The Tucker Carlson Effect

Tucker Carlson speaks in West Palm Beach, Fla., on July 15, 2023. (Giorgio Viera/AFP via Getty Images)

Commentary

Is Tucker Carlson a traitor?

Former Illinois Rep. Adam Kinzinger says he is. What makes Mr. Kinzinger think Mr. Carlson is a traitor?

Why, he has travelled to Moscow, which obviously means that Tucker is a Russian spy. Need more proof? He actually interviewed Vladimir Putin, the leader of Russia. That really removes all doubt, doesn’t it?

Journalism or Treason?

The sin that Tucker has committed is, we are to understand, quite an egregious one. But he’s not the first journalist to interview Mr. Putin, or other unsavory heads of state. Barbara Walters sat down with Mr. Putin in November 2001, in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. Oliver Stone did a series of interviews with the Russian leader between 2015 and 2017. NBC News’s Keir Simmons interviewed Putin in June 2021, and in October 2021, CNBC’s Hadley Gamble had a chat with Mr. Putin.

What’s more, all the interviews were held in ... Russia.

Traitors all, if one is to apply the deft, unassailable logic of Mr. Kinzinger to Mr. Carlson’s tête-à-tête with Mr. Putin. Ah, but Russia invaded Ukraine, and the United States is supporting Ukraine in every way short of putting boots on the ground, so any kind of contact with the leader of the invading forces is just bad form, to say the least.

Related Stories

Tucker Carlson Confirms Interview With Vladimir Putin

2/6/2024

Tucker Carlson Addresses Putin Interview Speculation

2/5/2024

Or is it?

It’s not as if Mr. Carlson has been engaging in foreign policy negotiations with Mr. Putin, or undermining the Biden administration’s diplomacy or war efforts in the Ukraine–Russia war, or negotiating with any other foreign leader. At least, none that we know of.

But compare Tucker’s decision to interview Vladimir Putin and his decision to announce it publicly, so that the entire world, and even President Joe Biden, can see what he’s doing, or about to do, with the actions of John Kerry with regard to Iran during the Trump administration.

Mr. Kerry secretly met or communicated with Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif, undermining the Trump administration’s foreign policy toward Iran, and possibly violating the Logan Act.

If Mr. Kinzinger called John Kerry a traitor for his clandestine meetings with a declared enemy of the United States, it would be good to know. In fact, even the Washington Post noted the lack of outrage at the time Mr. Kerry’s rogue diplomacy was revealed.

The Hits Are Coming

Why the hit jobs on Mr. Carlson? He’s a guy without a network (at the moment).

What’s the big deal? Why, one wonders, would the criticism of Mr. Carlson’s interview from the leftwing media be coming so early? Is it because Mr. Carlson’s last interview was viewed 267 million times on X (formerly Twitter)?

Or is it, as Julia Davis, at the Daily Beast, which characterizes Mr. Carlson and Mr. Putin as “Kremlin Cronies,” says that Mr. Carlson’s reason for the interview is to “blow up” the American election.

Could be. She won’t be the only pundit to say this, and probably a lot worse things, in the days to come. But is that really what Mr. Carlson is up to?

Maybe so.

Asking Questions That Need Answers

Or, it may just be that he wants to get a fuller picture of the causes of the war. That would be an act of sheer and gratuitous journalism, of which no self-respecting deep state would deign to put up with. What’s more, it’s a bold and very insensitive affront to all those who’ve spent years polishing their craft of sophistry in the bowels of the American mainstream media machine.

But, as the tabloid tagline goes, “inquiring minds want to know.”

Just what does Tucker Carlson want to know?

He may want to know if there are, or were, U.S.-funded biolabs in Ukraine. Given the recent pandemic, that would seem like a reasonable question to ask.

He might also ask Mr. Putin if the decision to expand NATO eastward, driven by U.S. policy all those years ago, was part of his decision to invade Ukraine.

Perhaps Mr. Carlson might also ask if the United States’ deep involvement in Ukraine politics was a factor as well.

He could also inquire, as Oliver Stone did in his interviews with Mr. Putin, why U.S. influence in Ukraine was viewed as a direct threat by Russian policy-makers, including Mr. Putin.

On the flip side, Tucker could ask some very pointed questions about Mr. Putin’s own behavior and his policies. Such questions might be, why should anyone trust Mr. Putin when he’s suspected of having his political opponents killed and known for his seizing of privately-owned companies?

It would also be great if Tucker questioned Mr. Putin about his deep connections to Iran’s radical Islamists and his support of Hamas and other groups who wish to see Israel driven into the sea. It’s a sure bet that Americans would like to hear Mr. Putin’s responses to those questions, and others like those.

American Journalism Is a Zombie Land

One might hope that such questions would or could be asked, if not entirely answered. At least we could watch Mr. Putin’s body language and draw our own conclusions.

In short, the pre-interview criticism of Tucker Carlson is all about fear. The fear is that in Mr. Carlson interviewing Mr. Putin, the American people may learn a few facts about the reasons why Russia decided to invade Ukraine. That might include the reputed existence of biolabs, of any peace overtures that may have been made and/or ignored, and perhaps even some inside baseball on the extent of the Biden families’ alleged payoffs that came from Ukraine. It’s not likely that Mr. Putin will admit to political assassinations or any other such allegations.

Mr. Putin’s answers are likely to be a blend of fact and fiction, the ratio of which viewers will decide, and will probably remain unclear to many. What is clear, however, is that today, journalism is dead on its feet in America.

Tucker Carlson is the exception.

May he continue to be just that.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.