Tucker Carlson

[L Ron Burgundy]

Just now, daz28 said:

Vald is extremely good at it, too.  Trump DREAMS that he could interview like Putin.  Tucker may as well be throwing bon-bons in his mouth.  There's always an endgame, and I'm still struggling with what this one might be.  Maybe to soften the blow if Trump wins the election, and loses Ukraine to Vlad.  get Fox people thinking Vlad's not too bad a guy.  he just mean tweets a lil too much.  

He is the best at it.  #1, Brady level.  He's fully aware some right wing stooges will swallow some of his poison too. 

[US Egg]

2 hours ago, Tommy Callahan said:

From her mouth to rons keyboard. 

Hillary never gets tired of making up Russia rumors.
 

Speaking of contract deals with Russians.

 

From the Lefts favorite newspaper:

Edited February 8 by US Egg

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

6 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

You slow son.

Riiigght! But you voted for Biden so you have to be smart. You don't like putin, don't watch the interview. You don't have to cry faux outrage like a grown baby. You slower son.

6 hours ago, daz28 said:

Vald is extremely good at it, too.  Trump DREAMS that he could interview like Putin.  Tucker may as well be throwing bon-bons in his mouth.  There's always an endgame, and I'm still struggling with what this one might be.  Maybe to soften the blow if Trump wins the election, and loses Ukraine to Vlad.  get Fox people thinking Vlad's not too bad a guy.  he just mean tweets a lil too much.  

You just can't help yourself. Show me on the doll where Trump hurt you. It's laughable at this point.

[BillsFanNC]

 

[BillsFanNC]

You'd think the bolded statement would be clear and obvious to 99% of the country. Not in 2024 though!   When half the country are brainwashed useful idiot commie tools.

 

BREAKING:  The European Union is said to be seeking sanctions and a "travel ban" against Tucker Carlson for his interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

 

I never thought I would be defending Tucker Carlson so much within a period of a couple days, but once again, if you support freedom then you should support Tucker's right to interview Putin, just like many others have in the past. 

 

I'm sure much of what Putin will say will be lies, embellishments and inaccuracies.  Putin is the one who should be sanctioned further, not an American who is asking Putin questions.

 

The 'risks' of this interview for Tucker shouldn't be sanctions from US allies.

 

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

7 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

You'd think the bolded statement would be clear and obvious to 99% of the country. Not in 2024 though!   When half the country are brainwashed useful idiot commie tools.

 

BREAKING:  The European Union is said to be seeking sanctions and a "travel ban" against Tucker Carlson for his interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

 

I never thought I would be defending Tucker Carlson so much within a period of a couple days, but once again, if you support freedom then you should support Tucker's right to interview Putin, just like many others have in the past. 

 

I'm sure much of what Putin will say will be lies, embellishments and inaccuracies.  Putin is the one who should be sanctioned further, not an American who is asking Putin questions.

 

The 'risks' of this interview for Tucker shouldn't be sanctions from US allies.

 

If people are so bothered, don't watch. 

[BillsFanNC]

Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Putin etc..

 

We've been told repeatedly over the years that Trump himself is as least as bad, if not worse than, all of the above.

 

So....

 

Useful idiots, please explain the endless interviews of Trump by "journalists" and legacy media broadcasting his comments 24/7 since 2015.

 

How dare they interview the nazi, fascist, orange dictator!

 

 

[Doc]

10 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

That is 100% the insinuation.  I get nuance may not be your thing.  

 

Let's assume I'm wrong,  what exactly would be the point of the interview?  Gonna ask his favorite Taylor Swift song?  No.  The right thinks this is going to be old school journalism!  But it's just a tool to Vlad.  

 

How about watching it and finding out?  I think that's the point of what most have been saying.

 

10 hours ago, US Egg said:

Hillary never gets tired of making up Russia rumors.
 

Speaking of contract deals with Russians.

 

From the Lefts favorite newspaper:

 

I guess that "overcharge," er, "reset" button ddn't work...

