Tucker Carlson’s interview with Vladimir Putin tonight will deliver an antidote to dangerous Russophobia in the U.S. while unleashing an insane reaction from Western elites.
— Scott Ritter (@RealScottRitter) February 9, 2024
By Scott Ritter
Scott Ritter Extra
The former Fox News talk show host-turned independent media phenomenon, Tucker Carlson, is in Moscow, where he has committed the mortal sin of interviewing Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The interview is scheduled to air at 6 pm eastern time tonight, Thursday, Feb. 8. Let there be no doubt — Tucker Carlson has pulled off one of the most memorable journalistic accomplishments in modern history, and when the interview does air, it will — literally and figuratively — break the internet.
As someone who has travelled to Russia twice in the past year to engage in “people’s diplomacy” designed to advocate for better US-Russian relations, I applaud Tucker Carlson’s decision to go to Moscow and get this interview.
The American people have been infected with a virulent case of Russophobia transmitted to them via a political and economic elite who have built a model of American relevance predicated on the need for an enemy capable of sustaining a military industrial and congressional complex by justifying an expansive budget that leaves America weaker and shareholders wealthier.
Rampant Russophobia threatens American security by creating a false sense of danger around which policies that could lead to a military confrontation with Russia—and nuclear war—are formulated and implemented. If the American people are to have any hope of surviving the next decade, then an antidote to the disease of Russophobia must be administered.
This antidote is not difficult to acquire — it consists of fact-based truth grounded in a realistic understanding of the world we live in, inclusive of a sovereign Russia. The real issue is administering this antidote because the traditional vectors for the dissemination of information in America — the so-called mainstream media — have long since been corrupted by the very political and economic elites who are promoting Russophobia to begin with.
Love him or hate Tucker Carlson (I am guilty of having done both; I currently count Tucker as one of the “good guys”), he represents a massive media presence that operates outside the span of control of the informational elite in America, a social media-based presence which, given its association with Elon Musk’s “free speech” platform, X (the former Twitter), cannot be shut down or silenced.
Carlson Interviews Trump, August 2023
(Fox News Screenshot)
Quantifying the “Tucker Carlson factor” is a challenge. Back in August 2023, Tucker interviewed former President Donald Trump; the interview was streamed at the same time as a prime-time Republican Party presidential debate that Trump had boycotted. Fox News, which broadcast the debate, attracted some 12.8 million viewers during the two-hour broadcast.
Donald Trump later posted on X that the interview had received 236 million views a day after it was streamed. But that number reflects what X calls “impressions,” not actual views—that number was just shy of 15 million (not as impressive, but still beating out the Fox debate.)
Let’s be clear — major networks would kill to have 15 million viewers (the final episode of the HBO hit series “Game of Thrones” brought in 13.8 million viewers, the most in that network’s history.) There are outliers — the 1983 final episode of MASH attracted 136 million viewers, and the 2023 Super Bowl drew over 115 million.
But for Tucker Carlson to bring in 15 million viewers for an independent social media event was unprecedented. And while “impressions” aren’t “views,” per se, they cannot be discounted — 236 million “impressions” means Tucker was moving the needle somewhere.
And, when it comes to delivering an antidote to Russophobia, these “impressions” matter as much as the actual views. Let there be no doubt — the Tucker Carlson interview tonight with Vladimir Putin will attract huge numbers of viewers — most likely shattering records for a streaming event on X.
But we are at the stage where the actual content of the interview doesn’t matter — the mere fact that this interview has taken place has set the information world on fire. The amount of support Tucker Carlson has received is impressive — a clear indication of the power of alternative media.
Unhinged, Un-American Reactions
Please watch this video and see for yourself how completely unhinged, authoritarian and repressive American liberals have become.
This is from a lawyer, very seriously discussing whether Tucker Carlson will be prosecuted under the 1917 Espionage Act for interviewing Putin. https://t.co/jrfIUE9a6i
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) February 7, 2024
But the real tell is in the extreme vitriol the idea of this interview has produced among the ranks of the political and media elite in the United States and Europe.
It seems that every major personality in the mainstream media has weighed in on the issue, universally condemning Tucker for daring to operate outside his “lane.” No, it seems, the right to interview Vladimir Putin apparently resides only with the chosen few, those self-anointed gatekeepers through which all information suitable for public consumption must pass.
Tucker has also been vilified by a class of political elites who have, together with their like-minded accomplices in the mainstream media, been responsible for infecting the minds of average Americans with Russophobia-laced nonsense.
For Tucker’s sin, these elites have called for his excommunication — his passport seized, travel bans, and even criminal prosecution.
These American elites have gone insane.
Their arrogance in assuming that they represent some sort of moral and ethical police force imbued with extra-constitutional powers designed to punish free speech when the content is no longer convenient to the official narrative is matched only by their collective ignorance of the Constitution when it comes to free speech.
Their actions are the living embodiment of un-American activities, an irony that seems to escape them as they attack Tucker Carlson’s patriotism for having the audacity to give a platform to perhaps the most important voice about the most critical issue of our time.
Moreover, the stupidity of these elites is mind-bending.
If they truly believe Tucker Carlson’s platforming of Vladimir Putin is a bad idea, then the appropriate response is to turn to the U.S. Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court. In this, we have the example of Justice Louis Brandeis, who opined on the issue of free speech and its relationship to American values while hearing arguments in the 1927 case, Whitney v. California. He argued:
“If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence. Only an emergency, can justify repression.”
The question before us, then, is whether Tucker Carlson’s interview of Vladimir Putin constitutes an emergency warranting repression. Brandeis provides guidance in answering this question by referring to the founding fathers of the United States of America. He wrote:
“They [the founding fathers] believed that freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think are means indispensable to the discovery and spread of political truth: that, without free speech and assembly, discussion would be futile; that, with them, discussion affords ordinarily adequate protection against the dissemination of noxious doctrine; that the greatest menace to freedom is an inert people. Believing in the power of reason as applied through public discussion, they eschewed silence coerced by law—the argument of force in its worst form.”
