"They're all afraid!" Tucker Carlson illustrates what media can be with courage.

[badger2]

Carlson is absolutely frank in making the points he makes. That he noted that United Arab Emirates, a nation you would expect to be primarily Muslim, allows more freedom for Christian expression than does the United States was to make a point about liberty in the United States. It does not 'leave out' anything else.

Does Tucker think Trump would be able to ferret the deep state swamp out of the CIA and other government entities? No he doesn't. Neither do I. Neither do I think anybody else can without a super majority in Congress of similar mind to do just that.

Does He think that disqualifies Trump from being President? No he does not.

But he is absolutely certain the media will do their best to help the Democrats destroy Trump or anybody else who even makes an effort to do so.

You insist on Carlson's reifications and illusory use of islamochristian tolerance, while at the local level, we know very good and well xian chalk-talk started on campuses a few weeks ago, soon to be replaced by an intensified campaign.

This rise in xian nationalism is real. Within the last few days, this protection racket's intensity was stepped up with street preaching using amplifiers, (two different proselytizing groups [italics]), a phenomenon we have not seen in the capital of Wisconsin for years. This is a set-up for re-installing Trump. Because Trump played the xian card the last time, the xian mafia wishes to set the stage for a replay, though Carlson hasn't the stones to bring this up in front of others.

So at the local level, we can see xian nationalism ramping up their agenda. RFK Jr. is correct: the CIA needs to be dismantled and cast to the winds. Carlson is much too effeminate to actually be potent for IQs above 80.

 

[Donald H]

So Tucker now has the ability to lie as much as he cares to? Don't expect me to celebrate.

He's still got a lot of potential in that he will run his mouth carelessly on America's foreign policy.

But it's too bad he has to live with the admission that what he has said for Fox News can't be taken seriously.

 

[alang1216]

Perhaps you could point out a lie he told in that interview or a point he made that might have other perspective?

Didn't listen to the interview, I was referring to his past lies.

 

[Foxfyre]

You insist on Carlson's reifications and illusory use of islamochristian tolerance, while at the local level, we know very good and well xian chalk-talk started on campuses a few weeks ago, soon to be replaced by an intensified campaign.

This rise in xian nationalism is real. Within the last few days, this protection racket's intensity was stepped up with street preaching using amplifiers, (two different proselytizing groups [italics]), a phenomenon we have not seen in the capital of Wisconsin for years. This is a set-up for re-installing Trump. Because Trump played the xian card the last time, the xian mafia wishes to set the stage for a replay, though Carlson hasn't the stones to bring this up in front of others.

So at the local level, we can see xian nationalism ramping up their agenda. RFK Jr. is correct: the CIA needs to be dismantled and cast to the winds. Carlson is much too effeminate to actually be potent for IQs above 80.

So what did Carlson get wrong in that interview?

 

[alang1216]

He's still got a lot of potential in that he will run his mouth carelessly on America's foreign policy.

But it's too bad he has to live with the admission that what he has said for Fox News can't be taken seriously.

It's hard to get back trust or integrity once they're gone.

 

[Foxfyre]

Didn't listen to the interview, I was referring to his past lies.

You don't have to listen to anything. All you have to do is read the interview at the link provided in the OP.

And frankly, I think it pretty lame to not read the information in the OP before commenting. Especially when the purpose is just to insult.

Now if you can point out a 'lie' he told in that interview, you might be relevant here. Otherwise you're just trolling.

 

[Donald H]

It's hard to get back trust or integrity once they're gone.

Tucker is going to run his mouth carelesssly when his ratings make it necessary. He endangers US foreign policy secrets because he's hugely popular and is widely believed.

It's not that he knows more than the average American, it's because he has a soapbox created for him by the media and he's trying to keep it under his ass.

With luck, he'll find it necessary to blow the cover on America's war against Russia, to keep getting publicity!

 

[Donald H]

You don't have to listen to anything. All you have to do is read the interview at the link provided in the OP.

And frankly, I think it pretty lame to not read the information in the OP before commenting. Especially when the purpose is just to insult.

Now if you can point out a 'lie' he told in that interview, you might be relevant here. Otherwise you're just trolling.

clandestine nighttime invasion of Somalia in 1992 in "Operation Hope" to oust an illegal regime.

Try some other day.

 

[badger2]

So what did Carlson get wrong in that interview?

Carlson attempted to sanitize and fuzzy-animal the arrogant moth--er--fuck--s of a one-book protection racket, xianity. A mafia that hasn't the first qualm about molesting kids during the first weeks of Fall semester. A violent, narcissistic projection of knowledge-envy-driven pedophila. Arrogant bastards and their trollops. Boycott them lastingly.

 

[alang1216]

You don't have to listen to anything. All you have to do is read the interview at the link provided in the OP.

And frankly, I think it pretty lame to not read the information in the OP before commenting. Especially when the purpose is just to insult.

Now if you can point out a 'lie' he told in that interview, you might be relevant here. Otherwise you're just trolling.

I started reading the interview but stopped at the first lie. Most was just Tucker's opinions, I didn't agree with him but those were not lies. I only got as far as Devon Archer segment when Tucker claimed that Joe called Hunter during business meetings. Exactly not what Archer claimed. Not a big lie but definitely not the truth.

 

[Magnus]

Okay you got in your insults. Now would you like to comment on or discredit anything he said in that interview? good luck on that.

