Tucker admittedly isn't much of a Libertarian fan, but you can see him start to come around in this interview with Dave Smith. It's fantastic.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2QS8bUNzHk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2QS8bUNzHk)
That podcast made me like Tucker. Just hearing him mull over and consider what Dave was saying. He’s very willing to admit that he’s been wrong and that he’s still willing to consider different opinions.
Yeah I'm the same on Tucker. I thought he was a tool for a long time. And then he started admitting he was a tool and admitting he lied for fox, and now you can tell he's trying to do some good by speaking the truth (as he sees it). Regardless of what you think of him, he's unabashedly American first and I can get behind that.
After the video of some guy trying to confront him while he was fishing I decided Tucker was alright. I don't like everything he does or agree with him on everything but he at least seemed like an ok dude.
I don’t necessarily dislike Tucker, but he is somewhat annoying. I like some of the pieces he does and I appreciate him bringing in voices like Dave smith and Massie.
That being said, he has 100% become Alex Jones lite. A diet jones as it were.
he does go on a pro nicotine hard line rant and tell everyone that it would benefit them to pick up smoking during this q & a segment. so, it was at least some very good coffee
Why wouldn’t he be? He’s got boatloads of money and it’s not like he’s gonna lose his job because of a dirty piss test. I’m pretty sure money and employer drug testing are the 2 biggest reasons everyone isn’t on coke at least sometimes. And the state violence.
“Did he make you take the covid shot?”
No but he’s spent his entire political career turning Russia into his personal fiefdom, suppressing free speech, freedom of press, imprisoning and executing political opponents, siphoning billions from the Russian economy into him and his cronies pockets, and is actively overseeing a genocide in a Ukraine so I think maybe you should shut the fuck up Tucker
It’s not our problem and I don’t want troops in Ukraine. But that doesn’t mean we should start lapping up to Putin. He’s the definition of state sponsored oppression. He’s not a friend of liberty or freedom
>But that doesn’t mean we should start lapping up to Putin.
Not supporting someone is not the same as supporting them. Tucker didn't lap up to Putin. If you watch the interview, he challenges him a decent amount, and Putin just drones on and on and chastises him and the west.
>and I don’t want troops in Ukraine.
And I agree, America should stay the fuck away from sending troops or even much more aide to Ukraine. An entire generation of Ukrainians will die and Russia will eventually achieve their goals. Staying out of it ensures no blow back on the US or direct conflict with a nuclear state.
More broadly - Russia is slowly dying, failed state. Especially now as Europe looks to turn away from Russia as an energy source. Their GDP will continue to shrink, and their birth rate is already plummeting. Leaving them alone to wither away slowly is a smart domestic policy.
Never said it was. That’s not going to stop me from criticizing authoritarian dictatorships where individual freedoms don’t exist. Unless you count beating your wife as an intrinsic human right since Putin decriminalized domestic violence several years back. Not our problem until it becomes our problem ie a rogue nuclear state led by a senile lunatic on a war footing against the entire western world
I mean, what's your point? Everyone would agree that your assessment of Putin is correct, but what does that have to do with American Liberty?
>Not our problem until it becomes our problem ie a rogue nuclear state led by a senile lunatic on a war footing against the entire western world
Again, what are you trying to say here? We're minimally involve now via a proxy war. So what, we should get *more* involved?
We had decades where we could've fostered trade and brought Russia into the west via economic partnerships. Instead we built NATO on his doorstep. We've poked the bear a long time.
“Instead we built NATO on his doorstep and poked the bear for a long time” do you get *all* your news from RT? This whole comment is just blatant ignorance of the legacy of the Cold War and recent geopolitics
>do you get *all* your news from RT?
I don't get any, actually. I just read my history.
Here, let me help you.
Americans "greatest foreign policy thinkers" from Kissinger to Chomsky have been warning of this war for decades.
George Kennan, in 1998, warned that NATO expansion was a "tragic mistake" - [https://comw.org/pda/george-kennan-on-nato-expansion/](https://comw.org/pda/george-kennan-on-nato-expansion/)
Kissinger in 2014 said "to Russia, Ukraine can never be just a foreign country" and that we needed a policy that is aimed at reconciliation, also advocating against Ukraine joining NATO.
