Image 01 Image 03

Tucker Taking His Show To Twitter

Tucker Taking His Show To Twitter

“Starting soon we’ll be bringing a new version of the show we’ve been doing for the last six and one-half years to Twitter, we’ll bring some other things too.”

Tucker has landed. He’s taking a version of his prior show to Twitter.

This makes perfect sense. The Twitter worldwide audience dwarfs the cable news audience. It’s where the political debates take place. And it’s free, unless you want a blue check mark, in which case you have to pay Elon Musk his $8 per month. It will be interesting if Tucker charges for access to his Twitter show, perhaps on the model that some other use where there is some free content, but also some premium content for a fee. He’ll be an even richer man if he monetizes his Twitter show.

It also makes Tucker his own editorial boss, which probably means a lot to him.

Nothing is a guaranteed success. He’ll still have to continue delivering content that people want. And he still will be a target for Media Matters and other haters. But since those same groups already have tried and failed to bully Elon Musk, their strategy of deplatforming through advertiser harassment deployed against Fox News and others won’t work.

To quote Kamala Harris, it’s Fweedom.

What time slot do you think he’s schedule his new Twitter show?


I was wondering how Tucker could start a new show if he was under contract with Fox News. This seems to be the answer: A reader alerted me to this report, via Axios, Tucker Carlson accuses Fox of fraud, contract breach:

Tucker Carlson, two weeks after being ousted by Fox News, accused the network Tuesday of fraud and breach of contract — and made a host of document demands that could precede legal action.

Why it matters: The aggressive letter from his lawyers to Fox positions Carlson to argue that the noncompete provision in his contract is no longer valid — freeing him to launch his own competing show or media enterprise….

The details: The letter — from Carlson lawyer Bryan Freedman to Fox officials Viet Dinh and Irena Briganti — said Fox employees, including “Rupert Murdoch himself,” broke promises to Carlson “intentionally and with reckless disregard for the truth.” …

The letter also alleges Fox broke promises not to settle with Dominion Voting Systems “in a way which would indicate wrongdoing” on the part of Carlson and not to take any actions in a settlement that would harm Carlson’s reputation….

A Fox News spokesperson said it is “categorically false” that Carlson lost his job as part of the network’s $787.5 million settlement with Dominion Voting Systems.

  • Stephen Shackelford, an outside attorney for Dominion, told Axios’ Dan Primack: “Dominion did not insist on them firing Tucker Carlson as part of the settlement.”

What’s next: Carlson is also claiming that Briganti, Fox’s longtime communications and PR chief, attempted to “undermine, embarrass, and interfere” with Carlson’s future business prospects, which he maintains would constitute another breach of his employment contract.

  • “Make no mistake, we intend to subpoena Ms. Briganti’s cell phone records and related documents, which evidence communications with her and all media, including, but not limited to The New York Times,” the letter said.

What to watch: Carlson’s lawyers added that because Carlson is considering litigation against the network to resolve these disputes, Fox News must take immediate steps “to preserve all existing documents and data” relevant to Fox’s relationship with Carlson, including correspondence between top executives and several media outlets.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


He’ll have to lose the traditional fake laugh if it’s going to be watchable. (“This is so outrageous that I can’t say how exactly it’s outrageous.” It’s akin to sarcasm (“Something’s wrong but I’m not going to say exactly what it is. You have to figure it out.”)

    mailman in reply to rhhardin. | May 9, 2023 at 6:54 pm

    He’s not gonna have to lose anything to our rate everyone darling 😂😂

      mailman in reply to mailman. | May 10, 2023 at 10:57 am

      Lets try that in English!! He’s not gonna have to lose anything to get ratings darling! And those ratings are going to be through the roof!!

    Sally MJ in reply to rhhardin. | May 10, 2023 at 4:40 pm

    Uh – that’s his regular laugh that sounds like a girl. So you are suggesting Tucker Carlson take laughing lessons? You mean, so his laugh could sound like yours?😉

thad_the_man | May 9, 2023 at 6:09 pm

I was hoping he would go to Rumble.

I would like to see the youtube sector filled with three or four competitors ( like television was till about 1990 ), and Rumblee would like a boost,

    smalltownoklahoman in reply to thad_the_man. | May 9, 2023 at 6:17 pm

    Perhaps with time he’ll branch out and host his show on multiple sites including Rumble. There are plenty of others who post their stuff to as many sites as possible to reach as many people as they can. Tucker can afford to hire some people to help him manage that if he chooses to do so.

      henrybowman in reply to smalltownoklahoman. | May 9, 2023 at 6:46 pm

      No chance, I think . Whoever lands Tucker is going to want an exclusive, and right now that’s Musk.

