Dog Wonder
Veteran
Still living in your fantasy world of ifs.
Tucker Carlson interviews Vladimir Putin.
- Thread starter WeAAsles
- Start date
KCFlyer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 11,358
- 1,428
I know you like to think that you are the smartest guy in the room, but you would be wrong here. Since I don't WATCH "liberal media". But here's my point...of Maddow, Amanpour and Carlson, which one lost their job for spouting lies about stolen elections and compromised voting machines? Which one of those cost their employer a billion dollars for spouting lies? Yeah, the other ones may be biased, and I will admit that. You can look at Tucker Carlson, who had 20,000 hours of January 6 video and "analyze" it down to 15 minutes of a bunch of sightseers at our nations capitol. Two of those three have a definite bias, but only one has made a living out of an extreme bias in the name of ratings.
CorvetteMan
Veteran
- Jul 7, 2022
- 529
- 55
“Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson released an interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday — the first that Putin has granted with a Western media figure since his full-scale invasion of Ukraine two years ago. The far-right personality didn't challenge Putin on much in the lengthy discussion, which at times showed Carlson appearing lost. At one point, Putin suggested "an agreement can be reached" with the US to release detained American journalist Evan Gershkovich, as he brought up the conviction of a "patriotic" Russian hitman in Germany.”
OP
WeAAsles
Veteran
- Oct 20, 2007
- 23,864
- 5,266
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #49
And what does any of this have to do with the Putin interview? You are an obsessive, stop obsessing. Besides the fact anyway who controlled what was aired on that Network? Oh that’s right the Network themselves.
Have you watched the interview? Of course you haven’t.
OP
WeAAsles
Veteran
- Oct 20, 2007
- 23,864
- 5,266
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #50
Also did you watch the interview? I did. The whole 2 plus hours. If you did you would have heard who that “patriotic” Hitman killed at least according to Putin.
Some guy or soldier who lined up a bunch of Russians on a roadway alive and ran over their heads with a car or truck.
There are evil people all over and brutality in many parts of this World is met with equal brutality or justice depending on your point of view.
Not everything looks as sanitary as the American Legal system. Unless you count the newest Death penalty methods.
KCFlyer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 11,358
- 1,428
When a guy has helped damage the democratic process in this country buy talking to a batshit crazy woman making unsubstantiated claims and agreeing with her, knowing that she was spouting lies, then I don't lend credence for much else that he does. He can sound very convincing (except when he laughs) but he has shown that he is just in it for ratings....and his position as the most watched "news" in the country should require far more on the "balanced" side of the Fox News world. So I won't watch anything this propagandist puts out.
KCFlyer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 11,358
- 1,428
When you have read something that a friend posted that you agreed with, have you ever checked it out? I do it all the time. And I've called my friends out for it. Tucker Carlson had so much potential to be legitimate, but he became one of the driving forces behind the Fox News entertainment side. Entertainment...not news. He was a little biased until we had a president who was a regular Fox viewer and who would regularly "consult" with the top entertainer on the Fox News network. That could go to anyone's head - the most powerful person in the world getting advice from a news entertainer. What a fantastic gig....but when Trump lost in 2020, it was over. Or was it? Tucker jumped on the "stolen" election bandwagon and as the most watched entertainer on the Fox News network, spread outright lies - even though he KNEW what he was spouting was wrong. For ratings. For money. Tucker was one of the biggest problems with the country. Fox News had two sides - news and entertainment. And the highest rated shows on Fox were Tucker, Hannity and Ingram, with the occasional drunken rant from Pirro. All of them on the "entertainment" side. Except the vast majority of their viewers got their "news" from these entertainers. And the most popular was Tucker Carlson. He had a duty to at least be truthful - he couldn't. And he lost credibility. You know as well as I do that if Zelensky met with Carlson, the end would be sympathetic to Russia. So why waste time.
KCFlyer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 11,358
- 1,428
Good. I fully expect to not get any more responses from you on any topic moving forward.
OP
WeAAsles
Veteran
- Oct 20, 2007
- 23,864
- 5,266
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #57
132 Million views so far on X. 6.8 Million views on YouTube. None of this considers how many views through Tuckers Webpage or all the other places on Earth that the interview was posted or shared. And of course we have John Kirby telling us that we shouldn’t believe anything Putin says.
Absolutely ridiculous. Almost everything Putin talked about is public knowledge. It’s easy to look up. He gave a perfect History lesson and talked about NATO expansion all the way up to Russia’s doorstep.
