Tucker out at Fox News????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:None of this is passing the smell test. I'm not convinced this isn't a Murdoch and/or some right wing think tank ruse. He gives a "viral" speech the weekend before he's sacked. It's leaked his pal Lachlan made the decision? The back and forth from "sources" in the tabloids. The old man was worried Tucker is starting to sound too religious.

Murdochs know cable TV is dying and to my knowledge, they have nobody in the podcast/streaming space to gatekeep that younger demo? Solution: Create a fired "martyr" who is actually a company man hack.

If the Murdochs really wanted this preppy dork to be a nobody overnight, blacklist him from coverage at FN, Post and Daily Mail. And make him sit home and do nothing for a few years while he rides out the rest of his contract. Instead Daily Mail is outside of his Florida compound this week to catch a lovey-dovey photo op? And watch a buyout will happen soon, so he can quickly launch his totally independent online streaming program. And even Matt is plugged into to what Tucker has "planned" two days after he was "fired" and before he knows if he'll be bought out? Right.

DailyMail is owned by a British family, not the Murdochs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Conclusion: Tucker's such a dirtbag that there are multiple plausible reasons why he got kicked out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None of this is passing the smell test. I'm not convinced this isn't a Murdoch and/or some right wing think tank ruse. He gives a "viral" speech the weekend before he's sacked. It's leaked his pal Lachlan made the decision? The back and forth from "sources" in the tabloids. The old man was worried Tucker is starting to sound too religious.

Murdochs know cable TV is dying and to my knowledge, they have nobody in the podcast/streaming space to gatekeep that younger demo? Solution: Create a fired "martyr" who is actually a company man hack.

If the Murdochs really wanted this preppy dork to be a nobody overnight, blacklist him from coverage at FN, Post and Daily Mail. And make him sit home and do nothing for a few years while he rides out the rest of his contract. Instead Daily Mail is outside of his Florida compound this week to catch a lovey-dovey photo op? And watch a buyout will happen soon, so he can quickly launch his totally independent online streaming program. And even Matt is plugged into to what Tucker has "planned" two days after he was "fired" and before he knows if he'll be bought out? Right.

DailyMail is owned by a British family, not the Murdochs.

Doesn’t News Corp / Fox own TMZ, Daily Mail and NY Post? All these leaks and photo ops are from these outlets.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Conclusion: Tucker's such a dirtbag that there are multiple plausible reasons why he got kicked out.

This is really just what it boils down to.

He's not coming back up again, this guy.

[Anonymous]

It's been reported by Megyn Kelly that Tucker Carlson hasn't been fired, they just stopped the show.

This would mean Fox is paying him without giving him a job, with intent to sideline him during the election.

This contradicts with Fox's behaviour. They are badmouthing Tucker, hoping he will respond in kind, and they can use the nondisparagement clause to not pay out his contract. It is something Fox does with regularity with people they fire.
Kind of like the Boston Red Sox, only without the payout issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's been reported by Megyn Kelly that Tucker Carlson hasn't been fired, they just stopped the show.

This would mean Fox is paying him without giving him a job, with intent to sideline him during the election.

This contradicts with Fox's behaviour. They are badmouthing Tucker, hoping he will respond in kind, and they can use the nondisparagement clause to not pay out his contract. It is something Fox does with regularity with people they fire.
Kind of like the Boston Red Sox, only without the payout issues.

F*cker is stupid. He’ll slip up and say the wrong thing and Fox will be off the hook. I never imagined I’d ever be sympathetic to Fox News, but I am now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The video got prurient views - not fan views

Rainn Wilson:

"I can't believe I'm saying this but I agree with most of what Tucker Carlson said in that video".

Even leftist Hollywood seems to be shifting.

Yes what did those leftist commies Arnold Schwarzenegger and Clint Eastwood say?

And Tim Allen

Don’t forget Scott Baio and Kid Rock.

[Anonymous]

Just love that he's no longer on the air.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just love that he's no longer on the air.

Sounds fascist, must silence the guy who says things I don't like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just love that he's no longer on the air.

Sounds fascist, must silence the guy who says things I don't like.

Dude, PP wasn’t the one who fired him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just love that he's no longer on the air.

Sounds fascist, must silence the guy who says things I don't like.

So platforms for anti-American racists are ok with you.

Got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just love that he's no longer on the air.

Sounds fascist, must silence the guy who says things I don't like.

Rupert Murdoch posts on DCUM? Who knew?

[Anonymous]

NYT has some of the redacted texts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NYT has some of the redacted texts

For those that can't access the NYT, the text that may have led to Carlson's dismissal is below. I seriously don't understand why people put things in writing that can get them into trouble. It's just dumb. The interesting insight here, at least for me, is that Tucker wasn't just performing on his show--he actually seems to believe a lot of what he spews. I had been assuming that it was mostly an act.

In the message, which he sent to one of his producers "in the hours after violent Trump supporters stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, Mr. Carlson described how he had recently watched a video of a group of men — Trump supporters, he said — violently attacking 'an Antifa kid.'"

It was “three against one, at least,” he wrote.

And then he expressed a sense of dismay that the attackers, like him, were white.

“Jumping a guy like that is dishonorable obviously,” he wrote.

“It’s not how white men fight,” he said. But he said he found himself for a moment wanting the group to kill the person he had described as the Antifa kid.

“I found myself rooting for the mob against the man, hoping they’d hit him harder, kill him. I really wanted them to hurt the kid. I could taste it,” he wrote. “Then somewhere deep in my brain, an alarm went off: this isn’t good for me. I’m becoming something I don’t want to be.”

After all, he wrote, “Somebody probably loves this kid, and would be crushed if he was killed.”

“If I don’t care about those things, if I reduce people to their politics, how am I better than he is?” he wrote.