[Tommy Callahan]

 

[KDIGGZ]

Hitler was interviewed many times, hosted an Olympic games, and his books are still available for sale. Who decides who can and cannot be interviewed? That person has too much power apparently 

[B-Man]

 

 

 

[daz28]

6 hours ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

 

You just can't help yourself. Show me on the doll where Trump hurt you. It's laughable at this point.

Your screen name, on a football site no less, LITERALLY has TDS in it, but me stating facts about him on a political page is laughable????  Sounds like you're the one with the obsession.  

[daz28]

1 hour ago, KDIGGZ said:

Hitler was interviewed many times, hosted an Olympic games, and his books are still available for sale. Who decides who can and cannot be interviewed? That person has too much power apparently 

So you do need the list of dictators who were given the spotlight, which turned out to be a complete disaster causing literally hundreds of millions of deaths and suffering?  No one is saying it's illegal, they're saying it's immoral, and just a really bad idea.  Should we have an Isis tv channel, so people can make up their own minds about beheadings, too?  The GQP has made what a short time ago was preposterous now the norm, but somehow they still claim to have common sense.  Conservative Judge Royce Lamberth NAILED it:  

Judge Royce Lamberth, a Reagan appointee to the bench, said the “destructive” misinformation, spread by political leaders who have downplayed and misrepresented the attack, had become pervasive.

“In my thirty-seven years on the bench, I cannot recall a time when such meritless justifications of criminal activity have gone mainstream,” Lamberth lamented in a seven-page public court filing.

Though he did not mention Trump by name, Lamberth specifically called out language used by Trump and, more recently, Trump allies like Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), describing Jan. 6 defendants as “hostages.”

“I have been shocked to watch some public figures try to rewrite history, claiming rioters behaved ‘in an orderly fashion’ like ordinary tourists, or martyrizing convicted January 6 defendants as ‘political prisoners’ or even, incredibly, ‘hostages,’” he wrote. “That is all preposterous. But the Court fears that such destructive, misguided rhetoric could presage further danger to our country.”

[KDIGGZ]

3 minutes ago, daz28 said:

So you do need the list of dictators who were given the spotlight, which turned out to be a complete disaster causing literally hundreds of millions of deaths and suffering?  No one is saying it's illegal, they're saying it's immoral, and just a really bad idea.  Should we have an Isis tv channel, so people can make up their own minds about beheadings, too?  The GQP has made what a short time ago was preposterous now the norm, but somehow they still claim to have common sense.  Conservative Judge Royce Lamberth NAILED it:  

Judge Royce Lamberth, a Reagan appointee to the bench, said the “destructive” misinformation, spread by political leaders who have downplayed and misrepresented the attack, had become pervasive.

“In my thirty-seven years on the bench, I cannot recall a time when such meritless justifications of criminal activity have gone mainstream,” Lamberth lamented in a seven-page public court filing.

Though he did not mention Trump by name, Lamberth specifically called out language used by Trump and, more recently, Trump allies like Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), describing Jan. 6 defendants as “hostages.”

“I have been shocked to watch some public figures try to rewrite history, claiming rioters behaved ‘in an orderly fashion’ like ordinary tourists, or martyrizing convicted January 6 defendants as ‘political prisoners’ or even, incredibly, ‘hostages,’” he wrote. “That is all preposterous. But the Court fears that such destructive, misguided rhetoric could presage further danger to our country.”

I don't agree. They aren't saying there should be a Russian TV channel. They are saying this guy started a war let's see why and what he has to say about it. If he's a bad guy then we should know about it. Nobody should be censored because then who decides who gets censored? Like with the COVID stuff. They censored a lot of DOCTORS who ended up being completely right. Give us the information and we will decide for ourselves 

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

17 minutes ago, daz28 said:

Your screen name, on a football site no less, LITERALLY has TDS in it, but me stating facts about him on a political page is laughable????  Sounds like you're the one with the obsession.  

Aaannndd you have no clue who al bundy is? If u did it would all make sense. Calling Trump weak for not retaliating a retaliation is a weird hill to die on, but u do u. I really don't care. And they are not facts but your opinion, and a rather weak one at that. Your broken and it shows.

