Tucker Carlson in Moscow Fueling Kremlin Propaganda & Interviewing Sergey Lavrov

[Social Media]

 

Tucker Carlson, a figure celebrated by Russian state media, made headlines again with his return to Moscow, where he conducted an interview with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. While the public focus of his visit appeared to be promoting Kremlin narratives about Ukraine, speculation swirled that Carlson’s true agenda might be far more shadowy.  

 

Tucker: How many people have died in Ukraine?

Lavrov: I don't know, but look what the Jews are doing in Palestine.

Lavrov giving Tucker a lesson in good old Russian whataboutism.

Tucker: How many people have died in Ukraine?

Lavrov: I don't know, but look what the Jews are doing in Palestine.

Lavrov giving Tucker a lesson in good old Russian whataboutism. pic.twitter.com/FK99dliM5m

— Pekka Kallioniemi (@P_Kallioniemi) December 7, 2024

 

During the interview, broadcast on Thursday night, Carlson echoed Moscow's key talking points, advocating that the United States should retreat from its support for Ukraine to avoid a global nuclear crisis. The timing of the discussion aligned perfectly with the Kremlin's intensified rhetoric. Following Ukraine's receipt of permission to deploy long-range missiles against military targets in Russia, Moscow escalated its threats, including the dramatic launch of an intermediate-range ballistic missile known as Oreshnik. Margarita Simonyan, head of RT and a vocal Kremlin supporter, made repeated appearances on Russian state television, articulating Russia’s goal to recreate a crisis reminiscent of the Cuban Missile standoff in a bid to force the U.S. to withdraw its backing of Ukraine.  

 

“How did Navalny die?”

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s response:

“How did Navalny die?”

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s response: pic.twitter.com/grBxZO2yoa

— Tucker Carlson Network (@TCNetwork) December 5, 2024

 

Carlson’s conversation with Lavrov was positioned as a dire warning about a looming global war. On his platform, the Tucker Carlson Network, the interview was introduced with a sensationalist question: “We’re on the brink of global war. Why isn’t anyone talking about it?” Lavrov, adopting a cooperative tone, parroted the Kremlin’s preferred narratives, claiming “Russia did not start this war” and referencing international law to justify Moscow’s actions. Despite the highly questionable claims, Carlson refrained from challenging Lavrov, allowing the Russian minister to control the narrative unimpeded.  

 

When Carlson sought deeper insights, his efforts yielded little substance. A question about Russian military casualties was dismissed by Lavrov, who stated, “It’s not for me to disclose this information.” Regarding the death of opposition leader Alexei Navalny—poisoned with a Novichok nerve agent in an attack widely attributed to Russian security forces—Lavrov deflected blame onto Germany, where Navalny received medical treatment. When Carlson pressed, asking, “How do you think he died?” Lavrov offered an evasive response: “I am not a doctor, but for anybody to guess, even for the doctors to try to guess, they need to have information.” Once again, there was no follow-up from Carlson.  

 

Critics have suggested that Carlson’s performance during the interview may not have been mere negligence but deliberate acquiescence. His avoidance of critical questioning or fact-based rebuttals allowed Lavrov to disseminate unfounded claims without opposition. This, coupled with Carlson’s alignment with Kremlin rhetoric, raises concerns that his Moscow visit served purposes beyond journalism.  

 

As Russia’s state media continues to praise Carlson as a valuable ally in amplifying their agenda, his actions have left many questioning whether his role extends beyond public advocacy and into back-channel diplomacy on behalf of former President Donald Trump. Whether intentional or incidental, Carlson’s interactions with Russian officials have furthered a narrative that aligns with Putin’s goals, complicating the global conversation about the war in Ukraine and the broader risks it poses.