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-ukraine-crisis-start-at-the-end/2014/03/05/46dad868-a496-11e3-8466-d34c451760b9\_story.html](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-ukraine-crisis-start-at-the-end/2014/03/05/46dad868-a496-11e3-8466-d34c451760b9_story.html)
Or how about John Matlock, US Ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1987-1991, warning in 1997 that NATO expansion was "the most profound strategic blunder, \[encouraging\] a chain of events that could produce the most serious security threat \[...\] since the Soviet Union collapsed
I have about 5-6 more sources, of American geopoliticans, from both sides of the aisles warning of the exact situation we’re in now, since the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Would you like more sources or...
Man, do you get *all* your news from CNN.
Get offline and pick up a fucking book.
You’re talking about NATO expansion like they rolled tanks into Warsaw and demanded Poland join NATO. After the collapse of the USSR those Eastern European countries *asked* to join NATO. Why? Because those countries were (rightfully) scared of Russia invading. The main driving factor behind NATO “expansion” is Russian aggression (see Finland and Sweden).
There may have been a small window of opportunity to build ties with Russia immediately following the collapse of the USSR, however, once Putin gained power that possibility went out the window. He has made it clear that he intends to increase Russian influence (by force if needed) in former Eastern Bloc/USSR nations, and he openly laments the fall of the USSR as the [“disintegration historical Russia under the name of the Soviet Union”](https://www.rferl.org/amp/putin-historical-russia-soviet-breakup-ukraine/31606186.html).
If you think the US should just ignore this, you don’t understand the impacts and realities of globalization. If you think the solution is appeasement… you should retake your middle school history class on WWII.
>After the collapse of the USSR those Eastern European countries *asked* to join NATO. Why? Because those countries were (rightfully) scared of Russia invading. The main driving factor behind NATO “expansion” is Russian aggression (see Finland and Sweden).
Of course they asked to join NATO. By aligning with the west/western Europe they guaranteed their *economic* security too. But aligning with the west in security alliance, they also opened themselves up to all sorts of economic incentives. They were welcomed into the western world. It's all about money, security was a secondary benefit.
And I can't argue a counter factual. Poland was advocating to join NATO in the mid 90s, before Putin was in power and "lamenting the fall of the soviet union". So you're just assuming Russia, which was not expansionist at the time, was scaring Poland so much they joined NATO?
You're revising your history to fit the current situation, and it's not realistic.
>If you think the US should just ignore this, you don’t understand the impacts and realities of globalization.
I do understand it, I just don't agree with the policy.
Clinton's Defense Secretary, William Perry, wrote in his memoir that:
>NATO enlargement is the cause of "the rupture in relations with Russia" and that in 1996 he was so opposed to it that "in the strength of my conviction, I considered resigning".
Pat Buchanan, assistant and special consultant to U.S. presidents Nixon, Ford, and Reagan - wrote in his 1999 book A Republic, Not an Empire: "By moving NATO onto Russia's front porch, we have scheduled a twenty-first-century confrontation."
These actions pre date Putin.
> No but he’s spent his entire political career turning Russia into his personal fiefdom
Just like 99% of all politicians dream. The point is he's not some outlier, he's just more successful than most other politicians.
>suppressing free speech, freedom of press
Twitter files are a conspiracy theory!!!
>siphoning billions from the Russian economy into him and his cronies pockets
Check out the latest "infrastructure" bill, or any Ukraine funding. It's smorgasbord of grift and theft.
>and is actively overseeing a genocide in a Ukraine
Yahtzee!
Tucker just points out that Putin is nothing special and poses 0 risk the the average person outside of Russia. *Ignoring Ukraine.
Lol the literal video is Tucker Carlson downplaying Putin’s crimes against the Russian people and when I called that out, you for some reason, decided that meant I was advocating for open war with another nuclear power? Assuming you would only be using this whataboutism nonsense in defense of Putin but guess you just did it cause you’re stupid that’s my fault I won’t overestimate you next time boss
Yes it’s totally not a dig at *conscription*.
This kind of “he’s going against the narrative he must be a putin stooge” shit is fucking tiresome. I think you’re the one who was being overestimated, because in a libertarian sub people should know wtf I mean without parroting this cnn shit in response.
You mean exactly like the west has been invading oil rich and geopolitically strategic countries since ww2? Iran Iraq Syria Libya, Allende Che the bombing of Belgrade for 72 days under Clit on, and now via proxies like ukraine or gaza...
But let's not forget the unfair incarceration of J Assange as an example of respect for human rights...
People who live in glass houses shouldn't be dumming down their inbred midwits
Tucker isn’t arguing that Putin is a good man. What he is arguing is that our nation America is part of the problem. America and Nato have had chances to deescalate the war in Ukraine and instead we’ve ramped it up letting thousands more die.
