What’s Tucker Carlson’s point?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Easy. Carlson is in it for the filthy lucre.

Correct. He's in it for the eyeballs, which bring in ad revenue, which elevates his status.

He doesn't actually care what he's spouting, but he's very good at the rage machine against Democrats. He could, in a different life, have been excellent at another network raging against Republicans.

But this way is slimier, since Republicans are generally against improving healthcare, quality of life, standards of living, etc...

[Anonymous]

TC is an attention seeking, angry/aggrieved white male entitled twit.

[Anonymous]

OP here. I kinda get the money thing, but where’s TC’s self respect. Like, if I knowingly spouted BS on TV everyday, then had to see my family, friends, etc., I’m not sure I could hold my head up. It’s kinda like everyone in the neighborhood knows that you’re the local drug kingpin - sure, you got the goods, but everyone talks behind your back and doesn’t respect you. I’d hate to be compared to Alex Jones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What headlines?

Like, the US is responsible for the Nord Stream pipeline attack.

You must admit the US is the party that benefits the most from the pipeline’s demise. It’s not a weird assumption, qui bono.

Galaxybrain at work.

LOL you're right. It's not like the US has been opposed to the pipeline FOR YEARS! It's not like the US now gets to sell more expensive American LNG to Germany.

It's not like Russia could blow something up undetected in a heavily patrolled littoral area where the Germans, the Danes and the Swedes are all active.

There is no conclusive evidence of the guilty party yet. But there are motives and beneficiaries, and the American hand is at play like every other. I mean your entire opposition to this idea is based not on evidence but on "we wouldn't do something like that!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What headlines?

Like, the US is responsible for the Nord Stream pipeline attack.

You must admit the US is the party that benefits the most from the pipeline’s demise. It’s not a weird assumption, qui bono.

Galaxybrain at work.

LOL you're right. It's not like the US has been opposed to the pipeline FOR YEARS! It's not like the US now gets to sell more expensive American LNG to Germany.

It's not like Russia could blow something up undetected in a heavily patrolled littoral area where the Germans, the Danes and the Swedes are all active.

There is no conclusive evidence of the guilty party yet. But there are motives and beneficiaries, and the American hand is at play like every other. I mean your entire opposition to this idea is based not on evidence but on "we wouldn't do something like that!"

If the Russians really believed that the US did this, they would be a lot more vocal. Look how fast they’re trying to repair the Crimean bridge. In contrast, they haven’t lifted a finger to fix the pipeline. Once the evidence is displayed, you’re going to look like a fool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What headlines?

Like, the US is responsible for the Nord Stream pipeline attack.

You must admit the US is the party that benefits the most from the pipeline’s demise. It’s not a weird assumption, qui bono.

Galaxybrain at work.

LOL you're right. It's not like the US has been opposed to the pipeline FOR YEARS! It's not like the US now gets to sell more expensive American LNG to Germany.

It's not like Russia could blow something up undetected in a heavily patrolled littoral area where the Germans, the Danes and the Swedes are all active.

There is no conclusive evidence of the guilty party yet. But there are motives and beneficiaries, and the American hand is at play like every other. I mean your entire opposition to this idea is based not on evidence but on "we wouldn't do something like that!"

Sounds like you trust Russia more than NATO or the US government. If you were a Russian, your trust in their government wouldn’t be working out too well for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I kinda get the money thing, but where’s TC’s self respect. Like, if I knowingly spouted BS on TV everyday, then had to see my family, friends, etc., I’m not sure I could hold my head up. It’s kinda like everyone in the neighborhood knows that you’re the local drug kingpin - sure, you got the goods, but everyone talks behind your back and doesn’t respect you. I’d hate to be compared to Alex Jones.

Tucker thinks it’s all a game. When that’s the case, any action is justified. Also, He needs to be more extreme than OAN and Newsmax to stay relevant. Add to this a dose of nihilism and you get Tucker Carlson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What headlines?

Like, the US is responsible for the Nord Stream pipeline attack.

You must admit the US is the party that benefits the most from the pipeline’s demise. It’s not a weird assumption, qui bono.

Galaxybrain at work.

LOL you're right. It's not like the US has been opposed to the pipeline FOR YEARS! It's not like the US now gets to sell more expensive American LNG to Germany.

It's not like Russia could blow something up undetected in a heavily patrolled littoral area where the Germans, the Danes and the Swedes are all active.

There is no conclusive evidence of the guilty party yet. But there are motives and beneficiaries, and the American hand is at play like every other. I mean your entire opposition to this idea is based not on evidence but on "we wouldn't do something like that!"

If the Russians really believed that the US did this, they would be a lot more vocal. Look how fast they’re trying to repair the Crimean bridge. In contrast, they haven’t lifted a finger to fix the pipeline. Once the evidence is displayed, you’re going to look like a fool.

They’ll do what Republicans always do and never engage on that specific subject again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Easy. Carlson is in it for the filthy lucre.

Correct. He's in it for the eyeballs, which bring in ad revenue, which elevates his status.

He doesn't actually care what he's spouting, but he's very good at the rage machine against Democrats. He could, in a different life, have been excellent at another network raging against Republicans.

But this way is slimier, since Republicans are generally against improving healthcare, quality of life, standards of living, etc...

I will note that he was not successful at either MSNBC or CNN.