 

Based on a report by Daily Beast 2024-12-09

 

 

 

[Hakuna Matata]

By gilbertdoctorow on December 7, 2024 According to TASS, Tucker Carlson’s interview with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov released a couple of days ago has already been seen by more than 2 million viewers on the social network X alone, with presumably a great many more who watched it on Carlson’s own TCN network and on other media outlets.   That was, by Tucker Carlson standards, an important media exercise. For Carlson, it refreshed his seeming relevance to international developments that he established ten months ago by his interview with Vladimir Putin (21 million views on Youtube), still earlier by his interview with Hungary’s prime minister Viktor Orban (884,000 views on Youtube), an interview that also dealt largely with the Ukraine war and how to manage relations with Putin.   For Vladimir Vladimirovich, the Carlson interview was a rare opportunity to make his views on the Ukraine war and other key issues known directly to the American and global public. It was also a missed opportunity as I wrote at the time, because he was evidently very nervous, was uncertain how to deal with the intellectual lightweight Carlson, and wasted audience time with historical narrative, getting around to the present and future only towards the end of their hour-long chat when he surely had lost most of his audience.   I mention this shortcoming of the Putin interview, because it is also somewhat relevant to the new Carlson interview with Sergei Lavrov. Too much of it is backward looking. We come away impressed by Lavrov’s vast command of the subject matter, by his intellectual acuity and diplomatic skills, all of which one would expect from the world’s doyen among foreign ministers. But it is less effective than it might be in providing a glimpse into what may come next in Russian-American relations. In that sense it is also a missed opportunity in the ongoing multi-layered Russian information offensive directed at shaping expectations of the Americans and Europeans in particular over what may be achieved to bring an end to the Ukraine war at the start of the incoming Trump administration.   As another example of this ‘multi-layered information offensive,’ I call out the public statements by a leading nationalist Russian businessman and media personality, owner of the Tsargrad internet platform, Konstantin Malofeyev, in which he trashes the salient points in the published peace plans of General Kellogg, Trump’s nominee emissary to Ukraine and Russia. Malofeyev may be said to be close to the Putin entourage via his marriage to the official who oversaw the removal to Russia of orphaned Ukrainian children from war zones that brought indictments against her and Putin by the ICC. Malofeyev’s views on how the war may end were set out in a feature article of The Financial Times in the past week.   Within the context of Russia’s ongoing information offensive, we now have the 30-minute CNN interview with Russia’s Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Sergei Ryabkov which came out a day ago in its full version. This interview is outstanding in every way. It is especially valuable for explaining Russia’s disparagement of what we know of Trump’s plans for ending the war very quickly by use of threats and blandishments to the leaders of Russia and Ukraine. Per this official Russian position, a settlement is possible only if the core security concerns of Russia are addressed, meaning a settlement addressing the European security architecture and not merely a ceasefire, a frozen conflict, and other nonsense contained so far in what the Trump entourage is touting.   In what follows, I will not reconstruct Ryabkov’s talking points. I leave that to my readers to do for themselves. The interview is short and merits your time.  Instead, I use this space to bring out some relevant facts about who is who in the interview, about how it has fared so far in viewer numbers and why you should spread the word to raise its public impact around you.   First, let me remind you that Sergei Ryabkov is a fluent English speaker who spent more than three years in Washington as an advisor to the Russian ambassador (2003-2005). As his career progressed, he served as director of the ministry’s department on cooperation with Europe. Later as Deputy Minister from 2008, Ryabkov has had responsibility for arms control and non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. This is to say that his long-time work experience is directly relevant to the present crisis situation between Russia and the Collective West that is being played out in Ukraine.   Ryabkov is the official who crafted and presented the ultimatum to NATO in December 2021 over the need to roll back the NATO European presence to what it was at the end of the Cold War, before the alliance expanded eastward under Bill Clinton. The refusal early in the new year by Washington and Brussels to enter into negotiations over the Russian demands led directly to the launch of the Special Military Operation and invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, with Russia determined to win by force of arms what it could not achieve by diplomacy.   It is also relevant to mention that the CNN interviewer was not some gal or guy from Atlanta who was put on the case thanks to good looks and readiness to read out some aggressive questions prepared for her/him by the CNN editorial board.  No, it was the German jouralist Frederik Pleitgen, who is based in Berlin, who by education and work experience in Europe clearly knew what to ask and how to ask it to get meaningful and relevant answers.   So far, this full version of the show has been seen by 105,000 viewers and has generated 2,295 Comments. Let me say without hesitation that the audience numbers are pitiful! When I appeared on ‘Judging Freedom’ a week ago, I gathered 120,000 viewers.  When John Mearsheimer opens his mouth before any of the leading interview channels on youtube, he gets half a million views without difficulty even if he has nothing much to say. The same is true of Jeffrey Sachs. And NONE of us is an original formulator and implementer of state policy for the country most deeply involved in the existential struggle between East and West that is going on before our eyes. We are just commentators. Ryabkov is the source and I urge you to take the time to listen to him. .............. ©Gilbert Doctorow, 2024