Okay, here is my comment without the insults.

The notion that Tucker Carlson has any credibility left after being proven publically that he is a liar is laughable.

A guy who will say one thing in private and then say something entirely different in public just for ratings or to keep the party bosses happy is in no shape to lecture others on good journalism.

As an example, he speaks highly of the UAE ruler. How do we know that Tucker hasn't been paid off? What credibility does he have?

How's that for straight talk? Want more?

 

[Donald H]

Okay, here is my comment without the insults.

The notion that Tucker Carlson has any credibility left after being proven publically that he is a liar is laughable.

A guy who will say one thing in private and then say something entirely different in public just for ratings or to keep the party bosses happy is in no shape to lecture others on good journalism.

As an example, he speaks highly of the UAE ruler. How do we know that Tucker hasn't been paid off? What credibility does he have?

How's that for straight talk? Want more?

Straight talk is saying that he's hugely popular and the American people are stupid enough to take him seriously.

That simply means that you should be right, but you're obviously not.

You should be having second thoughts about now on what America has created in the minds of the bozos!

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Perhaps start thinking of an event equivalent to the My Lai

Vietnamese Just Love to Kill White People

My Lai was a Communist stronghold. Men, women, and even children there were killing American soldiers at will. Race traitors were behind the unrealistic "hearts and minds" policy. The ruling class, whose sons never had to fight for us, shackled us with indigenous "allies" who were cowards, crooks, and collaborators.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Does Tucker think Trump would be able to ferret the deep state swamp out of the CIA and other government entities? No he doesn't. Neither do I. Neither do I think anybody else can without a super majority in Congress of similar mind to do just that.

Storming of the Bastille

Trump can do what Yeltsin did to his Congress in 1993.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

No. That was my own commentary to illustrate my response to your assertion that the press is honorable to protect necessary secrets. They aren't honorable about that or much of anything else these days. Which is most of what Tucker focused on in the interview. The modern MSM doesn't give a damn about ethics for the most part.

Jurinalism

Even worse than being pathological liars, the media are ignorant of history, logic, and grammar. They have no right to the jobs that their CliffsNotes "education" got them. The same can be said about the huffy-puffy blowhards prominent in all sectors of Terminal America.

 

[eagle1462010]

Did it contain that? LOL

Lol War Crimes??? Oust a Legal Regime. We were there to stop the stargation of a Nation. UN aid workers were being threatened and people starving lining up for Food were being Slaughtered by this Legal Regime.

We ended that shit. Fed people only to tuck tail and Run under that POS Clinton. A CNC who refused to support our military in the field.

His Legacy. Is dead Americans and a Movie Called Black Hawk Down.

 

[Magnus]

Straight talk is saying that he's hugely popular and the American people are stupid enough to take him seriously.

That simply means that you should be right, but you're obviously not.

You should be having second thoughts about now on what America has created in the minds of the bozos!

So, if he is "hugely popular" then it doesn't matter if he is a liar? Is that from your retard playbook?

No wonder you idiots adore the orange douchebag.

 

[Foxfyre]

Okay, here is my comment without the insults.

The notion that Tucker Carlson has any credibility left after being proven publically that he is a liar is laughable.

A guy who will say one thing in private and then say something entirely different in public just for ratings or to keep the party bosses happy is in no shape to lecture others on good journalism.

As an example, he speaks highly of the UAE ruler. How do we know that Tucker hasn't been paid off? What credibility does he have?

How's that for straight talk? Want more?

Do you ask the same questions of Biden? How do you now he isn't being paid for what he says? How do I know you aren't being paid to trash Tucker here? See how silly such a question actually is?

I say a lot of things in private that I would not say in public because it would not be appropriate or helpful. So do you. So does everybody. To criticize somebody privately and then state what a person has accomplished or got right in public is NOT a lie nor does it compromise a person's integrity. To change one's opinion about something over months or years is NOT a lie nor does it compromise a person's integrity. It is a pretty dull or fanatical person whose perception never changes when one matures or is better educated or has better information.

It is only what a person states as a certainty, a verifiable FACT when the person knows it is false as opposed to an opinion, that is a lie. A person who mistakes something as fact is not lying, but is just wrong. And those who are intellectually honest are able to distinguish between a personal opinion, a mistake, and something stated as verifiable fact.

Based on my opinion about that, Tucker lied about nothing in that interview.

 

[Foxfyre]

Jurinalism

Even worse than being pathological liars, the media are ignorant of history, logic, and grammar. They have no right to the jobs that their CliffsNotes "education" got them. The same can be said about the huffy-puffy blowhards prominent in all sectors of Terminal America.

There are still honest, honorable journalists (and public servants) out there but none are going to be infallible or get everything absolutely right. But when they find out they're wrong, the honest ones admit it. They won't admit they're wrong just because hateful people call them liars though. They admit they are wrong when they find out they are actually wrong.

I like to think Tucker Carlson is one of those even though I often disagree with his perception or opinion of something. And even though he can make a mistake, he exercises damn good journalism

 

[Foxfyre]

Storming of the Bastille

Trump can do what Yeltsin did to his Congress in 1993.

No he can't because Trump is constrained by the U.S. Constitution. Yeltsin was not.

And even though Trump did suggest setting aside one clause in the Constitution to deal with a unusual and chaotic situation in the 2020 election, everything he has said and done affirms that he is in his heart, mind, and soul a Constitutionalist.