Tucker Carlson hypes Kremlin Agitprop as defacto Putin mouthpiece in US

[Anonymous]

You really do wonder if he's being paid for this "promotional" service:




▶ PLAY YOUTUBE VIDEO

[Anonymous]

Then why are you amplifying it?

[Anonymous]

Of course he’s getting paid!! It’s clear from all his text msgs from the Dominion case that the man’s only concern is filthy lucre. The man is the biggest wh*re on tv.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Then why are you amplifying it?

Do you think he's paid by the Kremlin? Why would he do Putin's bidding?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then why are you amplifying it?

Do you think he's paid by the Kremlin? Why would he do Putin's bidding?

NP. No, but he’s figured out that there’s a lot of hay to be made by entertaining discussions about taboo topics. But even then honeypot should still be avoided.

The Ukrainian war is a bigger mess than we are told (simple version: when did you last hear about casualties in this war of attrition?), but Tucker still isn’t worth listening to for other reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then why are you amplifying it?

Do you think he's paid by the Kremlin? Why would he do Putin's bidding?

NP. No, but he’s figured out that there’s a lot of hay to be made by entertaining discussions about taboo topics. But even then honeypot should still be avoided.

The Ukrainian war is a bigger mess than we are told (simple version: when did you last hear about casualties in this war of attrition?), but Tucker still isn’t worth listening to for other reasons.

Numbers for estimated Russian casualties are easily/widely available, but I agree, Ukrainian are less so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Then why are you amplifying it?

He's on Fox - how is putting anything here "amplifying it"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then why are you amplifying it?

He's on Fox - how is putting anything here "amplifying it"?

It's their m.o.

Same as all the crap TFG and the congressional put out there. They want us to talk about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then why are you amplifying it?

Do you think he's paid by the Kremlin? Why would he do Putin's bidding?

NP. No, but he’s figured out that there’s a lot of hay to be made by entertaining discussions about taboo topics. But even then honeypot should still be avoided.

The Ukrainian war is a bigger mess than we are told (simple version: when did you last hear about casualties in this war of attrition?), but Tucker still isn’t worth listening to for other reasons.

Numbers for estimated Russian casualties are easily/widely available, but I agree, Ukrainian are less so.

Actually what you mean is that the pundits have been told not to opine on the number of Ukrainian casualties as it interferes with the rah rah narrative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then why are you amplifying it?

Do you think he's paid by the Kremlin? Why would he do Putin's bidding?

NP. No, but he’s figured out that there’s a lot of hay to be made by entertaining discussions about taboo topics. But even then honeypot should still be avoided.

The Ukrainian war is a bigger mess than we are told (simple version: when did you last hear about casualties in this war of attrition?), but Tucker still isn’t worth listening to for other reasons.

Numbers for estimated Russian casualties are easily/widely available, but I agree, Ukrainian are less so.

Actually what you mean is that the pundits have been told not to opine on the number of Ukrainian casualties as it interferes with the rah rah narrative.

Yes it is a conspiracy! Wonder why your precious Fox is not talking about it? You think for a little more cash Tucker throw in some made up numbers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then why are you amplifying it?

Do you think he's paid by the Kremlin? Why would he do Putin's bidding?

NP. No, but he’s figured out that there’s a lot of hay to be made by entertaining discussions about taboo topics. But even then honeypot should still be avoided.

The Ukrainian war is a bigger mess than we are told (simple version: when did you last hear about casualties in this war of attrition?), but Tucker still isn’t worth listening to for other reasons.

Numbers for estimated Russian casualties are easily/widely available, but I agree, Ukrainian are less so.

All casualty numbers in this war are made up.

And you’re naive if you don’t think there is a narrow range of allowed POVs for people who want to be published or aired.

Actually what you mean is that the pundits have been told not to opine on the number of Ukrainian casualties as it interferes with the rah rah narrative.

Yes it is a conspiracy! Wonder why your precious Fox is not talking about it? You think for a little more cash Tucker throw in some made up numbers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then why are you amplifying it?

Do you think he's paid by the Kremlin? Why would he do Putin's bidding?

NP. No, but he’s figured out that there’s a lot of hay to be made by entertaining discussions about taboo topics. But even then honeypot should still be avoided.

The Ukrainian war is a bigger mess than we are told (simple version: when did you last hear about casualties in this war of attrition?), but Tucker still isn’t worth listening to for other reasons.

Numbers for estimated Russian casualties are easily/widely available, but I agree, Ukrainian are less so.

Actually what you mean is that the pundits have been told not to opine on the number of Ukrainian casualties as it interferes with the rah rah narrative.

No, that's not what I mean. All numbers are estimates at this point but estimates on the Russian dead are more available than Ukrainian.

I wonder what Carlson has to gain by propping up Russian propaganda....

[Anonymous]

So, it is not right to question our involvement? I am on Ukraine's side, but I also was on South Vietnam's side. That did not work out so well.

All this talk about Tucker is ridiculous. I don't agree with him, but some of his comments are certainly worthy of contemplation.

Funny, that so many people against Tucker think that John Kerry is just wonderful. But, I remember when he was condemning American soldiers when we still had soldeirs in Vietnam.

Better to discuss policy before we send "advisors" there. Or, do we already have "advisors" there. To those younger than I, that is how our involvemenrt began in Vietnam--with "advisors."

The person who deserves criticism is Biden:

Removing objections to Nordstream

awful pull-out of Afghanistan--indicating that we do not stand with our friends--and put our troops at great risk.

Comments on whether Russia committed a "minor" or "major" incursion

But, for those actions on Biden's part--we might not be having this discussion about Tucker. Russia just might have stayed home.

[Anonymous]

OP, this has been going on for years. A lot of us have been imploring people to stop watching Fox.

There are a million threads on it already. Stop amplifying it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, it is not right to question our involvement? I am on Ukraine's side, but I also was on South Vietnam's side. That did not work out so well.

All this talk about Tucker is ridiculous. I don't agree with him, but some of his comments are certainly worthy of contemplation.

Funny, that so many people against Tucker think that John Kerry is just wonderful. But, I remember when he was condemning American soldiers when we still had soldeirs in Vietnam.

Better to discuss policy before we send "advisors" there. Or, do we already have "advisors" there. To those younger than I, that is how our involvemenrt began in Vietnam--with "advisors."

The person who deserves criticism is Biden:

Removing objections to Nordstream

awful pull-out of Afghanistan--indicating that we do not stand with our friends--and put our troops at great risk.

Comments on whether Russia committed a "minor" or "major" incursion

But, for those actions on Biden's part--we might not be having this discussion about Tucker. Russia just might have stayed home.

It’s funny that you don’t know that John Kerry was speaking from first person experience and was not speaking on behalf of North Vietnam whereas Tucker Fish Sticks Carlson has never served and is pushing Russian propaganda. These two things aren’t remotely the same.

It’s also funny that you can’t see that Trump lined up both the situation in Ukraine and the pull out in Afghanistan. GOP voters have the memories of goldfish.