Tucker Carlson’s detractors do not seek to engage him in a battle of ideas—the kind of discussion based upon the power of reason embraced by the founding fathers. If they chose this path, they would be engaging in activities that represented the quintessential value of American free speech.
As Brandeis noted, “we have nothing to fear from the demoralizing reasonings of some, if others are left to demonstrate their errors and especially when the law stands ready to punish the first criminal act produced by the false reasonings; these are safer corrections than the conscience of the judge.”
Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 1, 1923. Brandeis is third from the right. (National Photo Company Collection/Wikimedia Commons)
Fantasy-Laced Fiction
Tucker Carlson has not committed any criminal act. If people disagree with his actions, once the interview with the Russian President becomes public (his words or the words of President Putin), then they are free to demonstrate the errors of Tucker, Putin, or both.
The problem, however, is that the proponents of Russophobia operate in a fact-free environment, where ideological hatred has replaced informed judgment, where actual knowledge about Russia has been supplanted with fantasy-laced fiction.
They fear Tucker Carlson’s interview with Vladimir Putin because, through this interview, ideas, narratives, and facts that have been ignored or suppressed by the political and media elites will be set forth in unfiltered fashion for the American public to consider free of the influence of those who seek to manipulate the population through narrative manipulation.
One such “gatekeeper” is Fred Hoffman, a retired U.S. Army Colonel who served as a Foreign Area Officer and who has converted this service into a teaching sinecure at Mercyhurst University in Erie, Pennsylvania. “The main problem I have with Tucker Carlson interviewing Vladimir Putin,” Hoffman noted in a recent posting on X, “is that Carlson is being used as a tool, a ‘Useful Idiot,’ in the Kremlin’s strategic disinformation campaign against the West.”
Not one to let an opportunity for defending free speech to pass me by, I authored a reply:
 |
One would hope that self-proclaimed “national security experts” like Hoffman would welcome the opportunity to dissemble the illogic and fallacies they believe will be present in the product of Tucker Carlson’s interview with President Putin. I, for one, would relish this kind of intellectual combat, an opportunity to demonstrate to the public the strength of my ideas and the flaws of those of my opponent.
But Hoffman and his ilk do not relish such a challenge, in large part because of the deficit of fact and logic inherent in their position. Putin and Russia, in their minds, have been reduced into a simplified black and white, good-versus-evil caricature which exists only to mock and criticize.
Any action which provides the target of this debasement with an opportunity to defend itself, to put forward alternative facts, to challenge the status quo narrative, must be avoided at all costs, for the simple fact that Hoffman and his colleagues are ill-equipped to engage in such activity.
The hard-hitting journalism that CNN wants to see from Tucker Carlson ?pic.twitter.com/cWPzfMXRxH
— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) February 8, 2024
Greatest Threat to Russophobia
Tucker Carlson’s interview with President Putin represents the greatest threat to the proponents of Russophobia in recent history.
I say this with more than a little bitterness, for myself and others have been at the forefront of the struggle against Russophobia for years, with minimal impact.
Watching Tucker Carlson swoop into Moscow and accomplish in days what I have been struggling to do over the course of a lifetime is, to be frank, a hard pill to swallow, especially when I had myself submitted a request back in September 2023 for an interview with the Russian president.
Would I have loved to have the opportunity that has been given to Tucker Carlson?
Hell, yes.
Am I upset that he got this interview, and I did not?
To be honest, I was — more than a little.
But that’s because I’m only human, and jealousy is very much a human trait that resides inside me as much as anyone else.
But I’m over it.
Let’s be honest — I’m an expert, a historian.
I’m not your classic journalist.
My ideal interview with Vladimir Putin would be in the form of a conversation where I could learn about the challenges he faced in the early years of his presidency, overcoming the inherited legacy of the catastrophe of the 1990’s.
Of how he and Akhmad Kadyrov brought an end to the Chechen conflict.
About what prompted his address to the Munich Security Conference in 2007.
How he overcame the dominance of the oligarch class and create an economy that enriches Russia, and not Russian billionaires.
I’d want to know how he felt about the betrayal of the Minsk Accords.
The betrayal of the United States when it came to arms control.
About his connection with the Russian people.
My interview would have had no “gotcha” moments.
It would lack the drama of the hunt, where the wily interviewer seeks to find the chink in the logic of the interviewed.
In short, my interview would have bored the living hell out of an American audience. And it would not have moved the needle in any appreciative manner when it comes to overcoming Russophobia in America today.
Tucker Carlson is an accomplished journalist. He knows how the game is played. There is no doubt that he will package the interview with President Putin in a manner which is both informative and entertaining.
He will elicit responses designed to create controversy in the United States and Europe, to challenge the official narrative, and to inject a new point of view into the American public.
In short, Tucker’s interview will be everything that any interview I might have conducted would not have been. It will be a game-changing moment, a historical event.
It will shake Russophobia in America to its core and, in doing so, hopefully set in motion the grounds for a broader discussion of US-Russian relations that could set America on a trajectory away from conflict, helping eliminate the possibility of a nuclear war.
Such a result would be a good thing. And it is my duty to be prepared to use whatever resources I can muster to help facilitate such a national dialogue.
I applaud Tucker Carlson for having the courage to make this trip to Russia, and to pursue this interview.
As I know from personal experience, the cost one pays for undertaking such a journey is high.
But I also know that the benefits of such a journey, from the perspective of what is good for America, outweigh these costs.
I am convinced that Tucker Carlson is doing what he believes is best for America.
My hope is that most Americans will come to share this belief and that, because of this interview, America will find itself on a path where peaceful coexistence with Russia is the preferred outcome.