[JDHillFan]

3 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said:

Give us the information and we will decide for ourselves 

I don’t proclaim to understand but it seems that the modern left, as exemplified by a handful of melodramatic sorts on this board, wants the exact opposite of this. Free thinking is not virtuous to this sort of person. 

[Doc]

8 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

Aaannndd you have no clue who al bundy is? If u did it would all make sense. Calling Trump weak for not retaliating a retaliation is a weird hill to die on, but u do u. I really don't care. And they are not facts but your opinion, and a rather weak one at that. Your broken and it shows.

 

Al would definitely be a MAGA guy.

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

15 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Al would definitely be a MAGA guy.

100%%%% NOMAAM!

[phypon]

24 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

Aaannndd you have no clue who al bundy is? If u did it would all make sense. Calling Trump weak for not retaliating a retaliation is a weird hill to die on, but u do u. I really don't care. And they are not facts but your opinion, and a rather weak one at that. Your broken and it shows.

Spelling is not your strong suit...

 

Anyway, here is a vid from someone that was once upon a time a "Democrat"!  Heads will explode!  It doesn't mean he is a Republican (I know how you leftist's think in terms of things as only left or right).  

 

Good watch:

 

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

Just now, phypon said:

Spelling is not your strong suit...

 

Anyway, here is a vid from someone that was once upon a time a "Democrat"!  Heads will explode!  It doesn't mean he is a Republican (I know how you leftist's think in terms of things as only left or right).  

 

Good watch:

 

Do u have me confused with someone else? I'm definitely not a leftist. And who gives a f about spelling, it's a message board. And what did I even spell wrong? 

[L Ron Burgundy]

6 hours ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

Riiigght! But you voted for Biden so you have to be smart. You don't like putin, don't watch the interview. You don't have to cry faux outrage like a grown baby. You slower son.

You just can't help yourself. Show me on the doll where Trump hurt you. It's laughable at this point.

Still slow.  Outrage would require giving 2 f's I give zero.  I'm calling out what's going to happen.  The circus around this is beneath my contempt.  

[phypon]

2 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

Do u have me confused with someone else? I'm definitely not a leftist. And who gives a f about spelling, it's a message board. And what did I even spell wrong? 

Great fo U.  Watch the vid regardless.  It's a good vid.  Did you watched it?

[JaCrispy]

[All_Pro_Bills]

32 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

Aaannndd you have no clue who al bundy is? If u did it would all make sense. Calling Trump weak for not retaliating a retaliation is a weird hill to die on, but u do u. I really don't care. And they are not facts but your opinion, and a rather weak one at that. Your broken and it shows.

Leftist have gone to war against humor because making fun of their many foolish notions is both fun and what they might say are microaggressions.  Al Bundy would certainly be cancelled and his No Maam organization declared an extremist group.   And I'll wager none of the leftists ever scored 4 touchdowns in a single game either!  

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

3 minutes ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

Still slow.  Outrage would require giving 2 f's I give zero.  I'm calling out what's going to happen.  The circus around this is beneath my contempt.  

So you can predict the future? Good for u. Once again if you're so bothered, don't watch. Still slower. Beneath you? Your a dem, no telling how low you can sink.

Just now, All_Pro_Bills said:

Leftist have gone to war against humor because making fun of their many foolish notions is both fun and what they might say are microaggressions.  Al Bundy would certainly be cancelled and his No Maam organization declared an extremist group.   And I'll wager none of the leftists ever scored 4 touchdowns in a single game either!  

They wouldn't last a down vs Bubba "spare tire" dixon, that's for sure!

6 minutes ago, phypon said:

Great fo U.  Watch the vid regardless.  It's a good vid.  Did you watched it?

Spell better and I might take you more seriously. I haven't watched it, maybe when I'm done with work.

[phypon]

6 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

So you can predict the future? Good for u. Once again if you're so bothered, don't watch. Still slower. Beneath you? Your a dem, no telling how low you can sink.