        Sally MJ in reply to henrybowman. | May 10, 2023 at 4:48 pm

        I don’t think Elon would mandate a monopoly. He would negotiate a financial structure that is more advantageous to Tucker to work only with Twitter. carrot versus stick approach.

    Ghostrider in reply to thad_the_man. | May 9, 2023 at 6:59 pm

    I sensed he would move to Twitter, especially when his last two nights at Fox he interviewed Elon Musk. They are both similar in intellect.

    I could be mistaken but I don’t believe the Fox Noncompete includes social media.

    Tucker will have a podcast, and special privileges offered to him by Musk since Twitter will grow exponentially from Carlson’s traffic.

    Carlson wants in on Musk’s plans for a new AI startup deal.

      1073 in reply to Ghostrider. | May 9, 2023 at 7:19 pm

      I agree about Musk.
      I find it great he claims details are in the Dominion settlement, which can’t be disclosed. So Fox or Dominion can make the agreement public or he wins.

      M Poppins in reply to Ghostrider. | May 10, 2023 at 5:31 pm

      I wouldn’t call what they have “intellect”.

    Sally MJ in reply to thad_the_man. | May 10, 2023 at 4:42 pm

    But isn’t Rumble known as a conservative site? It makes sense for him to go where he can get the largest audience.

    BierceAmbrose in reply to thad_the_man. | May 10, 2023 at 5:14 pm

    If it works, the payoff for both sides is bigger with Tucker / Twitter, than other combinations.

smalltownoklahoman | May 9, 2023 at 6:22 pm

” It will be interesting if Tucker charges for access to his Twitter show, perhaps on the model that some other use where there is some free content, but also some premium content for a fee. ” They do it and have been for a couple of years now. Own their site too so there will always be one place at least where they can’t be deplatformed.

    Twitter just started a new monetized long video service in the last few weeks. I don’t know the details but think Rumble, YouTube or Podcast.

CommoChief | May 9, 2023 at 6:39 pm

The ascent of new media continues. Lots of people including many of the execs and ‘talent’ at legacy media, seem oblivious as to how wide a reach folks have outside their insular industry. There are many creators on new media platforms like YouTube and Rumble with a bigger audience than established on air talent backed by multi million $ ads and incessant promotion.

Twitter has now added Matt Walsh and Tucker Carlson. Who will be next? Twitter under Musk is starting to build a roster of talented and very popular creators which is a direct threat to the establishment. Fun times ahead.

    Close The Fed in reply to CommoChief. | May 9, 2023 at 8:22 pm

    Too bad none of it helps stop the dissolving of our country via the invasions at our borders.

      CommoChief in reply to Close The Fed. | May 9, 2023 at 8:58 pm

      Yeah we elected a guy President who promised to fix that but it didn’t get done b/c he chose not to fight the DC establishment by using his Veto to force Ryan and McConnell to either round up the votes to defy funding the signature campaign issue or go back and find the $ to fully fund the border wall.

        gonzotx in reply to CommoChief. | May 9, 2023 at 10:18 pm

        Right, it was all Trumps fault

        Right on cue

        BeAChooser in reply to CommoChief. | May 9, 2023 at 11:58 pm

        “Yeah we elected a guy President who promised to fix that but it didn’t get done b/c he chose not to fight the DC establishment by using his Veto to force Ryan and McConnell to either round up the votes to defy funding the signature campaign issue or go back and find the $ to fully fund the border wall.”

        You’ve repeated this now on several threads as a way to attack Trump. But the truth is a lot more involved than that. You’ve skewed it to make Trump look bad. Here’s the real story.

        First, Trump, early on, provided republicans in Congress with three ways to get the wall passed One was to elect enough Republicans in 2018 to make sure they’d have the 60 votes majority. That didn’t work out because of the RINO republican leadership in Congress and the RNC. In fact, despite Trump’s successes the first two years of his administration, republicans lost 33 votes in the House. Perhaps some of them were due to democRAT cheating.

        In the Senate, the republicans ended up with 51 votes, when they needed 60 to pass a funding bill with a wall in it. They weren’t going to get 9 more votes from the democRATS, especially since the democRATS wanted Trump to shut down the government so they could blame the republicans for that (which they eventually did).

        The second solution offered by Trump was to get rid of the 60 vote requirement in the Senate and switch to a majority vote. But the Senate republicans wouldn’t go along with that. Even John Cornyn of Texas argued against changing the 60 vote requirement.