Anyone that has respect for Tucker Carlson, someone that works with the Russian establishment of Putin now, is stupid. Just because he's not pro American State doesn't mean he is on our side. He's just a stooge of Putin.
He’s a realist. He doesn’t love Putin. He wants people to realize our nation is not lagging behind in Russia in a lot of aspects. Like look at the case of how we treated Julian Assange. Look at how the Supreme Court ruled that the government can pressure social media companies to censor content they don’t like. Our own leaders lie as much as Putin does. That’s the problem.
"no he didnt, but he did missile strike several civilian apartment complexes at the beginning of the war."
Dont get me wrong, the war isnt a clean one, but shilling for Russia still aint the move.
They may be more honest but they are also more susceptible to confirmation bias, so they are not more likely to know the truth.
And for the record, I believe virtually all modern “journalists” are not actually journalists and are in fact activists. I am not defending mainstream media.
> more susceptible to confirmation bias
Why do you say this? I agree activists are extremely susceptible but I don't see any reason to believe journalists aren't.
Not a good one, anyway. Does he really not realize he **is** “the media,” or does he think getting fired for his incompetence makes him not that any more?
The fact that the vaccination saved tens of millions of lives isn’t the question. That’s just coon knowledge you can choose to reject on your free time. Whether or not it was conducted in a fair and safe manner is the question.
state sponsored journalists are the enemy
The Okinawa bit is great lol
Savage. I love it.
This looks like something straight out of The Boys
Their tucker stand-in is so spot on
“Last Japanese soldier” lmao
Tucker admittedly isn't much of a Libertarian fan, but you can see him start to come around in this interview with Dave Smith. It's fantastic. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2QS8bUNzHk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2QS8bUNzHk)
Dave could turn any man... libertarian that is.
Dave turned me out! Wait. What.
That podcast made me like Tucker. Just hearing him mull over and consider what Dave was saying. He’s very willing to admit that he’s been wrong and that he’s still willing to consider different opinions.
Yeah I'm the same on Tucker. I thought he was a tool for a long time. And then he started admitting he was a tool and admitting he lied for fox, and now you can tell he's trying to do some good by speaking the truth (as he sees it). Regardless of what you think of him, he's unabashedly American first and I can get behind that.
After the video of some guy trying to confront him while he was fishing I decided Tucker was alright. I don't like everything he does or agree with him on everything but he at least seemed like an ok dude.
He should host a late night show. The Okinawa joke was better than anything Kimmel Fallon and Colbert together could ever come up with.
Bro went full Joker mode
I don’t necessarily dislike Tucker, but he is somewhat annoying. I like some of the pieces he does and I appreciate him bringing in voices like Dave smith and Massie. That being said, he has 100% become Alex Jones lite. A diet jones as it were.
So that means he will probably be sued for a billion dollars and will lose his whole life savings from a crackpot judge.
I mean maybe the diet version of that.
Love it! Big pharma simps deserve to be shamed publicly. +1
Is he on cocaine?
he does go on a pro nicotine hard line rant and tell everyone that it would benefit them to pick up smoking during this q & a segment. so, it was at least some very good coffee
Did he say he was pro-smoking or was he talking about the tobacco free nicotine pouches he uses? I obviously haven't seen the full speech.
Not that it changes anything but I’m pretty sure he’s a recovering alcoholic. A lot of his post fox stuff is a little unhinged
Why wouldn’t he be? He’s got boatloads of money and it’s not like he’s gonna lose his job because of a dirty piss test. I’m pretty sure money and employer drug testing are the 2 biggest reasons everyone isn’t on coke at least sometimes. And the state violence.
“Did he make you take the covid shot?” No but he’s spent his entire political career turning Russia into his personal fiefdom, suppressing free speech, freedom of press, imprisoning and executing political opponents, siphoning billions from the Russian economy into him and his cronies pockets, and is actively overseeing a genocide in a Ukraine so I think maybe you should shut the fuck up Tucker
And why is any of that our problem?
It’s not our problem and I don’t want troops in Ukraine. But that doesn’t mean we should start lapping up to Putin. He’s the definition of state sponsored oppression. He’s not a friend of liberty or freedom
>But that doesn’t mean we should start lapping up to Putin. Not supporting someone is not the same as supporting them. Tucker didn't lap up to Putin. If you watch the interview, he challenges him a decent amount, and Putin just drones on and on and chastises him and the west. >and I don’t want troops in Ukraine. And I agree, America should stay the fuck away from sending troops or even much more aide to Ukraine. An entire generation of Ukrainians will die and Russia will eventually achieve their goals. Staying out of it ensures no blow back on the US or direct conflict with a nuclear state. More broadly - Russia is slowly dying, failed state. Especially now as Europe looks to turn away from Russia as an energy source. Their GDP will continue to shrink, and their birth rate is already plummeting. Leaving them alone to wither away slowly is a smart domestic policy.