Scott Ritter is a former U.S. Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties, in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD. His most recent book is Disarmament in the Time of Perestroika, published by Clarity Press.
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
Thank you Scott Ritter. I hope you get to interview President Putin.
Ben Norton reminds us of who the real Tucker Carlson is:
Watch “Putin debunks Tucker Carlson’s warmongering anti-China propaganda, mocks his CIA ties” on YouTube
hxxps://youtu.be/JzEc5GbSbIU?si=thGuVq52IzbMIqOi
It’s now Saturday morning and over 100 million have watched the interview, and Establishment West has responded much along the lines of Hillary Rodham with Carlson as useful idiot and a lot of raving about propaganda etcetera etcetera. One alternative media is beginning to push the idea Carlson has been merely transferred from his previous mainstream position where he mostly mouthed The Right Wing to a new position, with X, subtly being placed by the Same Powers to do their nefarious bidding and whatever they’re up to now. Also, there’s been a lot of smug talk that Carlson was just “softballing” Putin and everything was predictable out of the man’s mouth, nothing new, it was all expected. So it all comes down to evading what Putin actually said in order to gloss over and jabber about Carlson Carlson Carlson and whether he should be imprisoned along with Assange.
I would like to discuss one more point that I have not yet seen mentioned in any “summary” of what was said. That is, at one point, and I don’t have the precise minute, but it was well into the conversation, Putin responded to a question Carlson brought up with a decided grin on this face and said in effect: “That is the boogie-man theory of China.” This boogie man theory might well have been close to Carlson’s heart, at least the old Carlson of before he became re-born as a truth-loving Patriot Truth Seeker Of The First Order, or whatever he’s become. But this moment showed a) the US needs to try to wake up and get serious about China instead of its current idiocy re Taiwan etc. and b) suggested what Putin thought of Carlson. Moscow has refused to say what Putin thought of his interviewer but, for me at least, that moment suggested it. Answer: not much. Schoolboy type probably with a not long enough attention span.
I have just waded thru the comments and am wrapt by the number of educated people that mention that a lot of US citizens are finally realizing that the hegemony they desire is being fairly challenged thruout the world..
Call me cynical, go right ahead and do it.
I just started to watch this interview and immediately, toward the end of the first two minutes, I have a problem.
Putin is former KGB and immediately my antennae picked up on something I feel must be pointed out, a subtlety ( as in, per Merriam Webster’s – synonyms -, of which there are 18 listed that cover what one might expect from a KBG agent, I will list my top six picks caginess, craft, cunningness, guile, slyness, wiliness ).
I, as an old survivor have learned over the years one might want to be careful about jumping before choosing a spot to land.
Which brings me to my point here, I for one wold be very cautious in jumping too quick onto the ‘Tucker Carlson Network” bandwagon. I have to admit I know nothing, nada about the “Tucker Carlson Network” but I looked at his site and hit the “what is TCN” button and quickly became wary.
Tucker, dog bless his pointy “big” head, should have all the Fox money he needs to fund his future. Seems he has learned well from the ways of Orange Turd, i.e. methods “of pulling blood out of a turnip”, raising funds from his base, as it were. You may or may not excuse my reservations about accepting the comments of either of these two gentlemen at face value here.
I’m more than willing the let the “dough rise overnight or a fortnight for that matter. I mean what the hell the U.S. has been leading Ukrainians to the meat grinder for a year now, which leads me to my final point here.
The Israelis have been engaging in the raging blood lust genocide in Gaze for quite sometime now. Putin engaging in a history lesson on Russia’s historical rights, a legitimate claim, is he making here, I’ll let those lofty history Ph.D.’s out there decide but I do have some knowledge, very little, on the subject. Which, it is said can be dangerous in the wrong hands. WTHE
My point is I cannot imagine that Putin does not have “frosted” gonads about this entire Ukrainian debacle which has cost Russia and Ukraine very dearly.
So excuse me while I suffer through two hours of more TV news while I watch the remainder of this interview. I would assume that most see that by now I have serious reservations about this event currently.
I will say this if Carlson brings peace to the Ukraine and Israel I will be willing to eat crow and have it streamed live somehow. It actually doesn’t taste so bad if it is prepared right. Think BBQ!
Now with appropriate apologies to Mr. Ritter, remember this, if making peace was easy anybody could do it, maybe even Tucker. Hell, he might be vying for VP under Trump for all I know.
As I have stated more times that I care to count, “This entire situation should been and could have handled mush differently.” But hell the defense industry is booming and so are the market.
DOG give me strength enough to sit through 2 hour plus of “The Tuck and Pooty Show”.
Thanks CN
Is that CNN Zelenskyy interview for real? It looks like a video satire of journalism, blatant almost to the point of transparency, propaganda. I’d like to find it elsewhere to see something was done to it to make it that ridiculous. Feel free to tell me. Thanks.
thank you Consortium for attention to Tucker Carlson interview. He is brave to do this….Am glad some support him, as here.
It was sure an interesting interview, but for a reason or another Carlson wasn’t able to challenge Putin and make it “the interview of the century”; for example, when Putin said the Russia economy did better than the European countries, Carlson should ask him if that was due to the “economy of war” rather than genuine economic dynamism and if that was sustainable.
Why he didn’t???
still, thank you Carlson, there was some interesting takeaways.
Now Carlson interviewing Zelensky? he should, although Zelensky would probably decline. It would show Carlson interested in hearing both sides.
There is no “both sides” about it. The Obama administration overthrew the elected government of Ukraine and proceeded to shell easter Ukraine (the Donbas) for eight years. NATO moved right up to Russia’s borders. Russia is defending itself and it is winning, thank goodness. Ukraine is a Nazi puppet serving NATO and U.S. aggression.
Now Tucker needs to interview Alexei Navalny to keep everything fair and balanced!
Navalny is a right wing racist. A POS.
Kudos to Tucker and Scott.
