Tucker Carlson Goes to Moscow?

[Robert Paulson]

2 hours ago, impulse said:

 

I'm about 1:40:00 into it and so far, it's a snoozer for me.  A lot of historical background, going back a loooong way.  Quite a bit later on, into the recent events that led to 2014 and 2022, but I'm going to have to rely on others with more background to fact check his claims. 

 

I suspect the debates will go on for years.  I just hope the killing and the spending don't.

 

Edit:  BTW, a lot of insights into the changes in global trade and the effect on the USD & Euro, BRICS, and Euro economies brought on by the sanctions.  

 

There really isn’t anything to fact check. Ukraine and usa broke the Minsk agreements. You really don’t need a fact checker to know the Donbas was being bombed for years on end, do we? There was a us backed coup in 2014 that ousted the democratically elected leader of Ukraine. Those are just things that happened. I think just because Americans didn’t see them on the news they think it’s “propaganda”.

[Jingthing]

35 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Most other democratic leaders don't have their political opponents jailed/murdered or siphon funds from the state to the tune of $200 billion (allegedly).  Maybe Tucker should have asked Putin about Boris Nemtsov and Alexei Navalny.

I'm still watching Tucker's Kremlin propaganda show but I knew before I started that traitorous sleazeball wouldn't ask such questions. He's not a journalist. One detail I noticed which reveals what we already knew, Tucker asked Putin if he thinks Zelinsky is empowered to make decisions in a negotiation. That's pure Maga conspiracy garbage to even ask that and you know Tucker and his conspiracy theory fans believe that -- that Zelinsky is a puppet of Washington. Even Putin didn't go with that -- he confirmed that Zelinsky has the power to make such decisions for his own country.

Edited February 9 by Jingthing

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, Robert Paulson said:

There really isn’t anything to fact check. Ukraine and usa broke the Minsk agreements. You really don’t need a fact checker to know the Donbas was being bombed for years on end, do we? There was a us backed coup in 2014 that ousted the democratically elected leader of Ukraine. Those are just things that happened. I think just because Americans didn’t see them on the news they think it’s “propaganda”.

Says you. 

For one thing, the Minsk agreements required the withdrawal of all foreign forces. The Russians said that didn't apply to them since they didn't have any troops in Donbas. It is to laugh.

[placeholder]

11 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I'm still watching Tucker's Kremlin propaganda show but I knew before I started that traitorous sleazeball wouldn't ask such questions. He's not a journalist. One detail I noticed which reveals what we already knew, Tucker asked Putin if he thinks Zelinsky is empowered to make decisions in a negotiation. That's pure Maga conspiracy garbage to even ask that and you know Tucker and his conspiracy theory fans believe that -- that Zelinsky is a puppet of Washington. Even Putin didn't go with that -- he confirmed that Zelinsky has the power to make such decisions for his own country.

As I pointed out earlier, he already got called out by the Kremlin spokesman for claiming that Western media hadn't made attempts to interview Putin.

“Mr Carlson is not correct. In fact, there’s no way he could know this,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Wednesday.

Mr Peskov went on to say that the Kremlin receives “numerous requests” for interviews from Western media, which are all denied because the Kremlin does not deem the media outlets impartial."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/tucker-carlson-vladimir-putin-interview-b2492192.html

 

It looks like he's even more pro-Putin than Putin himself.

[Jingthing]

Another example of what a wet rag Tucker is.

Putin knows Tucker has a huge following with fundamentalist Christian magadonians.

So Putin ends by talking about Ukrainian measures against the Ukrainian orthodox church.

Tucker just nods like the useful idiot for Putin that he is.

An actual journalist would have followed that by bringing up the reason for the measures.

Russia invaded Ukraine. Ukraine is at war with the Russian aggressor.

If churches are allied with Russia as they are, what is a country at war supposed to do?

 

Ukraine to prepare law banning churches 'affiliated' with Russia | Reuters

 

It's sad that a lot of ignorant people are going to be persuaded by this show. On the other hand it is very boring so perhaps not so many people will actually watch it.

The news in it is mostly about Tucker and what a sleazeball he is rather than Putin who was being predictably Putin.