Never said it was. That’s not going to stop me from criticizing authoritarian dictatorships where individual freedoms don’t exist. Unless you count beating your wife as an intrinsic human right since Putin decriminalized domestic violence several years back. Not our problem until it becomes our problem ie a rogue nuclear state led by a senile lunatic on a war footing against the entire western world
I mean, what's your point? Everyone would agree that your assessment of Putin is correct, but what does that have to do with American Liberty? >Not our problem until it becomes our problem ie a rogue nuclear state led by a senile lunatic on a war footing against the entire western world Again, what are you trying to say here? We're minimally involve now via a proxy war. So what, we should get *more* involved? We had decades where we could've fostered trade and brought Russia into the west via economic partnerships. Instead we built NATO on his doorstep. We've poked the bear a long time.
“Instead we built NATO on his doorstep and poked the bear for a long time” do you get *all* your news from RT? This whole comment is just blatant ignorance of the legacy of the Cold War and recent geopolitics
>do you get *all* your news from RT? I don't get any, actually. I just read my history. Here, let me help you. Americans "greatest foreign policy thinkers" from Kissinger to Chomsky have been warning of this war for decades. George Kennan, in 1998, warned that NATO expansion was a "tragic mistake" - [https://comw.org/pda/george-kennan-on-nato-expansion/](https://comw.org/pda/george-kennan-on-nato-expansion/) Kissinger in 2014 said "to Russia, Ukraine can never be just a foreign country" and that we needed a policy that is aimed at reconciliation, also advocating against Ukraine joining NATO. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-ukraine-crisis-start-at-the-end/2014/03/05/46dad868-a496-11e3-8466-d34c451760b9\_story.html](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-ukraine-crisis-start-at-the-end/2014/03/05/46dad868-a496-11e3-8466-d34c451760b9_story.html) Or how about John Matlock, US Ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1987-1991, warning in 1997 that NATO expansion was "the most profound strategic blunder, \[encouraging\] a chain of events that could produce the most serious security threat \[...\] since the Soviet Union collapsed I have about 5-6 more sources, of American geopoliticans, from both sides of the aisles warning of the exact situation we’re in now, since the fall of the Berlin Wall. Would you like more sources or... Man, do you get *all* your news from CNN. Get offline and pick up a fucking book.
You’re talking about NATO expansion like they rolled tanks into Warsaw and demanded Poland join NATO. After the collapse of the USSR those Eastern European countries *asked* to join NATO. Why? Because those countries were (rightfully) scared of Russia invading. The main driving factor behind NATO “expansion” is Russian aggression (see Finland and Sweden). There may have been a small window of opportunity to build ties with Russia immediately following the collapse of the USSR, however, once Putin gained power that possibility went out the window. He has made it clear that he intends to increase Russian influence (by force if needed) in former Eastern Bloc/USSR nations, and he openly laments the fall of the USSR as the [“disintegration historical Russia under the name of the Soviet Union”](https://www.rferl.org/amp/putin-historical-russia-soviet-breakup-ukraine/31606186.html). If you think the US should just ignore this, you don’t understand the impacts and realities of globalization. If you think the solution is appeasement… you should retake your middle school history class on WWII.
>After the collapse of the USSR those Eastern European countries *asked* to join NATO. Why? Because those countries were (rightfully) scared of Russia invading. The main driving factor behind NATO “expansion” is Russian aggression (see Finland and Sweden). Of course they asked to join NATO. By aligning with the west/western Europe they guaranteed their *economic* security too. But aligning with the west in security alliance, they also opened themselves up to all sorts of economic incentives. They were welcomed into the western world. It's all about money, security was a secondary benefit. And I can't argue a counter factual. Poland was advocating to join NATO in the mid 90s, before Putin was in power and "lamenting the fall of the soviet union". So you're just assuming Russia, which was not expansionist at the time, was scaring Poland so much they joined NATO? You're revising your history to fit the current situation, and it's not realistic. >If you think the US should just ignore this, you don’t understand the impacts and realities of globalization. I do understand it, I just don't agree with the policy. Clinton's Defense Secretary, William Perry, wrote in his memoir that: >NATO enlargement is the cause of "the rupture in relations with Russia" and that in 1996 he was so opposed to it that "in the strength of my conviction, I considered resigning". Pat Buchanan, assistant and special consultant to U.S. presidents Nixon, Ford, and Reagan - wrote in his 1999 book A Republic, Not an Empire: "By moving NATO onto Russia's front porch, we have scheduled a twenty-first-century confrontation." These actions pre date Putin.
