Tucker Claims CIA Reading His Texts, May Make Criminal Referral
My initial take, subject to more actual facts coming from someone other than Tucker, is that his communications with Iran were swept up and “unmasked” as part of American intelligence agencies (not just CIA) surveillance of Iran. Either someone illegally tipped him off to this, or he just assumes it to have happened and knows it will not look good.
You know how I feel about post-Fox News Tucker Carlson, so let’s get that out of the way.
He has become a malicious purveyor of anti-Jewish conspiracy theories both through his own words and those he platforms to his nodding approval. He’s has normalized Jew-hatred among a swath of Gen Z youth in the Republican Party, while simultaneously sucking up to fundamentalist Islamic countries like Iran and Qatar. He also has attacked the Trump agenda relentlessly, to the point that Trump himself said Tucker has lost his way and is not MAGA.
Oh, and he’s a habitual liar, particularly on anything that has to do with Israel. Like when he recently falsely claimed to be “detained” at Ben Gurion Airport.
So yeah, Tucker is a waste product in my own opinion.
But is he a foreign agent? Certainly he serves foreign interests — not just of Islamic countries but also Russia. But did he break the law in failure to register under The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), and possible violation of other national security laws?
Well, Tucker just released a video which seems to reflect a consciousness of guilt. Tucker claims the CIA is preparing a criminal referral to DOJ against him for acting as an agent of Iran based on his communications with Iranian authorities.
Tucker may be lying about it as part of his Main Character Syndrome disorder. Or maybe there’s something to it, or something in between.
I have posted various viewpoints below. My initial take, subject to more actual facts coming from someone other than Tucker, is that his communications with Iran (text or otherwise) were swept up and “unmasked” as part of American intelligence agencies (not just CIA) surveillance of Iran. Either someone illegally tipped him off to this, or he just assumes it to have happened and knows it will not look good.
In fact, it may look horrible – effectively painting him as disloyal to the U.S. even if not a criminal. So understanding how the media works, he’s getting ahead of it and portraying himself as the victim of the big bad Deep State because he stood up up to Israel. Setting the narrative and rallying his internet base in advance.
I first saw the video in a tweet from Ryan Saavedra, who commented:
He is either lying for attention or he is trying to get ahead of an explosive news story that is about break open
Tucker Carlson claims the CIA is preparing a criminal referral against him for acting as an agent of a foreign nation, something that has long been suspected by many
He is either lying for attention or he is trying to get ahead of an explosive news story that is about break open https://t.co/WgbNJONYEn
— Ryan Saavedra (@RyanSaavedra) March 14, 2026
There certainly have been some very strange appearances by Tucker at the White House that made no sense unless Trump was using Tucker (unwittingly) to lull the Iranians into a false sense that no American attack was imminent.
Journalist David Alandete observed:
For months, I’ve been seeing Tucker Carlson show up at the White House during delicate moments. Not once, not twice. Several times. In sensitive meetings, on key days. I saw it myself, like in this photo I took. He was there when they were talking about Venezuela, about oil, about Iran.
Among the journalists, the same question always floated around in hushed tones: what exactly is a television host doing here? Why is he in rooms where normally only officials, diplomats, or national security advisors are allowed?
Carlson seemed convinced that he could play another role. That he could be an informal link, someone capable of calming Trump, opening channels, pushing deals. For years, he has defended that strategy of negotiating with autocrats, talking to dictators, exploring pacts like the ones he proposed with Russia or with the Venezuelan regime.
But no.
Now he himself has said something that changes everything: that the CIA has reviewed his messages with people in Iran and that there could be a criminal referral to the Department of Justice for those contacts before the war, under the law that regulates agents of foreign powers (FARA).
If that’s true, many scenes from these months start to take on a different light. Those discreet entries into the White House. Those meetings where no one quite understood what he was doing there. And those conversations in which Trump seemed to give him information that later turned out to be incomplete or downright wrong.
Within the administration itself, there’s talk of the possibility that Trump might have been feeding him misleading or incomplete information to throw off the ayatollahs before the attack. It would be a pattern that was already seen in another recent episode: when he agreed to speak on the phone with Nicolás Maduro in the middle of negotiations, sending messages through Ric Grenell, and shortly afterward ended up ordering his arrest.
Moreover, this episode also has an internal reading in Washington. In the struggle within Trumpism between Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the situation is relevant. Carlson is close to Vance and has been for years one of Rubio’s harshest critics. If now his figure is called into question in this context, that indirectly strengthens Rubio’s position within the administration.” (emphasis added)
Llevo meses viendo a Tucker Carlson aparecer en la Casa Blanca en momentos delicados. No una vez, ni dos. Varias. En reuniones sensibles, en días clave. Lo vi yo mismo, como en esta foto que tomé. Estaba allí cuando se hablaba de Venezuela, de petróleo, de Irán.
Entre los… pic.twitter.com/68XqugbE7Q— David Alandete (@alandete) March 15, 2026
Drew Pavlov thinks Tucker was played expertly by Trump:
“The CIA knew Tucker was speaking to the Iranian regime.
That means that when Trump invited Tucker to the Oval Office multiple times in the lead up to the Iran strike, he knew full well that Tucker was backchanneling information to the Iranians.
Essentially Trump seems to have used Tucker as an unwitting counter-intel asset, to convince Khamenei that he was bluffing, that nothing would happen.
Trump was basically able to kill Khamenei thanks to Tucker’s arrogance.
