Regardless of who did the interview with Putin, the main reason for the manufactured outrage is narrative control. It has always been the same. Someone offers the public an opportunity to hear the current designated evil regime's side of the story is and the media and politicians do everything they can to discredit and distract from it.

I'm not going to prop up Tucker as a unbiased journalist who doesn't have a record of some off the wall theories but this interview in itself is definitely legit journalism. All the media losing their sh!t over this are slapping the face of journalism. Refusing to report is censorship and contradictory of press freedoms when they try and throw a blanket over the information. Even if they were in Tucker's seat, rather than asking legit questions and letting the person talk, they would just be barking US's usually unproven accusations while hurling insults. How is that journalism? It's even more laughable than TC being a journalist because people don't even register that it's an attack instead of reporting. Their whole life they have seen that as "reporting". Dumbed down is the most accurate term for this.

The fact that some in the USA are talking about invoking espionage laws over this, the EU talking sanctions on him and Ukraine talking violence on TC, says it all. How long before he's locked away in a prison for years without actually being charged with a crime like Assange has been? Why are people not defending press freedoms instead of brainlessly repeating what the people who have destroyed it have to say?

You are only allowed to hear one side of the story. A side that is perpetually being caught in lies, censoring and abusing the ones who report uncomfortable truths(like Assange).

Regardless of who did the interview with Putin, the main reason for the manufactured outrage is narrative control. It has always been the same. Someone offers the public an opportunity to hear the current designated evil regime's side of the story is and the media and politicians do everything they can to discredit and distract from it.

I'm not going to prop up Tucker as a unbiased journalist who doesn't have a record of some off the wall theories but this interview in itself is definitely legit journalism. All the media losing their sh!t over this are slapping the face of journalism. Refusing to report is censorship and contradictory of press freedoms when they try and throw a blanket over the information. Even if they were in Tucker's seat, rather than asking legit questions and letting the person talk, they would just be barking US's usually unproven accusations while hurling insults. How is that journalism? It's even more laughable than TC being a journalist because people don't even register that it's an attack instead of reporting. Their whole life they have seen that as "reporting". Dumbed down is the most accurate term for this.

The fact that some in the USA are talking about invoking espionage laws over this, the EU talking sanctions on him and Ukraine talking violence on TC, says it all. How long before he's locked away in a prison for years without actually being charged with a crime like Assange has been? Why are people not defending press freedoms instead of brainlessly repeating what the people who have destroyed it have to say?

You are only allowed to hear one side of the story. A side that is perpetually being caught in lies, censoring and abusing the ones who report uncomfortable truths(like Assange).
- boonerbuck

Sorry, but this I cannot agree with, just because a guy interviews someone else does not make him a credible journalist, he is mocked because of who he is and his outlandish perception on life and his interpretation of democracy. Any one that say's they believe that the guy in charge can assassinate his opponents because it happens all the time and should be accepted is completely (frank)ed in the head. Hatred is not freedom of speech, you can believe so if you want, but you will never change my mind no matter what you write here.

Sorry, but this I cannot agree with, just because a guy interviews someone else does not make him a credible journalist, he is mocked because of who he is and his outlandish perception on life and his interpretation of democracy. Any one that say's they believe that the guy in charge can assassinate his opponents because it happens all the time and should be accepted is completely (frank)ed in the head. Hatred is not freedom of speech, you can believe so if you want, but you will never change my mind no matter what you write here.
- Makita

You can't help yourself Makita. Here's what you have omitted so you could project on me.

I'm not going to prop up Tucker as a unbiased journalist who doesn't have a record of some off the wall theories

You open with changing what I said. I acknowledged his history and lack of credible journalism right from the beginning and here you are pretending I said otherwise. After I acknowledge opinions you are falsely accusing me of contradicting, I say the interview in itself was journalism. You can deny it all you want because you don't like how it was conducted. That only supports what I said in my post.

You must be referring to Navalny? Having not mentioned anything about the subject but have you project what I think about it is concerning.

I'll discuss it if you are capable of sticking to what is being written instead of this weird thing you keep doing.

What evidence is there that he was assassinated? Even Biden ends his speech full of rhetoric and accusations with the admission they don't know what happened which makes his "assassination" accusation baseless. Real journalism would point that out to you but nope... the complete opposite. They report it as an established fact which you will thoughtlessly repeat.

You can't help yourself Makita. Here's what you have omitted so you could project on me.

I'm not going to prop up Tucker as a unbiased journalist who doesn't have a record of some off the wall theories

You open with changing what I said. I acknowledged his history and lack of credible journalism right from the beginning and here you are pretending I said otherwise. After I acknowledge opinions you are falsely accusing me of contradicting, I say the interview in itself was journalism. You can deny it all you want because you don't like how it was conducted. That only supports what I said in my post.