 

 

 

 

[Jingthing]

I will add this.

I did watch it all and I would not suggest that you do the same.

Not worth the time.

What I DO suggest is to watch the live reaction that will be coming up in about five hours from the Inside Russia youtube channel.

That way you will spend your time more efficiently. Still watching the Tucker Kremlin show but getting all the B.S. called out in detail in real time.

[placeholder]

37 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I will add this.

I did watch it all and I would not suggest that you do the same.

Not worth the time.

What I DO suggest is to watch the live reaction that will be coming up in about five hours from the Inside Russia youtube channel.

That way you will spend your time more efficiently. Still watching the Tucker Kremlin show but getting all the B.S. called out in detail in real time.

Not surprisingly, you have to pay to read the transcript which is a far better way to fact-check and analyze the interview. 

[nauseus]

29 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I will add this.

I did watch it all and I would not suggest that you do the same.

Not worth the time.

What I DO suggest is to watch the live reaction that will be coming up in about five hours from the Inside Russia youtube channel.

That way you will spend your time more efficiently. Still watching the Tucker Kremlin show but getting all the B.S. called out in detail in real time.

 

Yeah, better not watch, in case you start asking the wrong questions. Can't have that.

 

Be efficient and pot plants until the MSNBC fact show comes on!. 555

[gamb00ler]

23 hours ago, Arindos said:

The bare fact is that mainstream media in the US and much of the western world (and India) is exceptionally leftwing to the point that the majority of the population are critical of it. 

Don't you think most people's opinions on the media's political affiliations or slants are also very biased?

 

I perceive that the most egregious politically slanted media are at the extreme right, followed by the extreme left.  Most mainstream media are only slightly biased.

Edited February 9 by gamb00ler

[retarius]

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

So, your basic point is to attribute unworthy motivations when journalists challenge the people they interview. Just another example of right wing mind reading.

No, don't put words in my mouth. I am very tired of your inane comments, Please desist or I will have to put you on ignore.

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Yeah, better not watch, in case you start asking the wrong questions. Can't have that.

 

Be efficient and pot plants until the MSNBC fact show comes on!. 555

Not MSNBC.

A very well respected and very knowledgeable Russian exile.

You can watch both but it saves some time and you will learn more watching his commentary either way.

It was really a garbage propaganda show done by a definite NON journalist.

Super cringe especially was Tucker's trademark LAUGHING. 

[placeholder]

Just now, retarius said:

No, don't put words in my mouth. I am very tired of your inane comments, Please desist or I will have to put you on ignore.

Here are your own words:  "I hate it when interviewers cut their guests off as they do so often to appear clever or smart."

 

You think it's a worthy motivation for an interviewer to ask questions for the sake of appearing clever or smart?

[Jingthing]

6 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Not surprisingly, you have to pay to read the transcript which is a far better way to fact-check and analyze the interview. 

He should pay us to take a transcript of that garbage propaganda show.

[placeholder]

8 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Yeah, better not watch, in case you start asking the wrong questions. Can't have that.

 

Be efficient and pot plants until the MSNBC fact show comes on!. 555

If anyone was a "pot plant" it was Carlson. Might as well have put up a cardboard image of him for all the probing questions he asked  Putin.

[Hamus Yaigh]

The 'dumb' expression on Carlson's face as he sits and listens to the autocrats bizarre monologues is there for a reason.

[Jingthing]

8 minutes ago, placeholder said:

If anyone was a "pot plant" it was Carlson. Might as well have put up a cardboard image of him for all the probing questions he asked  Putin.

The man was already disgraced but now he has piled it on higher and thicker.

 

[candide]

6 hours ago, impulse said:

In case anyone actually wants to see the interview:

 

https://tuckercarlson.com/the-vladimir-putin-interview/

 

Why see it? We already know Putin's propaganda from previous speeches (the denazification B.S., the U.S. is responsible for the war, etc..). On top of it, Russian propaganda has also been diffused to right-wing outlets, and this forum has been saturated by MAGA posts parroting this propaganda.

[nauseus]

16 minutes ago, placeholder said:

If anyone was a "pot plant" it was Carlson. Might as well have put up a cardboard image of him for all the probing questions he asked  Putin.