Doesn’t matter because the US Government doesn’t listen to the American public anyway.
Absolutely ridiculous. Almost everything Putin talked about is public knowledge. It’s easy to look up. He gave a perfect History lesson and talked about NATO expansion all the way up to Russia’s doorstep.
Doesn’t matter because the US Government doesn’t listen to the American public anyway.
OP
WeAAsles
Veteran
- Oct 20, 2007
- 23,864
- 5,266
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #58
American establishment media spent the days in the run-up to Tucker Carlson’s interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin pre-judging it as propaganda, and soliciting the opinions of establishment figures, like former US secretary of state, first lady, and presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, who dismissed Carlson a “useful idiot.”
All this before they even had the slightest notion of the interview’s content. All they knew was that Putin would have an opportunity to speak, and that ever since Carlson left Fox News and turned independent, there wasn’t any obvious establishment figure to babysit him or control what went out. Worse, it would air on the X platform (formerly Twitter) owned by Elon Musk, who describes himself as a “free speech absolutist.” So it did not bode well for the kind of propagandistic framing that the Western establishment enjoys when it comes to locking down narratives under the guise of fighting a war on fake news.
The fact that journalists balked at the very notion of Carlson interviewing Putin reeked of professional jealousy. There isn’t a credible journalist out there who wouldn’t leap at the same opportunity if given the chance. Which is why, as journalists from CNN and the BBC confirmed, they’d long sought their own interviews with Putin — unsuccessfully. Presumably, Carlson’s format, audience reach, and freedom from establishment media constraints were appealing enough to land him the opportunity. Good for him. And for the journalistic record that can only benefit from any and all contributions.
www.rt.com
All this before they even had the slightest notion of the interview’s content. All they knew was that Putin would have an opportunity to speak, and that ever since Carlson left Fox News and turned independent, there wasn’t any obvious establishment figure to babysit him or control what went out. Worse, it would air on the X platform (formerly Twitter) owned by Elon Musk, who describes himself as a “free speech absolutist.” So it did not bode well for the kind of propagandistic framing that the Western establishment enjoys when it comes to locking down narratives under the guise of fighting a war on fake news.
The fact that journalists balked at the very notion of Carlson interviewing Putin reeked of professional jealousy. There isn’t a credible journalist out there who wouldn’t leap at the same opportunity if given the chance. Which is why, as journalists from CNN and the BBC confirmed, they’d long sought their own interviews with Putin — unsuccessfully. Presumably, Carlson’s format, audience reach, and freedom from establishment media constraints were appealing enough to land him the opportunity. Good for him. And for the journalistic record that can only benefit from any and all contributions.
The real propagandists are those who dismiss Tucker Carlson’s Putin interview
Will Western media outlets look past their egos and establishment narratives to take advantage of the insights from the conversation?
KCFlyer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 11,358
- 1,428
IT doesn't matter if 50 gazillion people view it - it is still coming from a highly biased source.
KCFlyer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 11,358
- 1,428
RT is Russia TodayAmerican establishment media spent the days in the run-up to Tucker Carlson’s interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin pre-judging it as propaganda, and soliciting the opinions of establishment figures, like former US secretary of state, first lady, and presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, who dismissed Carlson a “useful idiot.”
All this before they even had the slightest notion of the interview’s content. All they knew was that Putin would have an opportunity to speak, and that ever since Carlson left Fox News and turned independent, there wasn’t any obvious establishment figure to babysit him or control what went out. Worse, it would air on the X platform (formerly Twitter) owned by Elon Musk, who describes himself as a “free speech absolutist.” So it did not bode well for the kind of propagandistic framing that the Western establishment enjoys when it comes to locking down narratives under the guise of fighting a war on fake news.
The fact that journalists balked at the very notion of Carlson interviewing Putin reeked of professional jealousy. There isn’t a credible journalist out there who wouldn’t leap at the same opportunity if given the chance. Which is why, as journalists from CNN and the BBC confirmed, they’d long sought their own interviews with Putin — unsuccessfully. Presumably, Carlson’s format, audience reach, and freedom from establishment media constraints were appealing enough to land him the opportunity. Good for him. And for the journalistic record that can only benefit from any and all contributions.
The real propagandists are those who dismiss Tucker Carlson’s Putin interview
Will Western media outlets look past their egos and establishment narratives to take advantage of the insights from the conversation?
RT (TV network) - Wikipedia
NO chance of any propaganda here.