Tucker’s interview was NOT madness. It was something that should have been done years ago multiple times by real journalists. I hope that many , many Americans were able to watch that interview, and watch it with open minds. I thought it was exceptional and absolutely necessary. Thank you Tucker! Noel S. Cowling
The “Madness” refers to the hostile reaction to the interview.
I thought it was brilliant. I watched it and printed out the transcript to study. Anyone who opposes this interview is in league with the neocon war criminals. Period.
This event is obviously of great value. Profound and needing study. I would like to discuss the following particular point in the talk.
About the one hour 30 minute mark comes some very interesting conversation. Tucker asks him who are America’s leaders. A pause, then, “I don’t know.” He talks of the American system as complex, “conservative on the one hand, rapidly changing on the other. It is very difficult to understand it.”
Then he says, “Look, why in my opinion . . . after the collapse of the Soviet Union such an erroneous, crude completely unjustified policy of pressure was pursued against Russia. After all, this is a policy of pressure, Nato expansion, (unclear), creation of a missile defense system. These are all elements of pressure. Pressure, pressure, pressure. Then dragging Ukraine into Nato is all about pressure, pressure, pressure. Why?”
He continues that during the confrontation with the Soviet Union came “specialists on the Soviet Union who could not do anything else but convince the (American) leadership that it is necessary to continue chiseling Russia to try to break it up, to create several quasi-state entities . . . and use them to break it up for the future struggle with China . . . This is a mistake . . . it is necessary to get rid of them. There should be new fresh forces, people who are looking to the future and what is developing in the world.”
Watching at this point two thoughts struck me. One that Putin was talking about the 90’s and the development of PNAC, the Project for a New American Century, and the entrenchment of the neocon movement in terms of coming to dominate US policy. The chance was upon America to at last dominate the globe without a competitor and put it to proper order. Of course, for this end certain countries needed to be eviscerated, there was a list, and to get on with it a new Pearl Harbor would be necessary.
The second thought was—and possibly influenced by the look on Tucker’s face—that he needed to study this period. It occurred to me he didn’t know anything about it.
hxxtps://tuckercarlson.com/the-vladimir-putin-interview/
(corrections appreciated)
hetro – Thank you for your comment; “the look on Tucker’s face—that he needed to study this period. It occurred to me he didn’t know anything about it.”
History has fascinated me since high school. In contrast, I’ve observed that Americans, including college educated ones, even those who share my age (70), can’t identify the names of America’s allies in World War 2. They don’t ask why?
It was reassuring to witness Tucker Carson probe Putin for the historical and pragmatic background for the Ukraine war.
Carson asked questions. That’s the role of a journalist in a free society. It’s also the duty of every citizen in a free society.
Keep on truckin Carson.
Putin was absolutely correct.
Putin is surprisingly soft spoken, focused, and very much in control. Initially he seemed to spend a bit too much time on Russian history explaining the connections between Russia and Ukraine, but afterwards I felt it enriched the interview. Being the only interview between an American journalist and Vladimir Putin there was a lot to topics to be covered, much of it was. a job well done by Tucker Carlson.
The USA and Russia both would have been better off today had the powers at the time, 1991, utilized the Marshall Plan as Russia found its market-legs; instead, it enacted the Wolfowitz Doctrine. It was stated that Dick Cheney drafted the Wolfowitz Doctrine; its intention is to keep the US as the #1 power in the world.
The “Rape of Russia” by Anne Williamson was a report she wrote as a WSJ reporter during that time. Williamson was invited to share this report to the Banking Committee of the Senate. It is a worthwhile read for all Americans. The USA could have been kinder to Russia as they endured tough challenges trying to establish a market-based economy.
It would be wise, now, to finally make peace with the Russian Federation.
It is, however, a shame that it became a market-based economy. I am a socialist and the market-based capitalist system is still a disaster for the working class.
Just finished watching — a superb interview. Tucker is far more intelligent than he looks and handled the 2-hour conversation extremely well. Putin is what a leader should be — in command of his material, his inner poise, and the needs of the moment. It makes our leaders look as shabby and incompetent as they are.
Have a look hxxps://tuckercarlson.com/
Absolutely right. I agree.
To me, it really doesn’t matter what people think of Tucker Carlson or Vladimir Putin – what matters is that this interview will be watched by millions of people around the world who otherwise would not have made the effort to listen to the ‘other’ side of the matter, the Russian side.
While Putin makes very long and detailed speeches, they are rarely, if ever, reported accurately in the western mainstream media, and when they are, they are selectively edited to make him and Russia look bad.
This interview is a huge opportunity for people around the world, not just in the west, to hear the Russian point of view without too much distortion and censoring. Although it would be naive to suggest that everything Putin says is 100% accurate and truthful, it will nevertheless provide a much needed contrast against which people can assess the official narratives we’ve been receiving in the west about the ‘evil’ Russians, and then most importantly – decide for ourselves.
We will be suddenly much better informed because Putin knows his history very well, and also knows his facts and figures very well, too. His style is to inform his audience whereas the Western leaders’ styles are to harangue and incite confusion and hatred. Our leaders lie blatantly – they know it, and they know that many of us know it, too.
The fact that even before the interview has been aired, western leaders and their vassals are apoplectic with anger – and fear, and doing their feeble best to persuade everybody not to watch it and not to believe anything that Putin says – as if we were little children being told that something is bad for us.
Imagine if Barbara Walters was greeted with the same degree of McCarthyite opprobrium for interviewing (and superficially displaying chemistry with) Fidel Castro in 1977, as Cuban forces were intervening abroad in Angola and the Horn of Africa, in spite of the pointed questions that she did put to him. Furthermore, imagine that she was expected to uncritically whitewash and fawn over Jonas Savimbi and Siad Barre instead, ignoring any evidence of their thuggery or corruption.