[roquefort]

Yawn. Another sad hit piece on Carlson.

 

What exactly is wrong with listening to what the other side has to say? Maybe if Biden had done that three years ago the US wouldn't be in the mess it is now trying to extract itself from in Ukraine.

[lou norman]

2 hours ago, roquefort said:

Yawn. Another sad hit piece on Carlson.

 

What exactly is wrong with listening to what the other side has to say? Maybe if Biden had done that three years ago the US wouldn't be in the mess it is now trying to extract itself from in Ukraine.

Why would the U.S. withdraw from Ukraine? At a cost of less than 10% of an annual defense budget and with no troops deployed, the U.S. has significantly weakened the Russian military. This situation appears to be a favorable deal for the United States.

 Moreover, Ukraine's efforts have reportedly led to the destruction of approximately 50% of Russia's military capabilities, forcing Russia to spend over $150 billion on military replenishment.

. The strategic benefits for the U.S. include not only supporting an ally but also degrading a major adversary's military strength at a relatively low cost

Maintaining support for Ukraine seems advantageous for the U.S., both in terms of financial investment and geopolitical strategy.

[SunnyinBangrak]

Pointing out facts in a last ditch effort to save the world from western liberals hell bent on unleashing nuclear armaggedon is not "kremlin propaganda". Its is a commendable effort by Tucker but good luck getting any truth bombs through lefty skulls. Their cultlike movement has false narratives way too deeply engrained.

Even basic points like NATO's eastward expansion against treaties and promises can not be acknowleged, even though its as clear as the nose on their faces.

Thsnk goodness there is a new sheriff in town. The misinformation by team democrat is so dangerous

[jcmj]

Unfortunately there are way more than two sides to this story and many people are just too lazy or “righteous “ to listen to the other side’s of the stories. 

[RayC]

3 hours ago, Hakuna Matata said:

By gilbertdoctorow on December 7, 2024 According to TASS, Tucker Carlson’s interview with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov released a couple of days ago has already been seen by more than 2 million viewers on the social network X alone, with presumably a great many more who watched it on Carlson’s own TCN network and on other media outlets.   That was, by Tucker Carlson standards, an important media exercise. For Carlson, it refreshed his seeming relevance to international developments that he established ten months ago by his interview with Vladimir Putin (21 million views on Youtube), still earlier by his interview with Hungary’s prime minister Viktor Orban (884,000 views on Youtube), an interview that also dealt largely with the Ukraine war and how to manage relations with Putin.   For Vladimir Vladimirovich, the Carlson interview was a rare opportunity to make his views on the Ukraine war and other key issues known directly to the American and global public. It was also a missed opportunity as I wrote at the time, because he was evidently very nervous, was uncertain how to deal with the intellectual lightweight Carlson, and wasted audience time with historical narrative, getting around to the present and future only towards the end of their hour-long chat when he surely had lost most of his audience.   I mention this shortcoming of the Putin interview, because it is also somewhat relevant to the new Carlson interview with Sergei Lavrov. Too much of it is backward looking. We come away impressed by Lavrov’s vast command of the subject matter, by his intellectual acuity and diplomatic skills, all of which one would expect from the world’s doyen among foreign ministers. But it is less effective than it might be in providing a glimpse into what may come next in Russian-American relations. In that sense it is also a missed opportunity in the ongoing multi-layered Russian information offensive directed at shaping expectations of the Americans and Europeans in particular over what may be achieved to bring an end to the Ukraine war at the start of the incoming Trump administration.   As another example of this ‘multi-layered information offensive,’ I call out the public statements by a leading nationalist Russian businessman and media personality, owner of the Tsargrad internet platform, Konstantin Malofeyev, in which he trashes the salient points in the published peace plans of General Kellogg, Trump’s nominee emissary to Ukraine and Russia. Malofeyev may be said to be close to the Putin entourage via his marriage to the official who oversaw the removal to Russia of orphaned Ukrainian children from war zones that brought indictments against her and Putin by the ICC. Malofeyev’s views on how the war may end were set out in a feature article of The Financial Times in the past week.   Within the context of Russia’s ongoing information offensive, we now have the 30-minute CNN interview with Russia’s Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Sergei Ryabkov which came out a day ago in its full version. This interview is outstanding in every way. It is especially valuable for explaining Russia’s disparagement of what we know of Trump’s plans for ending the war very quickly by use of threats and blandishments to the leaders of Russia and Ukraine. Per this official Russian position, a settlement is possible only if the core security concerns of Russia are addressed, meaning a settlement addressing the European security architecture and not merely a ceasefire, a frozen conflict, and other nonsense contained so far in what the Trump entourage is touting.   In what follows, I will not reconstruct Ryabkov’s talking points. I leave that to my readers to do for themselves. The interview is short and merits your time.  Instead, I use this space to bring out some relevant facts about who is who in the interview, about how it has fared so far in viewer numbers and why you should spread the word to raise its public impact around you.   First, let me remind you that Sergei Ryabkov is a fluent English speaker who spent more than three years in Washington as an advisor to the Russian ambassador (2003-2005). As his career progressed, he served as director of the ministry’s department on cooperation with Europe. Later as Deputy Minister from 2008, Ryabkov has had responsibility for arms control and non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. This is to say that his long-time work experience is directly relevant to the present crisis situation between Russia and the Collective West that is being played out in Ukraine.   Ryabkov is the official who crafted and presented the ultimatum to NATO in December 2021 over the need to roll back the NATO European presence to what it was at the end of the Cold War, before the alliance expanded eastward under Bill Clinton. The refusal early in the new year by Washington and Brussels to enter into negotiations over the Russian demands led directly to the launch of the Special Military Operation and invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, with Russia determined to win by force of arms what it could not achieve by diplomacy.   It is also relevant to mention that the CNN interviewer was not some gal or guy from Atlanta who was put on the case thanks to good looks and readiness to read out some aggressive questions prepared for her/him by the CNN editorial board.  No, it was the German jouralist Frederik Pleitgen, who is based in Berlin, who by education and work experience in Europe clearly knew what to ask and how to ask it to get meaningful and relevant answers.   So far, this full version of the show has been seen by 105,000 viewers and has generated 2,295 Comments. Let me say without hesitation that the audience numbers are pitiful! When I appeared on ‘Judging Freedom’ a week ago, I gathered 120,000 viewers.  When John Mearsheimer opens his mouth before any of the leading interview channels on youtube, he gets half a million views without difficulty even if he has nothing much to say. The same is true of Jeffrey Sachs. And NONE of us is an original formulator and implementer of state policy for the country most deeply involved in the existential struggle between East and West that is going on before our eyes. We are just commentators. Ryabkov is the source and I urge you to take the time to listen to him. .............. ©Gilbert Doctorow, 2024

 

Doctorow uses an awful lot of words to say nothing of any import.