They wouldn't last a down vs Bubba "spare tire" dixon, that's for sure!

Spell better and I might take you more seriously. I haven't watched it, maybe when I'm done with work.

Honestly, it's worth the watch.  I think you will appreciate it.  For real.

[JaCrispy]

 

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

Just now, phypon said:

Honestly, it's worth the watch.  I think you will appreciate it.  For real.

I will do, in the meantime, do u have a quick cliff note summary?

[daz28]

45 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

Aaannndd you have no clue who al bundy is? If u did it would all make sense. Calling Trump weak for not retaliating a retaliation is a weird hill to die on, but u do u. I really don't care. And they are not facts but your opinion, and a rather weak one at that. Your broken and it shows.

The man said what he said, and was very clear.  Because you guys want his jock, you choose to willfully misinterpret what is clearly being said.  Maybe next time we kill one terrorist, you'll be ok with 100 US casualties as a proper "retaliation" by a terrorist nation.  Hope it's no one in my family that has to die in your required retaliation by the terrorist country.    

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

1 minute ago, daz28 said:

The man said what he said, and was very clear.  Because you guys want his jock, you choose to willfully misinterpret what is clearly being said.  Maybe next time we kill one terrorist, you'll be ok with 100 US casualties as a proper "retaliation" by a terrorist nation.  Hope it's no one in my family that has to die in your required retaliation by the terrorist country.    

Want his jock? You're the obsessed one unable to rationalize a clear and concise thought. Good day sir. I'm done with u. Once again, you're campaigning for war, and war has already cost this country plenty.

[daz28]

52 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said:

I don't agree. They aren't saying there should be a Russian TV channel. They are saying this guy started a war let's see why and what he has to say about it. If he's a bad guy then we should know about it. Nobody should be censored because then who decides who gets censored? Like with the COVID stuff. They censored a lot of DOCTORS who ended up being completely right. Give us the information and we will decide for ourselves 

You're confusing censorship with just not doing what has been historically proven to be a really bad idea.  A good example of this is that one could go to an all black ghetto, and shout racist remarks just to see what happens, but it's a terrible idea.  Giving an audience to your enemies and known naked aggressors is a bad idea.  Suppose Kim Jong Un nukes America.  Should we interview him to find out why?  To me this is all COMPLETELY ABSURD.  Mr. Hitler, why did you exterminate the Jews, the American people need to know if and why that was justified.  Oh vey.

3 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

Want his jock? You're the obsessed one unable to rationalize a clear and concise thought. Good day sir. I'm done with u. Once again, you're campaigning for war, and war has already cost this country plenty.

Campaigning for stopping dictators from naked aggression, but you call it whatever you like.  

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

7 minutes ago, daz28 said:

You're confusing censorship with just not doing what has been historically proven to be a really bad idea.  A good example of this is that one could go to an all black ghetto, and shout racist remarks just to see what happens, but it's a terrible idea.  Giving an audience to your enemies and known naked aggressors is a bad idea.  Suppose Kim Jong Un nukes America.  Should we interview him to find out why?  To me this is all COMPLETELY ABSURD.  Mr. Hitler, why did you exterminate the Jews, the American people need to know if and why that was justified.  Oh vey.

Campaigning for stopping dictators from naked aggression, but you call it whatever you like.  

It wasn't naked aggression, it was retaliation. Thinking is hard.

[KDIGGZ]

15 minutes ago, daz28 said:

You're confusing censorship with just not doing what has been historically proven to be a really bad idea.  A good example of this is that one could go to an all black ghetto, and shout racist remarks just to see what happens, but it's a terrible idea.  Giving an audience to your enemies and known naked aggressors is a bad idea.  Suppose Kim Jong Un nukes America.  Should we interview him to find out why?  To me this is all COMPLETELY ABSURD.  Mr. Hitler, why did you exterminate the Jews, the American people need to know if and why that was justified.  Oh vey.

Campaigning for stopping dictators from naked aggression, but you call it whatever you like.  