You must be referring to Navalny? Having not mentioned anything about the subject but have you project what I think about it is concerning.

I'll discuss it if you are capable of sticking to what is being written instead of this weird thing you keep doing.

What evidence is there that he was assassinated? Even Biden ends his speech full of rhetoric and accusations with the admission they don't know what happened which makes his "assassination" accusation baseless. Real journalism would point that out to you but nope... the complete opposite. They report it as an established fact which you will thoughtlessly repeat.
- boonerbuck

My apologies, I wasn’t meaning to project on you at all, and yes you did acknowledge his history and his questionable off the wall theories. What I was commenting on was more this “ but this interview in itself is definitely legit journalism. All the media losing their sh!t over this are slapping the face of journalism. Refusing to report is censorship and contradictory of press freedoms when they try and throw a blanket over the information.”
It may very well be legit journalism, but anything out of this idiots mouth is tainted “in my opinion” only my stance, nothing anyone says will change my opinion of Carlson, or Trump. So if I am to be lumped into any group or labeled any trendy name because of my stance, so be it, I really don’t give a (frank).

I was just commenting my opinion regarding Carlson, I do not have a ounce of respect for Carlson, Trump, Fox News or the GOP in their present state. Even if they somehow pull off a legitimate interview every once and a while.

My apologies, I wasn’t meaning to project on you at all, and yes you did acknowledge his history and his questionable off the wall theories. What I was commenting on was more this “ but this interview in itself is definitely legit journalism. All the media losing their sh!t over this are slapping the face of journalism. Refusing to report is censorship and contradictory of press freedoms when they try and throw a blanket over the information.”
It may very well be legit journalism, but anything out of this idiots mouth is tainted “in my opinion” only my stance, nothing anyone says will change my opinion of Carlson, or Trump. So if I am to be lumped into any group or labeled any trendy name because of my stance, so be it, I really don’t give a (frank).

I was just commenting my opinion regarding Carlson, I do not have a ounce of respect for Carlson, Trump, Fox News or the GOP in their present state. Even if they somehow pull off a legitimate interview every once and a while.
- Makita

I think the problem is you are making the interview about TC. It's all about what comes out of his mouth. It's a strange thing really. When I watch an interview, I don't give a rats ass what the interviewer thinks. I focus on what the interviewee says. I like to be informed and the way you process media keeps you uninformed.

I don't follow TC on any platform. You won't find that style of "journalism" on any of my bookmarks. I occasionally take a look at something that pops up in a feed out of curiosity because he will have legit guests on topics the media is blacklisting, like Glen Greenwald who I have always respected for one example.

I hated TC for years and years because of him pushing the lies about Iraq and was the loudest pro war media personality for that crime. He came clean on how he and the rest of the media ignored the facts about WMD and pushed the agenda. Credit where credit is do. It was probably the beginning of the end for him at FOX but he had the biggest ratings so....

About Navalny... you are pushing a conspiracy theory. It's also a laugh to call that guy legitimate opposition. He wouldn't be allowed to run in NATO nations. Americans would try and throw him in prison... successfully quite possibly.

About Navalny... you are pushing a conspiracy theory. It's also a laugh to call that guy legitimate opposition. He wouldn't be allowed to run in NATO nations. Americans would try and throw him in prison... successfully quite possibly.
- boonerbuck

The comment about assassinating the opposition was in reference that Carlson believes it is quite alright for world leaders to assassinate opposition such as Trump should have every right as supreme leader to kill Biden, nothing at all to do with Putin and Navalny or Kim Jong and his uncles, brothers or any head of a country to kill off the opposition. It was about his beliefs on the acceptance of political assassinations period.
So no I am not pushing any conspiracy theories, I’ll leave that for guys that think higher education means you are neo-leftist indoctrinated follower out to turn the world into a touchy feeley trans pedofile grooming grounds.

The comment about assassinating the opposition was in reference that Carlson believes it is quite alright for world leaders to assassinate opposition such as Trump should have every right as supreme leader to kill Biden, nothing at all to do with Putin and Navalny or Kim Jong and his uncles, brothers or any head of a country to kill off the opposition. It was about his beliefs on the acceptance of political assassinations period.
So no I am not pushing any conspiracy theories, I’ll leave that for guys that think higher education means you are neo-leftist indoctrinated follower out to turn the world into a touchy feeley trans pedofile grooming grounds.
- Makita

Ok... I was hoping you would elaborate earlier because it was more of a confusing rant than anything.