Perhaps the difference in that case was that at least the Cubans were protecting news personalities’ investments in Chevron-Gulf (see “Chapter XI: Chevron-Gulf Keeps Marxist Angola Afloat,” in Antony C. Sutton’s 1986 book “The Best Enemy Money Can Buy”), whereas in this case, Gazprom’s gain is Royal Dutch Shell and Burisma’s loss (Matt Pratten, “The Russia-Ukraine Donbass Conflict and the Threats to the Oil and Gas Industry,” Intelligence Fusion, September 12, 2021)?
Well done, Tiucker.
Regardless of the outcome, it is wha is needed here to overcome the news (lies) we see every day from MSM.
But careful there. The truth got Julian Assange into trouble as we all know. I cannot see how this can be viewed as anything different from getting the real truth as he did so long ago now. One thing the US cannot tolerate is The Truth.
I do hope he raises the MH 17 story now that the courts have dismissed Russia as the killer of all those passengers and crew.
Can anyone imagine a top journaist from Russia having the same opportunity as Calrson with Biden? Nor can I.
Oh my gosh, let us suppose Tucker was to take an unfortunate fall out a window while there. What would we do?
What would we do?
Scott you are a masterful word smith here. Did I miss some hints of sarcasm?
I do have to wonder after after your comment about Fred’s sinecure teaching position. I’m sure that you are well aware Fred is only one of thousands of retired military who hole sinecure positions in institutions of higher learning. And I do unequivocally agree with you in this point.
Including the very photogenic Ms. Burnett having such a touching hiatus with the funny man President of Ukraine was a nice touch also.
But as word wrangled your way to finish The Greatest Threat to Russophobia I could help but recognize you might well be attempting to register your disappointment through a bit of humorous sarcastic cynicism.
Maybe not, regardless, this is what it is.
Thanks again CN
I can hardly wait for the kerfuffle especially in the MSM, MIC and the administration. Thank you Tucker Carlson for at least trying to open the minds of the masses in this country!
It clearly indicates that ‘freedom of speech’ clearly is nothing more than a mirage. It is quite obvious that the white Western world can’t stand to hear facts – only fairly tales that suit its nefarious intentions. Civilized? Educated? Not by a long shot.
The current problem the U.S. has is not in Russia. The problem is and has been in Washington D.C. , at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20500, and I might add the silent, politically unengaged millions of individuals who defer to the MSM for their information about the performance of our government.
The results of the cancer of “Greed”, unlimited monies showered on the inhabitants of the swamp, i. e. permeating the District of Columbia and the surrounding environs, in earnest, for at least the last sixty years.
Our governmental system has been severely damaged by too much money. Those having the most money buying the most influence to sway the political power available through congress in the direction They desire and to hell with everyone and everything else.
The magnificently wealthy, Orange Turd, Billy “wonder boy” Gates and the marvelously ” Mad, as in crazy as a shit house mouse”, Elon Musk are absolutely some of the greatest examples. (For the sake of Dog I pray the Orange Turd reads this, maybe it will buoy his mood some). I mean Tucker Carlson representing the U.S. MSM in Russia.
Could very well be that Mr. Ritter has hit the bullseye here. I understand his logic, I simply am dumbfounded by this development.
Those politically unengaged millions I spoke of earlier desperately need to wake the hell up, they and everyone here must take a moment and think about what is about to happen with the specter of this interview looming in the near future.
Mr. Ritter’s piece here, framed in gold gilded possibilities of encouraging rhetoric are quite the leap of faith in my opinion, given Mr. Carlson’s erratic and irresponsible on air performances in the past. But then is it TV and MSM’s clown shows that produce such garbage.
That said even a “blind Hog” finds a acorn once in the while.
One the other hand I have grave reservations about this. Mr. Ritter says above, four lines from the end, “I am convinced that Tucker Carlson is doing what he believes is best for America.”
Scott with all do respect here, and I have been a fan our yours since your days in Iraq, with regard to, ” . . doing what is best for America . . .” isn’t that exactly what so many did when the voted for the O. T. in 2016 and who rioted on January 6.
Every once in the while being the cynic pays dividends and I don’t trust anyone who rose to the level of Carlson at Faux News any further than I could throw them.
For the sake of DOG give me strength. You cannot make this stuff up!
Thanks CN
P.S. On the state of the American condition I have only to say this, I’m well below 10% on the propane tank I use for hot water and heat and I learned today I’m not on the list for delivery.
Welcome to the era of the results of Zionist influence overwhelming our government. Can you say Ukraine?
Ya’ ll have a nice day!
Bravo! A glimmer of hope for a nation of dopes!
The backlash from the state press organs will be odious and onerous, but more than a few, attracted by perceived salaciousness, will stand with eyes opened and unveiled by hideous Blob-imposed propaganda for the first time as a result.
We are at such a critical juncture in time as a species: one of trained perceptions vs a true epiphany of critical thinking, one can hope even several Congresspersons will climb—if even for a moment—out of their hyper-politicized shells to look at the world anew. It’s a lot to ask, as brain-dead and conformist our institutions have become.
As a result of U.S.-NATO policies the world is now a seething, roiling mass of rebelliousness to our governments, Western to the Orient. We have ticked off on a list of transgressions from Gaza to Ukraine, and each nation’s populace in its own way is responding to these transgressions emanating from the elites operating this plutocracy so aloofly—so far. The fact is, the majority of the planet’s population is ‘ticked-off’ indeed.
Finally.
Here’s to hope—that this is the beginning of something good and the vanquishing of poisoned delusions.
Very well said Sir, very well said1
Yikes, a self-proclaimed expert warning us about the self-proclaimed experts in journalism lying to us and that we should listen to the giant, noble Carlson for our truths now. What’s a poor citizen to do with this mess. Are we to forget Carlson’s dishonesty about a stolen election, or his degrading comments about immigrants making this country poorer and dirtier, or his calling Jan 6 neither organized nor violent? WTH? Now he is going to save Russia from it’s critics here in America with his awesome skills that are much like the great truth teller ,Putin, himself.