 

As for the video, it's extremely disturbing. Assuming Ryabkov is speaking with Putin's voice, it shows a hardening of the Russian position.

 

Whether one thinks the Russian position is justified depends upon the individuals' view of the veracity and validity of the underlying assumptions e.g. protection of Russian speakers, de-nazification of Ukraine, threat to Russian security, etc. Diplomatic channels to solve these problems having been exhausted (really?),  Russia was therefore left with no choice other than to invade Ukraine. 

 

Nothing in the Ryabkov interview makes me question my belief that the underlying assumptions have no validity and that there is no justification for the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

[candide]

1 hour ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Pointing out facts in a last ditch effort to save the world from western liberals hell bent on unleashing nuclear armaggedon is not "kremlin propaganda". Its is a commendable effort by Tucker but good luck getting any truth bombs through lefty skulls. Their cultlike movement has false narratives way too deeply engrained.

Even basic points like NATO's eastward expansion against treaties and promises can not be acknowleged, even though its as clear as the nose on their faces.

Thsnk goodness there is a new sheriff in town. The misinformation by team democrat is so dangerous

It's not "truth bombs" that Russia is sending! 😀

[SunnyinBangrak]

6 hours ago, candide said:

It's not "truth bombs" that Russia is sending! 😀

You know, its funny. Going back to the dark days when the only narrative here was Russia caused the Trump presidency because they colluded with DJT to game the election, and every post was an anti Russian rant, I tried again and again at great personsl risk to point out how dangerous this false narrative was and if were not careful could lead to actual war between Russia and the US. 

I dont pretend to be Nostradamus, it was clear the American left's irrational hatred of Russia(because they couldnt admit HRC was as electable as Jeffrey Dahmer) would take the world to a very dark place.

And now the champions of those dark years where only misinformation was permitted comes along and talks about what is true or not? An apology would be more appropriate. Wonder where ThailandRyan, Ozimoron, JeffR2 and the others that celebrated the enforcement of a false and dangerous narrative are these days? Maybe they enlisted in Panama paper Big Z's army?

[candide]

39 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

You know, its funny. Going back to the dark days when the only narrative here was Russia caused the Trump presidency because they colluded with DJT to game the election, and every post was an anti Russian rant, I tried again and again at great personsl risk to point out how dangerous this false narrative was and if were not careful could lead to actual war between Russia and the US. 

I dont pretend to be Nostradamus, it was clear the American left's irrational hatred of Russia(because they couldnt admit HRC was as electable as Jeffrey Dahmer) would take the world to a very dark place.

And now the champions of those dark years where only misinformation was permitted comes along and talks about what is true or not? An apology would be more appropriate. Wonder where ThailandRyan, Ozimoron, JeffR2 and the others that celebrated the enforcement of a false and dangerous narrative are these days? Maybe they enlisted in Panama paper Big Z's army?

Russia tried to interfere. That's a well documented fact. And it didn't happen only in the U.S. There is no way it could have caused the war, as the Russian perfectly knew what they had done.

 

What is unknown is the real impact as there is no scientific way to assess it. Personally I tend to think it was not strong enough to influence the result.

 

HRC was not unelectable, she largely won the popular vote. Her problem was the geographical distribution of votes.

 

 

[Patong2021]

Since Tucker's propaganda piece, Russia has suffered a significant setback in Syria. 

Russia supported the despot Assad and at some point, the Syrians will ask the unwelcome occupying Russian military to leave.

 

[roquefort]

On 12/9/2024 at 3:18 PM, lou norman said:

This situation appears to be a favorable deal for the United States.

Not so favourable for the people of Ukraine. Half a millon plus casualties and the total destruction of many of their cities and industries. Of course that will also be a favorable deal for the United States, as Blackrock, JP Morgan and the other vultures fly in to pick over the carcass and profit from the massive 'reconstruction' funds that the US taxpayer will make available.