Just remember that it's been the Democrats locking up journalists who report facts, leaks that are legit showing crimes by the governments, staging phony FBI investigations like the Trump Russiagate crap etc to undermine the election(as guilty as Trump on this). Or massive illegal surveillance on their population(biggest constitution violation in USA history)... You'd have to be very ignorant or just plain dishonest to not acknowledge what has happened under the Democrats in their last 3 terms regarding democracy. It makes people who show outrage for Trump undermining democracy look like hypocrites when they pretend to care about it. But if you *only* give credit to *corporate* media from the left... this is going to happen. It shows these people are just as ignorant as the people on the right they accuse of being like that.

A USA airman doused his body in gasoline and torched himself in front of the Washington Israeli embassy yesterday. He was yelling free Palestine. He filmed it. Some reports say he survived, some say not.

A USA airman doused his body in gasoline and torched himself in front of the Washington Israeli embassy yesterday. He was yelling free Palestine. He filmed it. Some reports say he survived, some say not.
- boonerbuck

From what I read he did not.

From what I read he did not.
- NewYorkNuck

The media is all over the place on where this happened. First page of search results on google has PBS saying Gaza, BBC says Atlanta, CNN says Washington DC... some other outlet claimed Russian paramedics put the fire out in a video I watched earlier...

The media is all over the place on where this happened. First page of search results on google has PBS saying Gaza, BBC says Atlanta, CNN says Washington DC... some other outlet claimed Russian paramedics put the fire out in a video I watched earlier...

- boonerbuck

I think this was the second person to do it, the first being in Atlanta if I recall...

First was a protestor in Atlanta: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-67597395

This last one in Washington: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68405119

The media is all over the place on where this happened. First page of search results on google has PBS saying Gaza, BBC says Atlanta, CNN says Washington DC... some other outlet claimed Russian paramedics put the fire out in a video I watched earlier...

- boonerbuck

I watched the video

Amazingly the cops pull a gun on him and tell him not to move once he's already collapsed to a burning mess on the ground.

I think this was the second person to do it, the first being in Atlanta if I recall...

First was a protestor in Atlanta: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-67597395

This last one in Washington: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68405119
- NewYorkNuck

That makes sense. It was mixed in with the current search results.

Comedian Seth Myers interviews the US President. Thank god real journalism is not dead.

https://apnews.com/articl...294d0697f2f2963f3025dd529

Comedian Seth Myers interviews the US President. Thank god real journalism is not dead.

https://apnews.com/articl...294d0697f2f2963f3025dd529
- bloatedmosquito

It was kinda funny, but you could tell on several occasions Joe forgot what he was talking about and said something like “we don’t have time to go into it”, or “I don’t want to get into it”.

He may not want to accept it, but he should be retiring and making way for the next generation.

It was kinda funny, but you could tell on several occasions Joe forgot what he was talking about and said something like “we don’t have time to go into it”, or “I don’t want to get into it”.

He may not want to accept it, but he should be retiring and making way for the next generation.
- 1970vintage

100 percent.

He leaves now: his legacy is intact, the honorable man who stepped aside and did what was best for the country.

He runs again: it ain't gonna be pretty. Even if he wins, 4 more years of mental and physical decline is bad.

100 percent.

He leaves now: his legacy is intact, the honorable man who stepped aside and did what was best for the country.

He runs again: it ain't gonna be pretty. Even if he wins, 4 more years of mental and physical decline is bad.
- NewYorkNuck

Didn't Reagan have dementia in his 2nd term?

Didn't Reagan have dementia in his 2nd term?
- Marwood

A sock puppet could sit in the oval office. The system would still run like clockwork. It reminds me of popular music. A band could have a talentless front man(or woman) who doesn't play an instrument, write songs or sing without electronics masking their flat vocals yet the people think the front man *is* the band.

Trump or Biden. Great options.

Didn't Reagan have dementia in his 2nd term?
- Marwood

Ya Nancy basically ran that shit. But Regan was also 73.. dementia being one thing, but being a fragile old fuck is another that's harder to hide from the cameras

A sock puppet could sit in the oval office. The system would still run like clockwork. It reminds me of popular music. A band could have a talentless front man(or woman) who doesn't play an instrument, write songs or sing without electronics masking their flat vocals yet the people think the front man *is* the band.

Trump or Biden. Great options.

- boonerbuck

So, the Oval Office is like The Masked Singer?

So, the Oval Office is like The Masked Singer?
- Marwood

What is a masked singer? You mean like KISS?

What is a masked singer? You mean like KISS?

- boonerbuck

Do a YouTube search.
I've only seen ads for it, it looks horrendous.

Do a YouTube search.
I've only seen ads for it, it looks horrendous.
- Marwood

I'll consider it when I'm bored.