I am not Russophobic. I’ve loved that country since I was a teen, reading many Russian authors and trying to find out about the character of Russians. I loved that they practiced kitchen table politics and listening respectfully to each other. They seemed to me to a serious minded people with the same interest as us, that our leaders should reflect their values. Didn’t happen there or here of course.
Don’t think Putin lies? All leaders do, and add to that his propensity to murder and isolate his critics and you got yourself a real pillar of society. Out of this will come the great awakening of America! Probably not. Maybe this is all about experts telling us how ignorant we are about the big mysterious world.
Hmmm, you do not need to listen to Carlson and you disagree with some of his opinions … that’s great!
However, remind me what other tv journalist with the ears of millions of Americans daily has said that the CIA killed JFK, that we don’t need to be enemies with Russia, that we don’t need to fight Israel’s war against Iran, etc. etc.?
Imperfect vessels that nevertheless fight against nuclear Armageddon and endless war should be lauded, I think …
Good to know you’re above it all.
I wasn’t listening to Carlson. I was listening to Putin. That was the reason why I was watching. Carlson actually did the world a favor by conducting this interview. To all of the Russophobes out there, drop dead.
The Erin Burnett clip is appalling on every level. Thanks Scott for sharing it. As for Tucker, nobody today is in a better position than him to make any meaningful change on the world stage of journalism. We all carry baggage, it’s how we carry it that matters and he seems to be doing just fine with it. More power to him.
In his era, Upton Sinclair’s journalism was caustically seen as “muckraking” by the powers that be.
In his novel, “The Jungle” he exposed “the appalling and filthy conditions in the meat-packing industry”
Scott Ritter, the persistent, genuine Constitutional American patriot, today may be regarded as his equivalent; although the less biased more appropriate term today is more legitimately read as “investigative journalist”!
Scott Ritter has been, ever since his UN inspector days, in Iraq, been doggedly attempting to expose – bring out into the open, the appallingly duplicitous US actions there, and in the world at-large as well as its long ongoing propaganda narrative-packaging industry.
In this armchair commenters opinion, it may arguably be said of ‘whistleblower’ Major Ritter, that he is one of Americas very own, prominent forerunner, Julian Assanges!
Yes, but……. Scott in a recent program told us about his love story with Israel until very recently,which I found astonishing from an intelligent person born before about 1990!
Wasn’t aware that soured love stories only happen to the unintelligent among us fallible mortals!
However, I guess when one is infallible, wrong choices are inexcusable, besides, virtual analyses of individuals are not always spot-on no matter how righteous one is.
Are you a member of the peanut gallery?
Mr. Ritter underestimates his own ability to ask penetrating questions that would “move the needle” in America. He writes that he would ask President Putin about “the challenges he faced in the early years of his presidency, overcoming the inherited legacy of the catastrophe of the 1990’s” and “how he overcame the dominance of the oligarch class and create an economy that enriches Russia, and not Russian billionaires.” These are questions the answers to which very well could and would open up a more robust public discussion in the USA. Why? Because the economic problems facing Americans today are in many ways similar to the challenges that Russians and their new president faced early in his presidency: the corrupt power of a deeply entrenched elite class of oligarchs. (Recall that a former U.S. president, Jimmy Carter, has warned us about oligarchical power in the USA, and another former president, Dwight D, Eisenhower, warned us against the power of “the military-industrial complex.”)
Reading in Vadim Volkov’s 2002 book, Violent Entrepreneurs: The Use of Force in the Making of Russian Capitalism, published by Cornell University Press, one becomes acquainted with the principle that “more rule of law means more economic growth,” if the rules are “transparent and their enforcement impersonal and efficient.” What president Putin did was to rein in the criminality and excesses of the oligarchs who had looted Soviet business, industry, and finance during and after the collapse of the Soviet Union. In his July 8, 2000 address to the legislature, Putin stressed “the centrality of the rule of law” and a “common responsibility on the part of ‘entrepreneurs, the power-wielding structures, and all citizens’ for the fate of the country.” He announced “a new social contract.” Rather than urging an “intensification in police activity” he turned instead to a “discussion of how to strengthen institutions” (Volkov, pages 184-185).
Judging by Russia’s subsequent accomplishments and by President Putin’s own popularity in his country, one gathers that he has followed through successfully enough on his promises to his people and his vision for their country.
So, thank you Mr. Ritter, and, by all means, let’s hear Mr. Carlson’s interview with President Putin!
Thanks for the notice Scott. It was generous and informative….I had not heard….I’m sure most Americans have not been informed either. You deserve to be in the chair…hopefully that will happen soon. Let’s all hope this interview will be fair, productive and that Americans will open their minds. It could be a meaningful breakthrough. Thank you Vladimir and Tucker! Keep on swinging Scott!
Scott, I’m sure you are aware of Oliver Stone’s interviews with Putin. Some time ago, but still exceedingly relevant and informative, if you want to get an idea of how Putin thinks and conducts himself. Maybe you could review and comment?
For anyone reading this, look for this title: Oliver Stone’s The Putin Interviews
2017 Showtime documentary DVD and book. The interviews were conducted over a period of two years. No one can say this is not thorough journalism.
True, but on over twenty years there are huge numbers of speeches and interviews where Putin’s views are clearly explained and questions answered.Every year there is a big question and answer session, wide-ranging and detailed. If people say “but is he not lying?” ( because of course they are used to from their own leaders and the champions of disinformation, Israeli government officials and nearly all Israeli media), they can follow the facts and observe in real life what does happen.
There is even an excellent book, “First Person” by Vladimir Putin, in English from the year 2000, consisting of many hours of interviews with Putin, his family, teachers, friends, which gives a good idea of his background and history.