        Trump’s third suggestion was to shutdown the government. And that’s what he did. In December 2018, when the Senate unanimously passed an appropriations bill without wall funding (you get that, CC, UNANIMOUSLY), and the bill appeared likely to be approved by the republicans in the House, Trump announced that he would not sign any appropriations bill that did not fund the wall’s construction. That’s equivalent to the veto that you claim Trump didn’t do. The House passed a stopgap bill with funding for the wall, but it was blocked in the Senate via the threat of a Democratic filibuster. Like I said, democRATS wanted to see a shutdown.

        That shutdown that you seemed to suggest never happened turned out to be the longest in US history. That sort of shoots down your claim that Trump didn’t try to force McConnell and Ryan (both UNIPARTY member who were content with a shutdown because it hurt Trump) to force the democRATS to fund the wall. It was day 35, before Trump, realizing the democRATS weren’t budging and his republican *allies* in Congress were on the other side, caved because he was losing political capital.

        One reason the democRATS weren’t budging is that they knew that not one of the republican southern border state lawmakers favored a wall. That’s what canvasing by them and the Wall Street Journal discovered. How’s that for loyal republican allies? All in all, it’s clear that the republicans in Congress weren’t going to do much to convince democRATS to fund a wall. And Trump had very little leverage on them … because so many were UNIPARTY.

        Another reason Trump couldn’t get his wall is because the media did everything it could to slam the idea of the wall and did not present his case for it. So he was not able to get a sufficient number of Americans to pressure Congress for a wall.

        One more factoid for you.

        Do you know that DeSantis voted against Republican sponsored legislation for the border wall that Trump wanted … in 2018? The bill, HR6136, called for $16.6 BILLION dollars “for a border wall system along the southern border of the United States”.

        DeSantist used the excuse that he didn’t like the proposed immigration reform section of the bill. What were those reforms? Enhanced enforcement of existing immigration law. Closing various immigration enforcement loopholes. Ending the catch and release policy. Providing a legislative solution for DACA program. And established a new merit-based visa program. And he voted against them.

        Guess some of the other republicans who voted against the bill? Justin Amash, a notorious UNIPARTY member. Liz Cheney, another notorious UNIPARTY member. democRATS like Nancy Pelosi and Debbie Wasserman Schulz voted against it. I wouldn’t have wanted to be on the same side with any of the four.

        Ever a hundred republicans in the House also voted against the bill … including Jim Jordan and Matt Gaetz. As you can see, there wasn’t much enthusiasm for the very good idea of a wall, even amongst the folks we believe to be good guys. With all that, you blame Trump for no wall? LOL! Orange Man Bad.

        And guess what? NOW DeSantis is promising a border wall if he’s elected. LOL! Should we trust him about that, CC … especially since he is beholden to the UNIPARTY for funding his campaign? Hmmmmm?

          CommoChief in reply to BeAChooser. | May 10, 2023 at 7:52 am

          Trump was inaugurated in Jan ’17. He had a GoP majority in HoR and Senate controlled by Ryan and McConnell. Both DC establishment who long opposed serious action to enforce existing immigration laws.

          It is no surprise the DC establishment would resist building the wall to anyone halfway paying attention. Trump made a promise to ‘build the wall’ as his central campaign pledge in ’16.

          IOW he ran on a pledge that he either:
          1. Knew he wouldn’t get done b/c the DC establishment would oppose it
          2. Didn’t know the DC establishment would oppose it

          No more excuses about the DC establishment opposing the wall. If the DC establishment wanted a wall we would have had one before Trump even thought about running for POTUS. We wouldn’t have needed to elect a candidate with ‘build the wall’ as the central campaign promise. A promise not kept.

      Can you name one person who has done more than Tucker Carlson to highlight the insanity at the border and to put pressure on politicians to do something about it?

      gonzotx in reply to Close The Fed. | May 9, 2023 at 10:17 pm

      One has to the think of the THOUSANDS of Chinese single males crossing the boarder and disappearing Once they cross.

      Add that to the the Chinese police stations operating in plain sight, all over the nation and the 300,000 Chinese students, scientists and the buying up of land, especially near military bases ( I mean, America, wtf)

      At some point , XI will make his plans very clear

      We are so screwed.

henrybowman | May 9, 2023 at 6:56 pm

The market works. Just not always as fast as we assume it will. (And admittedly, in some few cases, not as fast as is it needed to.)

Our side of the political divide is now using the “My Pet Goat” photo to smear our leftist opponents. Yeah, I know Bush is a j@ckoff and all that. Thanks.

I’m wondering, I’m I supposed to now think 9/11 was a Chimpy McBushitler-Darth Cheney “Pearl Harbor” type gaslighting-military operation?