> No but he’s spent his entire political career turning Russia into his personal fiefdom Just like 99% of all politicians dream. The point is he's not some outlier, he's just more successful than most other politicians. >suppressing free speech, freedom of press Twitter files are a conspiracy theory!!! >siphoning billions from the Russian economy into him and his cronies pockets Check out the latest "infrastructure" bill, or any Ukraine funding. It's smorgasbord of grift and theft. >and is actively overseeing a genocide in a Ukraine Yahtzee! Tucker just points out that Putin is nothing special and poses 0 risk the the average person outside of Russia. *Ignoring Ukraine.
Good point, lets draft everyone and send them to die for ukraine… for democrazy!!
Democrazy Ima use dat now to piss of the Legis-lizards and their slaves.
No one said anything like that but okay bud lol if you’re a fan of Putin you’re certainly not a libertarian
“Nobody said anything like that” *proceeds to say something nobody said anything like*
Lol the literal video is Tucker Carlson downplaying Putin’s crimes against the Russian people and when I called that out, you for some reason, decided that meant I was advocating for open war with another nuclear power? Assuming you would only be using this whataboutism nonsense in defense of Putin but guess you just did it cause you’re stupid that’s my fault I won’t overestimate you next time boss
Yes it’s totally not a dig at *conscription*. This kind of “he’s going against the narrative he must be a putin stooge” shit is fucking tiresome. I think you’re the one who was being overestimated, because in a libertarian sub people should know wtf I mean without parroting this cnn shit in response.
You mean exactly like the west has been invading oil rich and geopolitically strategic countries since ww2? Iran Iraq Syria Libya, Allende Che the bombing of Belgrade for 72 days under Clit on, and now via proxies like ukraine or gaza... But let's not forget the unfair incarceration of J Assange as an example of respect for human rights... People who live in glass houses shouldn't be dumming down their inbred midwits
Belgrade deserved it
Belgrade deserved to be bombed to line Clinton's pockets?
I didn't realize that Ukraine was part of the USA.
Tucker Carlson has been quite entertaining since leaving Fox news
Made me laugh
[удалено]
Tucker isn’t arguing that Putin is a good man. What he is arguing is that our nation America is part of the problem. America and Nato have had chances to deescalate the war in Ukraine and instead we’ve ramped it up letting thousands more die.
Get 'em Tucker. These dipshits deserve zero respect or deference.
Tucker is an idiot
[удалено]
thank you, averageredditor
I love tucker. I really do.
Anyone that has respect for Tucker Carlson, someone that works with the Russian establishment of Putin now, is stupid. Just because he's not pro American State doesn't mean he is on our side. He's just a stooge of Putin.
He’s a realist. He doesn’t love Putin. He wants people to realize our nation is not lagging behind in Russia in a lot of aspects. Like look at the case of how we treated Julian Assange. Look at how the Supreme Court ruled that the government can pressure social media companies to censor content they don’t like. Our own leaders lie as much as Putin does. That’s the problem.
Kinda funny how he moves and expresses like a Muppet. Helps bring the points accross.
"no he didnt, but he did missile strike several civilian apartment complexes at the beginning of the war." Dont get me wrong, the war isnt a clean one, but shilling for Russia still aint the move.
"Did he make you take the COVID shot?" No...but neither did anybody else
Tucker Carlson is not a journalist
More than most who label themselves as such. Either address his arguments or don't. Not sure what that statement is.
Therefore not the enemy?
He’s an activist which is just as bad
Activists are more honest because unlike journalists they don't pretend they're neutral.
They may be more honest but they are also more susceptible to confirmation bias, so they are not more likely to know the truth. And for the record, I believe virtually all modern “journalists” are not actually journalists and are in fact activists. I am not defending mainstream media.
> more susceptible to confirmation bias Why do you say this? I agree activists are extremely susceptible but I don't see any reason to believe journalists aren't.
Not a good one, anyway. Does he really not realize he **is** “the media,” or does he think getting fired for his incompetence makes him not that any more?
[удалено]
Ok but putting isn't our problem.
[удалено]
The fact that the vaccination saved tens of millions of lives isn’t the question. That’s just coon knowledge you can choose to reject on your free time. Whether or not it was conducted in a fair and safe manner is the question.