So much is written claiming “Putin wants this.., always….. wants to rebuild the USSR, wants to take over Europe…” giving the writer’s idea, never asking Putin himself.
Yes! Second that. I found Oliver Stone’s Putin sessions fascinating. I leaned so much about Russia, and Putin’s character. Hardly the depraved sociopath the MSM treats him as.
I think, “break through” is the issue. There is no end of sound information about pretty much any subject on Earth and it is not as hard as people think to discern sound from unsound. But Tucker Carlson has the ability to break through a propaganda wall unequalled since the time of Paul Joseph Goebbels, Julius Streicher and the publication Der Stürmer.
People need to feel they have permission, a licence, to inquire. If you’ve ever chaired a meeting and payed particular attention to the expression on the face of that person slowly raising their hand to ask the first question they’ve ever asked at a meeting, you’ll know what I’m talking about. Tucker Carlson can’t ask Putin everything, but he can licence ordinary folk to start asking their own questions and finding answers.
IS OUR DISINFORMATION BETTER THAN RUSSIA’S DISINFORMATION?
With many thanks as usual to Scott Ritter.
With the “blocks” on all information from Russia on the internet and in the media it has been impossible to present
all sides of issues. Meanwhile the disinformation from the US and its western partners is disemminated again and again
in official briefings as well as the exhortations of politicians and media.
(I have called current Russophobia “the Russians are coming!’ Ever since my days in elementary school when we has
to hid under old wooden desks to be safe from Russian bombs. The Russians, of course, never came.)
Well, if Russia dislikes what the US says or does, let’s read what they actually said with no cuts or redactions or
sanitizing.
I agree with Mr. Ritter concerning the issues, but Carlson is a TV celebrity personality. He already has boosted his own publicity exponentially, and he stands to make a lot of money from the interview. Dude is already very wealthy.
At the end of the day, he will tell us to “vote” for one of the kakistocrat freaks. Thus, despite the blah blah, he supports the status-quo. No one is talking about ways to abolish Citizens United decision, curb institutionalized corruption, bring meaningful choice to elections etc.
No worries, when DT is POTUS again, “merka will be great, and peace will break out. (Just like when he was POTUS before)
I remember what Putin told Oliver Stone at the end of their last interview,Oliver managed to get.He (Putin)said to Stone that he(Oliver}was going to have legions of enemies as a consequence of interviewing him,i am sure he will say the same thing to Tucker…More power to Tucker Carlson,Can`t wait to see this,bravo Tucker…
“This antidote is not difficult to acquire — it consists of fact-based truth grounded in a realistic understanding of the world we live in, inclusive of a sovereign Russia.”
But it is inclusive of a sovereign Ukraine?
“My ideal interview with Vladimir Putin would be in the form of a conversation where I could learn about the challenges he faced in the early years of his presidency, overcoming the inherited legacy of the catastrophe of the 1990’s.
Of how he and Akhmad Kadyrov brought an end to the Chechen conflict.
About what prompted his address to the Munich Security Conference in 2007.
How he overcame the dominance of the oligarch class and create an economy that enriches Russia, and not Russian billionaires.
I’d want to know how he felt about the betrayal of the Minsk Accords.
The betrayal of the United States when it came to arms control.
About his connection with the Russian people.
My interview would have had no “gotcha” moments.”
It sounds like a bunch of soft ball questions, hopefully Tucker will do better.
A sovereign Ukraine would not have had its government replaced by Joe Biden, Victoria Nuland, and John McCain.
Thanks, Scott!!!
The questions you would ask President Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, as you list them in your article above, are very interesting, indeed! I hope you have a chance to ask them.
Maybe not being a t.v. watcher, I never saw Tucker Carlson. Was not drawn to his stuff. But, Scott Ritter? Yeah. Keep the writing and interveiw ongoing. Inexpert may sure be better. Because no one is expert at everything. Yet, “trustworthy” can be welcome here, now. Humility, decency, care for humanity, urge to use the skills he was trained for, this, now, is interesting! Because and in spite of mainstream media lacking most of those qualities. Maybe we recognize that to put your own money, reputation, time, energies toward sharing what you know to be true? That is of great value! Putin, dear man, already knows of your goodness! We do too. Love your work, Mr. Ritter.
If Fred Hoffman to any extent represents the intellect of the Gatekeepers glory-be to that for its earnest stupidity and confidence that mythology on the lines of the domino theory, or the Official Narrative on any recent event from about 1991, will continue to work. It won’t. The lid is coming off. I’m sure they would love to put Carlson and Ritter and whoever else in accompanying billets with Julian short of gunning them down in the street somewhere. Chaos has reared its ugly head, so we’d better keep talking.
Long live free speech and free thinking. Which is the absolute opposite of what is in America today.
Bravo to Tucker Carlson. The empire is trembling at its core.
I live in France, and the land of the “rights of man” is dead. Every media outlet I see (I observe le Figaro etc on newsstands -cant bear to enter, and don’t have TV,) yet just the headlines I see on computer screen, or photos of Macron hugging Zelensky or Netanyahu, or the new Foreign Minister aghast that anyone could accuse Israel of genocide, or speak to a friend, sure she is fair, spouting the words I have read about Putin expanding all over Europe.
Germany sounds the same. The USA marks the way and the rest of the “liberal democracies” follow!
Tuck’s basically a lunatic when it comes to China. Regarding Russia and the hysteria in the West surrounding it and Putin he’s been good. He’s also been good about the U.S. retaining sovereignty as it relates to the swarms of illegal immigrants who have come flooding in over the past few years. But, Tuck does still have some of his old awful Chamber of Commerce Republican views, which may never be shaken loose.
I’m looking forward to his interview with Putin. He’ll be fair and give Putin a chance to elaborate on things, unlike some neocon or State Dept hack who would have disdain and hostility dripping from their lips the entire interview.