Because things are getting very weird.

    gonzotx in reply to Tiki. | May 9, 2023 at 10:12 pm

    Apparently it was done by Chico and the Man…

    CommoChief in reply to Tiki. | May 10, 2023 at 8:10 am

    Trust but verify? Which is kinda hard when the DC establishment and their corporate media allies hide or suppress the facts.

Close The Fed | May 9, 2023 at 7:27 pm provides freer speech than twit. What a shame.

He followed the same trajectory as Andy Ngo and Tim Pool. Being physically threatened by brown shirts tends to open one’s eyes.

I’m actually surprised he didn’t land on The Blaze, Daily Wire or Rumble. Very surprised it’s twitter but as much money as those places have to spend Musk has more.

It wasn’t even up for 4 hours and had over 22 million views.

Quicker than I thought

Hope he doesn’t charge because, for better or worse, he’s become the voice of the people on air, and many are having a hard time financially

Something streaming that claimed to be the Tucker Show was on YouTube last night, that seemed to be a bad sophomore philosophy bull session between Tucker and somebody about the meaning of life.

Technically unusual in being live streaming but you couldn’t rewind, only watch current stuff.

gonna have to break down and get a twitter account. can’t wait to see Tucker unleashed.

I guess deplatforming doesn’t work ? Or not in the way some celebrity politicians intended ?

    henrybowman in reply to schmuul. | May 11, 2023 at 4:16 am

    It worked great, until the Big Tech trust/cartel/conspiracy was broken by Musk, a non-player.

The Fox capitulation to Dominion was an insult to every American voter. Good luck Tucker!

BREAKING: Carlson was told by a member of the Fox board that he was taken off the air as part of the Dominion settlement, per Tucker’s legal team

So the settlement required the firing of the guy who was most skeptical of the accusations against Dominion?

tortious interference ?

E Howard Hunt | May 10, 2023 at 11:48 am

I wish him well. Personally, I would rather spend my time watching The Great Courses ( now Wondrium) than a middling entertainer, with a girlie laugh, crying in his beer, in a most repetitive faction, with strident, loud mouthed guests.

While I am not an attorney, I have dealt with non-competes in numerous situations. In Texas, in order for a non compete to be valid, it has to be limited to a reasonable time period and reasonable geography/distance. ( I am withholding comment on any other of the 49 states ). Limitation on time less than 2 may be okay, reasonable distance can be as little as 5 miles.

Granted, Tucker is not the normal rank and file employee, so I would suspect that his non compete is not the standard boilerplate Non compete. That being said, I would question how such a non compete could be crafted at still be valid under applicable state law

The second point is that the typical non compete are designed to survive termination of employment.

Depending on the reason for the termination and depending on how the survival clause post termination in the non compete is drafted, its possible the non compete survives or possible that the non compete is voided.

Bottom line, Dont jump to conclusions on whether the non compete remains valid

    BierceAmbrose in reply to Joe-dallas. | May 10, 2023 at 5:24 pm

    Non-competes I have seen, there’s also limitation on the scope of business or activity that can be constrained. Especially, a “non-compete” that renders someone completely unable to work, or work in their field, risks getting thrown out on that basis. Some states declare this explicitly.

    Looks to me like there’s also a “kind of product / kind of business” finesse in going with Twitter. Twitter isn’t in the broadcast media business. Blaze is. Daily Caller is. Most of the named politi-folks who moved onto Rumble do “shows.” Rumble looks more like a driect YouTube competitor, close to a kind of media.

    Twitter is a group chat at scale, as Musk has described it. Hey, Tucker’s just talking to people. What, you claim your non-compete means he can’t say anything to anyone (possibly ever?)

Looking forward to Tucker’s new show. Canceled my Twitter account years ago and I’ll now open a new one. The new audience will be huge and it will be world-wide. The audience will be different with an entirely new and younger demographic. The average age of Fox News viewers is about 65, while Twitter’s average age is about 40 years. I urge all Tucker viewers to open an account at Twitter, learn how to use it properly and await the first Tucker show. Also, be certain to patronize the advertisers on Twitter. Every last one of them is experiencing the wrath of woke influencers. Musk is rich but he needs help in expanding and defending free speech.No man, no matter how wealthy or talented can do it alone. I predict that Tucker’s audience wil grom from the 3-4 million on Fox to at least 20 million on Twitter. It will have an impact beyond our imagination. On Twitter if you see something you want to share, it just takes a mouse strike to share it with your contacts along with you row message. Some tweets reach millions, Carpe diem!

“NBC News NOW” guest host Tom Costello continued with a jaw-dropping question: “Will anybody be able to police what Carlson says? Or is this the point? It’s just a free-for-all?”

.. these aren’t journalists .. they are fascists