 

I expect that certain agreements had to be made in advance to get the appointment in the first place. If any of those had been broken then there would probably have been no interview aired at all.

 

At least we know Putin's view on several important questions and we now have have the chance to accept or reject his answers. Better something than nothing, which is pretty much what we get about the UA war, these days.

 

[riclag]

On 2/7/2024 at 6:52 AM, KhunLA said:

Why is talking to someone considered supporting them.   Talking is how you avoid wars.

 

Barbara Walters talked to Castro, does that mean she supported him?  Frost to Nixon, and so on.  Trump to Kin Jong Un or any of the other world leaders (all of NATO) he disagreed with, does that mean he supports them, or Mexico's Nieto.

 

If Hitler was still alive, or if they found him in S. America, journalist would be lining up to talk to him.

 

Anyone stating someone supports someone simply by talking to them is part of the propaganda problem, and simply pushing divisiveness.

 

I'm talking to you, do that mean I support your silly statement ?

Totally agree ! TC is a legend in his time, a mini Rush , Libertarian comes to mind.  A  government  Transparency Activist and anti war, anti corruption, anti censorship,  supporter who fed

up with the Legacy media apparatus.

He has many supporters ! Hes hated by the Marxist, Communist, Socialists around the world.

 

imop

[Morch]

9 minutes ago, riclag said:

Totally agree ! TC is a legend in his time, a mini Rush , Libertarian comes to mind.  A  government  Transparency Activist and anti war, anti corruption, anti censorship,  supporter who fed

up with the Legacy media apparatus.

He has many supporters ! Hes hated by the Marxist, Communist, Socialists around the world.

 

imop

 

But liked by dictators, real and wannabes...

[riclag]

On 2/8/2024 at 9:29 AM, Robert Paulson said:

Meghan Kelly interviewed him. So it’s not even unprecedented.

 

This doesn’t seem that difficult people: if you don’t like it, don’t tune in… but what you can’t do is decide for others what they should and should not see. Also, if Putin is such a vile piece of crap, why not just let his own words sink him? I don’t get it. Nothing you say makes sense. The solution to our problems is more talking, not choosing who you sensor based on your own ideology. As to your question: I don’t care who interviews who. Anyone can interview anyone they want. And to see it any other way seems quite ignorant to me.m

Good comment ! The radical left throughout, are hell bent on the dynamics of free speech censorship   ! Intolerant to many who have opposing opinions  to theirs!

Debate and diplomacy with Putin is absent because of the left and the war mongers in each party. 
 

imop

 

 

Edited February 9 by riclag

[impulse]

19 minutes ago, riclag said:

Good comment ! The radical left throughout, are hell bent on the dynamics of free speech censorship   ! Intolerant to many who have opposing opinions  to theirs!

Debate and diplomacy with Putin is absent because of the left and the war mongers in each party. 

 

That's 'cause they believe that if anyone disagrees with them, it's because they're either too stupid to be trusted with the vote, or morally challenged and they need to be re-educated. 

 

In a camp, possibly.

 

[placeholder]

55 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

I expect that certain agreements had to be made in advance to get the appointment in the first place. If any of those had been broken then there would probably have been no interview aired at all.

 

At least we know Putin's view on several important questions and we now have have the chance to accept or reject his answers. Better something than nothing, which is pretty much what we get about the UA war, these days.

 

There's nothing in this interview Putin hasn't said before most of it many times. At least, as much of it as I watched. I'll be glad to read a transcript whenever becomes available at no charge.

[tgw]

4 minutes ago, placeholder said:

There's nothing in this interview Putin hasn't said before most of it many times. At least, as much of it as I watched. I'll be glad to read a transcript whenever becomes available at no charge.

 

Be careful with absolutes.

I don't remember Putin ever saying anything in public about Evan Gershkovich for example.

[impulse]

11 minutes ago, placeholder said:

There's nothing in this interview Putin hasn't said before most of it many times. At least, as much of it as I watched. I'll be glad to read a transcript whenever becomes available at no charge.

 

Post back if you find a freebee version.