I believe in open borders. Immigrants should be allowed in. My grandparents were immigrants.
No.
Struggling working American citizens (of all stripes, African-Americans, Whites, Chicanos, Asian Americans, Native Americans) shouldn’t have to suffer with open borders. U.S. citizenship should mean something. Bernard Sanders was correct on this issue (before he sold out on this issue during his ’20 pres campaign) and so was Cesar Chavez and much of the labor movement for several decades.
Unfettered immigration stresses social services, drives down wages, busts unions, and drives up housing costs. Having said that, the illegals who come to our borders MUST be treated HUMANELY while they’re being processed to be rejected.
Two main reasons we’re seeing this profusion of illegal immigrations: 1.) The Chamber of Commerce Republican types love the cheap labor and their landlord class loves the increased rent revenues; 2.) a certain segment of our elite fear a homogenous society in that it’s more able to rally for its concerns against the predations of that elite versus a tossed salad nation.
Also the reason many people want to go to the USA is the way their country has been treated by the USA over decades or centuries so that their life there is unbearable. Personally, I would not even visit the USA, let alone try to migrate there, but I do not live in one of the many Latin American nations the USA has “helped”, or the countries exploited in other parts of the globe.
No such entity as a humane border. The introduction of increasingly discriminatory border controls is a recent invention that coincided with the mass infliction of capitalism on humanity. Why are so many desperate people trying to enter the EU and the USA? Could it be anything to do with the brutal exploitation by Europe and the USA of the Global South, wrecking their societies so much that millions feel they have no choice other than to flee?
As for your ahistorical liking for “a homogenous society”, that’s got nothing to do with what makes a good society. Humans in all our differences and diversity are what make us prosper, not trying to stick in ghettoes.
Rebecca, We have to deal with the real world as things sit right now.
Working class American citizens (African-Americans, Chicanos, Whites, etc.) should not have to suffer bc of the mass infliction of capitalism on humanity. At this stage in the development of the United States, borders must be enforced. nist
Yes, we must curtail the Washington-Zio empire, I fully support that. However, right now we must make sure U.S. citizens are secure in housing, wages and robust social services, all of which deteriorate when immigration runs rampant.
First things first. In fact, only when American citizens are relatively comfortable in the ways I’ve just mentioned, they then can make real movements to stop the wasted millions of U.S. tax dollars on empire and the infliction of violence and misery on millions of Third World victims.
Borders can be humane when done right.
I have many friend who are LEGAL immigrants. They waited in the queues, dealt with the putrid bureaucracy (sometimes paying lawyers to help), and eventually received green cards and later became, proudly, American citizens.
But America has a two-tiered Justice system; the politically well-connected, even if poor ILLEGAL ALIENS, are above the Law. US immigration is institutionally, systemically corrupted.
Joe Biden, who was a major factor in doubling the American incarceration rate from one to two million with his War on Drugs and his War on Crime bills, also was instrumental in crushing Latin America with death squads and narco states, forcing desperate people North as cheap exploitable Labor to compete with American citizens for blue collar jobs and keep wages at 1970s values (for example: thegrayzone.com/2019/07/28/biden-privatization-plan-colombia-honduras-migration/ )
I agree that Carlson is an anti-China cowardly warmonger and a consummate hypocrite. But:
Swarms? Migrants are not insects my friend – they are largely victims of US foreign policy and financial imperialism.
Why do they up and move only to subject themself to abuse?
DT and JB have imposed illegal siege warfare against Venezuela, Cuba etc. and supported death squads, election meddling, regime change etc. Even HRW admits that this has caused the largest refugee and migrant crisis in the Western Hemisphere.
So, the MassMediaCartel hysteria wants us to blame the victims, while they sell ads and make big money from the emotional manipulation and misinformation. That’s their job. The politicians use immigrants and refugees as election-year political footballs. It’s textbook tactics, and it is pathetic, not to mention racist. I’m sick and tired of this being trotted out every election cycle.
I’m also sick and tired of lazy, rich white folks whining about too many brown-skinned folks coming in while they hire them as servants and the oligarchy profits from exploiting their labor.
Certainly I oppose US meddling in other countries and I am sure you agree. But short of our getting the power to put a stop to that, should the US have a border and should those who want to cross it for whatever reason be required to pass via an official checkpoint?
Either you missed my point (intentionally, or not), or you are purposely posing a straw man argument.
Strange that capital and its owners pass freely over all borders. Do you object to that?
Exactly so. The vast majority of them are fleeing the results of US foreign policy in their countries.
I used to watch a old TV show about people who used skills as confidence tricksters to help ordinary people win fights against power. From this, I learned that the first step of a confidence trick is to control the victims source of information. A confidence trickster will say that only one source of info can be trusted, and will convince their victim that the sources that tell them anything differently are lying to them. Once the con-artists could control the information that the victim received, the ‘con’ could proceed.
The US Elites, who steer America in a direction that the people constantly now say is ‘the wrong direction’, regularly tell people that only the sources they own and control are to be trusted, and that everyone else is lying to them.
“They who have put out the people’s eyes, reproach them of their blindness.”
– John Milton
Most of problem for me some years ago, when I started trying to figure out what was really going on was overcoming the fifth filter in Chomsky and Herman’s propaganda model: “Anticommunism as a control mechanism” Most of us since childhood have “…fully internalized the religion…” Even though Communism has never existed. What is considered Communism was actually the destruction of Communism.
The difference between the US and Russia right now, is simply, Putin keeps a lid on his Oligarchs. Rather than the Oligarchs here keeping a lid on us.
Russia is not a communist country. It is a capitalist country since 1991.
And that is why the US centered empire hates him. He refuses to offer up his country for plunder as Yeltzin did.
Well said. The problems Putin and Russia faced early in his presidency are in many (but not all) ways similar to those that confound America and Americans today.