get order back into an increasingly chaotic and lawless society.
But its the strongman that's creating the perception that society is increasingly chaotic and lawless.
As an example of leadership: Trump calling Germany on their reliance on Russian gas a few years ago.
You're aware that George W. Bush, Barrack Obama and Joe Biden all called out Germany on its reliance on Russian Gas before Trump did? All of them are on record criticizing Germany for it. You could argue Trump was more forceful about it but in the end he wasn't any more successful in getting Germany to reduce their dependency on Russian gas.
NATO responded like crybabies, "oh how dare he say that, he is jeopardizing NATO".
Where did NATO respond to Trump's comments on Germany's Russian gas reliance like that?
Few years down the line the man looks like a prophet.
Yes he was vindicated, along with Bush, Obama and Biden.
Leaders must be willing speak uncomfortable and unpopular truths.
Well in the case of Bush, Obama/Biden and Trump they where perfectly able to call out other NATO countries on both defense spending and reliance on Russian gas. They might have been unpopular truths in Europe but I don't think you could have called them unpopular truths among the American people.
RTnews............................... ffs. Draad
I didn't watch it...I will later...I saw a link on twitter and thought it might be kinda interesting how Putin would spin things...it's atleast relevant to the discussion...not?
RTnews sucks & totally controlled by the state .................. read ouMaaik's posts, his Russian posts are verbatim to what their propaganda-machines t rompet.
Our discussion….Ukraine’s country. There is only one reason there is a discussion, Russia has a huge arsenal of nukes. Up until the invasion nobody stopped them trading, USA companies were still investing in Russia, St Petersburg was a regular on cruises, Russian cultural institutions and performers were welcomed in the Western capitals.
I do think there was a lingering suspicion of Russia in the intelligence communities that never helped the cause but which Putin has now made to look prescient.
Last night I saw a magnificent performance of Rachmaninoff’s 3rd piano concerto. Perhaps the most difficult piano piece of them all played magnificently by a 75 year old man….without the music in front of him. There must be more than 5000 key strikes, all from memory in front of a large live audience. Forty five minutes of virtuosity.
This whole experience was possible because of a Russian composer . They are intellectually a great people, sadly led by suspicion and superstition. Why one wonders.
Jon is missing the point but still funny...
Ouch ! Hung, drawn & quartered.
perspective...
That's a draadsitting response
No, it's not...I'm on Tucker's side of the fence and although I don't agree with Stewart, I can understand how he got to his conclusion...some of his assumptions are wrong, but atleast he's not deliberately distorting the truth...and he's still funny because he's still sincere.
Nope, I dispise Putin and his ilk ....you don't listen to Tucker , so you don't actually know what side he's on....you believe what your sources tell you to believe...you still trust the system...and that's fine. I just don't anymore.
https://www.businessinsider.com/putin-likely-chose-tucker-carlson-ignorance-russia-it-showed-interview-2024-2&post-bottom-piano-recommendations
Putin likely chose Tucker Carlson because of his ignorance of Russia, and it showedFeb 10, 2024, 1:51 AM NZDTTucker Carlson claimed to be venturing into territory no other Western journalist had dared in interviewing Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The Kremlin itself had hyped Carlson's credentials, saying he was the only Western journalist granted permission to talk to Putin in two years because his position was "in clear contrast to the position of the traditional Anglo-Saxon media."
But when the interview was released on Thursday, another likely reason Putin chose the former Fox News host for the two-hour interview became clear.
For much of it, Carlson sat in silence as Putin expounded his dubious historical theories about Ukraine, aired his grievances, and pushed MAGA talking points designed to appeal to Carlson's core audience.
"This is a stage for Big Vlad to showboat," Ian Garner, an expert on Russian propaganda, wrote on X as Putin seized control of the interview.
Putin has used these theories to justify his brutal invasion of Ukraine, where, according to the UN Human Rights Council, Russia has used mass killings, rape, and torture in an attempt to subjugate the country. Putin even published an essay on the theories just ahead of the invasion.
It matters because Putin is seeking to erode support for Ukraine among the GOP voters who form Carlson's core audience as congressional Republicans continue to block a $66 billion Ukraine aid bill.
Carlson seemed to lack the knowledge or willingness to offer even the most cursory pushback. He can perhaps be forgiven for appearing bemused when Putin started lecturing him on obscure historical figures, such as Rurik of Novgorod, but offered no challenge even as Putin discussed more recent events.
For instance, he allowed Putin to claim that the 2014 Maidan protests, in which Ukrainians took to the streets to demand freedom from Russian control, were a CIA plot. There's no evidence of this.
He also allowed Putin to claim, unchallenged, that Russia sought peace with Ukraine before launching the 2022 invasion. There's no evidence of this, with Russia illegally seizing swaths of Ukraine in 2014 and stoking conflict in the east of the country.
Putin was also able to claim, unchallenged, that the invasion was a bid to "de-Nazify" the country and not the campaign of revanchist conquest it is in reality.
Putin was given a two-hour platform to further undermine Republican support for Ukraine and offer an alternative version of history in which the US and NATO were the true aggressors.
Carlson will probably see a huge boost in his audience from the interview. Since his ouster from Fox News in 2023, he's been reduced to interviewing fringe figures such as an online conspiracy theorist who goes by the name "Catturd."
But in increasing his own profile, he's allowed Putin to present his alternative and vastly destructive historical theories to a whole new audience.
In response to earlier allegations that he was a pawn of Putin, Carlson told Axios in 2022: "I could care less."
"It's too stupid," he added. "I don't speak Russian. I've never been to Russia. I'm not that interested in Russia. All I care about is the fortunes of the United States because I have four children who live here."
That ignorance of Russia may be coming back to haunt him.
He was interviewing Putin, not debating him.
"Putin expounded his dubious historical theories about Ukraine, aired his grievances, and pushed MAGA talking points designed to appeal to Carlson's core audience."
WTF?
"Putin was given a two-hour platform to further undermine Republican support for Ukraine"
How exactly?
Putin delivered a huge blow to the Globalist narrative concerning the instigation of the war.
Nope, I dispise Putin and his ilk
That may be so, but by calling for a ceasefire as its stands or expecting Ukraine to make concessions is giving Putin exactly what he wants.
....you don't listen to Tucker, so you don't actually know what side he's on....
I've seen clips of Tucker over the years and clips where he has commented on the Ukraine war., I know what side he's on.
you believe what your sources tell you to believe...you still trust the system...and that's fine. I just don't anymore.
No I believe sources with credible evidence, the fact that you refer to "the system" says it all.
He was interviewing Putin, not debating him.
Interviewers can ask questions. This was a softball puff piece, pretty much a party political message from the Kremlin.
"That may be so, but by calling for a ceasefire as its stands or expecting Ukraine to make concessions is giving Putin exactly what he wants."
It's stupid to fight to the death in a lost cause...there's no elections any more...men below 65 are not allowed to leave the country...they have no choice but to fight...who's to say they even want to anymore?