 

In the meantime, if you just want the Audio (downloadable to listen later, unlike the video):

 

https://tuckercarlson.com/listen/

 

Click "SHARE" then click the download icon.

 

Edit:  I'd add that an advantage of audio is that you don't have to look at Carlson's ugly mug.

 

Edited February 9 by impulse

[KhunLA]

Just watched majority of the interview, and TBH, didn't learn anything new, as I knew the history and the why every thing today, developed the way it has.   Hopefully others will actually watch it, understand it, and realize RU was, is quite correct in their actions.

 

NATO has expanded and put missiles on RU's doorstep for decades, and UA was the final straws.   The regime change (coup), and attacking of Russians in Crimea & Donbas and other regions.   And ignoring the Minsk agreement, leaving RU no choice.

 

Sad so many are completely ignorant of the facts, and brainwashed by MSM propaganda.  Those same people will either not watch the interview, or simply say it's all lies.  And yet, believe the propaganda they are fed, by nothing but confirmed liars.   Pointed out again & again, by whistleblower, WikiLeaks and others.  All those facts ignored of course, even though presented in print & videos.  All never denied, simply folks prosecuted for releasing the info/facts.   Go figure.

[candide]

47 minutes ago, riclag said:

Good comment ! The radical left throughout, are hell bent on the dynamics of free speech censorship   ! Intolerant to many who have opposing opinions  to theirs!

Debate and diplomacy with Putin is absent because of the left and the war mongers in each party. 
 

imop

 

 

Debate is certainly absent in Russia because all media are censored and muzzled.

 

Apart from state propaganda outlets such as RT, no one is forbidden to debate about it in Western countries.

 

A few leaders, such as Macron  have tried the diplomacy card with Russia. How did it work?

 

[tgw]

3 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Just watched majority of the interview, and TBH, didn't learn anything new, as I knew the history and the why every thing today, developed the way it has.   Hopefully others will actually watch it, understand it, and realize RU was, is quite correct in their actions.

 

NATO has expanded and put missiles on RU's doorstep for decades, and UA was the final straws.   The regime change (coup), and attacking of Russians in Crimea & Donbas and other regions.   And ignoring the Minsk agreement, leaving RU no choice.

 

Sad so many are completely ignorant of the facts, and brainwashed by MSM propaganda.  Those same people will either not watch the interview, or simply say it's all lies.  And yet, believe the propaganda they are fed, by nothing but confirmed liars.   Pointed out again & again, by whistleblower, WikiLeaks and others.  All those facts ignored of course, even though presented in print & videos.  All never denied, simply folks prosecuted for releasing the info/facts.   Go figure.

 

I hope someone will dissect what Putin said and explain in detail the gaslighting.

 

Hopefully you will watch that detailed rebuff, understand it, and realize RU was, is completely wrong in their actions against the Ukrainian people.

[scottiejohn]

6 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Sad so many are completely ignorant of the facts, and brainwashed

Who is doing your brainwashing assuming you have a brain to wash?

 

 

 

Edited February 9 by scottiejohn

[candide]

13 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Just watched majority of the interview, and TBH, didn't learn anything new, as I knew the history and the why every thing today, developed the way it has.   Hopefully others will actually watch it, understand it, and realize RU was, is quite correct in their actions.

 

NATO has expanded and put missiles on RU's doorstep for decades, and UA was the final straws.   The regime change (coup), and attacking of Russians in Crimea & Donbas and other regions.   And ignoring the Minsk agreement, leaving RU no choice.

 

Sad so many are completely ignorant of the facts, and brainwashed by MSM propaganda.  Those same people will either not watch the interview, or simply say it's all lies.  And yet, believe the propaganda they are fed, by nothing but confirmed liars.   Pointed out again & again, by whistleblower, WikiLeaks and others.  All those facts ignored of course, even though presented in print & videos.  All never denied, simply folks prosecuted for releasing the info/facts.   Go figure.

Who's ignorant of facts and is buying Putin's propaganda,? There are no NATO nukes at Russia's doorstep except Turkey and it dates from the cold War time (and is not really at doorstep).

Russia did not respect the Minsk treaties, as another poster showed.