Read the book 1984. I think you would like to live in that kind of world. The rest of us do not. Nobody should have the power to pick and choose who gets censored and who does not. If Trump wins and says only right wing people are allowed to be on TV and everyone else gets silenced because they are evil would that be ok with you?

[wnyguy]

2 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said:

Read the book 1984. I think you would like to live in that kind of world. The rest of us do not. Nobody should have the power to pick and choose who gets censored and who does not. If Trump wins and says only right wing people are allowed to be on TV and everyone else gets silenced because they are evil would that be ok with you?

I don't know about daz but it would be a'ight with me.

[daz28]

14 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

It wasn't naked aggression, it was retaliation. Thinking is hard.

I'm talking about Putin invading Ukraine, but yeah, terrorism is worse than naked aggression, and requires an even stronger response, which they aren't entitled to retaliate, and cause American casualties.  Sheesh.  Are you pro-terrorism now?

5 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said:

Read the book 1984. I think you would like to live in that kind of world. The rest of us do not. Nobody should have the power to pick and choose who gets censored and who does not. If Trump wins and says only right wing people are allowed to be on TV and everyone else gets silenced because they are evil would that be ok with you?

Comparing giving airtime with American right wingers vs Hitler death squads is quite the stretch.  I can't believe anyone would consider American journalists not giving Hitler a platform from which to defend genocide to be "censorship".  Again, it's not and shouldn't be illegal, but just a really, really stupid idea.  

[daz28]

5 minutes ago, wnyguy said:

I don't know about daz but it would be a'ight with me.

No free speech should continue, but the consequences of using it should be heavily weighed.  People can do lots of things legally that are really bad ideas.  The fact that Tucker is getting good publicity for doing something really stupid is proof that free speech has consequences that can be good for some, but really bad for others.  

[wnyguy]

Just now, daz28 said:

No free speech should continue, but the consequences of using it should be heavily weighed.  People can do lots of things legally that are really bad ideas.  The fact that Tucker is getting good publicity for doing something really stupid is proof that free speech has consequences that can be good for some, but really bad for others.  

How do we know it's stupid until after the interview takes place? 

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

11 minutes ago, daz28 said:

I'm talking about Putin invading Ukraine, but yeah, terrorism is worse than naked aggression, and requires an even stronger response, which they aren't entitled to retaliate, and cause American casualties.  Sheesh.  Are you pro-terrorism now?

Comparing giving airtime with American right wingers vs Hitler death squads is quite the stretch.  I can't believe anyone would consider American journalists not giving Hitler a platform from which to defend genocide to be "censorship".  Again, it's not and shouldn't be illegal, but just a really, really stupid idea.  

I'm done with u. Have fun down your rabbit hole.

[daz28]

4 minutes ago, wnyguy said:

How do we know it's stupid until after the interview takes place? 

History.  Like I said, I could list dictators that it was a horrible idea to give a pulpit to, but I figured everyone already knew who they were.  I can't stress enough how Tucker has the right, but good sense should tell him it's not a good idea.  Money and popularity are the worst reasons possible to do it.  Would it have been absurd if a journalist went to Japan to ask them why they bombed Pearl harbor?  It's amazing that the same people who DESPISE Jane Fonda for her pro-Vietnam stance, are the same ones who are proponents of Tucker.  Again, this is so absurd to me, that I should just recuse myself from the discussion if i don't seem to be getting anywhere.

[KDIGGZ]

19 minutes ago, daz28 said:

Comparing giving airtime with American right wingers vs Hitler death squads is quite the stretch.  I can't believe anyone would consider American journalists not giving Hitler a platform from which to defend genocide to be "censorship".  Again, it's not and shouldn't be illegal, but just a really, really stupid idea.  

They are trying to make it illegal that's the thing. And yes, many including some on here would compare right wingers to Nazis. And even so, they interviewed Hitler many times. Heck, they even had a Nazi rally at Madison Square Garden at the height of the war! Because this is America so you should be free to be as dumb as you want to be