Now Tucker’s also legally fucked.”
David Wurmser thinks Tucker is making it up:
“One thing right off: the CIA does not do Signals Intelligence. The NSA does.
But I would not assume Carlson cares about that detail. Accusing the CIA makes the point more poignantly.
But the question is valid: is it true even in that inaccurate form?
Second, if it is, and that remains a big “if”, that would be a very guarded investigation. Few would know of it, and how Tucker would have been informed about his own investigation is a serious, warranted question of compromise by some officials.
Senior U.S. elected officials generally do NOT have access to the identity of the U.S. person captured in such intercepts and the record is erased. If the activity captured in signal intelligence warrants criminal pursuit, then it is referred to the professional bureaus, not the political echelon. In some very unique circumstances, there are mechanisms then also for unveiling higher up to senior staffers and even the President , but really none exist to release or share info with the target.
On balance then:
1. This can be another of Carlson’s fevered delusions to nourish his martyrdom complex. There is no solid evidence such a tap occurred. But Carlson’s nervousness tells us less about whether such an investigation exists, than that it implies he had questionable conversations, but not necessarily illegal, with foreign elements.
2. If such an investigation or sting exists, it would be closely protected , and if Carlson found out, then this and any leak would be a grave security violation and act of obstruction of justice.
3. The political echelon would be among the last to know of such an investigation and in my view unlikely to be the source of a leak.”
One thing right off: the CIA does not do Signals Intelligence. The NSA does.
But I would not assume Carlson cares about that detail. Accusing the CIA makes the point more poignantly.
But the question is valid: is it true even in that inaccurate form?
Second, if it is,… https://t.co/IgCOxjCbqh
— David Wurmser (@Wurmserscribit) March 15, 2026
Will Chamberlain and Jordan Schachtel think Tucker’s lying:
That’s what I’m hearing too. He just made it up, probably after he found out his comms with Iranians were unmasked.
Imagine making up a story that makes normal observers assume you committed a serious crime https://t.co/qVJPAWP6Kw
— Will Chamberlain (@willchamberlain) March 15, 2026
Mark Levin is calling it THE TUCKER CARLSON CONFESSION:
A couple of things come to mind regarding Tucker Carlson’s release of a video like this.
1. Carlson released that video because he committed acts of betrayal against our country and in support of the Iranian regime; 2. he either knows, or it just occurred to him, that the NSC or CIA has his texts or may have his texts (presumably, they and others have been monitoring communications with the Iranian regime), thus have access to what he did or is doing; 3. he is a mentally ill drama queen looking for his next jump in followers, which seems the least likely.
My guess is that one of his fellow isolationists in the government tipped him off (which would be a crime by the leaker) — possibly among his friendlies in the intelligence parts of the administration — and informed him that his texts were seen and shared with the Department of Justice. Unless he has been contacted by the government officially, how else would he know? Obviously, I have no way of knowing, but I am basing this, in part, on what Carlson has now publicly stated and the manner in which he is framing this.
Carlson has already argued that he is a journalist and free to contact whomever he wishes and ask whatever questions he wishes. It will be interesting if not determinative to see what are in those texts. Was he giving advice to the enemy — the Iranian regime or its surrogates? Depending on the facts, this could run much deeper than FARA. Whatever it is, he is concerned enough that he is trying to get out in front of it.
Marc Caputo from Axios throws cold water on the claim that Trump used Tucker:
The online chatter about Tucker Carlson looked like quite a story: he was being spied on by the CIA & knowing that, Trump treated him as a useful idiot by feeding him disinfo that fooled the Iranians about the looming Feb. 28 attack
But top admin officials say it’s bullshit.
Specifically, I’m told
1) there’s no CIA investigation of Carlson
2) In his meeting, the two politely disagreed, & Trump held to his position Iran was a threat & didn’t mislead him
Said one source: Trump “wasn’t participating in an op.”
Laura Loomer is taking “credit”:
“If Tucker Qatarlson gets charged for violating FARA and or leaking information to Russia, Saudi Arabia Iran or Qatar, I’m taking credit.
Islamic sympathizers always project onto others what they are likely guilty of.
You have no idea how relentless I have been in speaking to GOP reps and even reporting Tucker to law enforcement and the DOJ.
I pray my efforts are successful.
Tucker says the CIA read his texts to “set him up” for a crime.
Sounds like someone is trying to get ahead of a story.
Lock him up!”
LAST BUT NOT LEAST – SOME OF MY HOT TAKES ON X:
To everyone who thought you were so special being able to text with Tucker Carlson, is there anything you said you would like to take back?
— William A. Jacobson (@wajacobson) March 15, 2026
If the Mullah regime AND Tucker Carlson fall in the same week, it might just overload my ability to handle so much joy at one time.
— William A. Jacobson (@wajacobson) March 15, 2026
Your game is over. Your guy is going down. Not because he criticized Israel, but because – – allegedly – – he was cooperating with the enemy and acting on their behalf against the interest of the United States. https://t.co/TYDXVpeUY4
— William A. Jacobson (@wajacobson) March 15, 2026
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
If he was paid by Iran to act on its behalf, or agreed to act on its behalf for free, before the war started, then he’s guilty of a FARA violation.
If he did so after the war started he’s guilty of treason.
And if he had an arrangement with the IRGC, no matter when it was made, he’s guilty of providing a material benefit to a designated foreign terrorist organization. Repeating their propaganda on his broadcasts counts as a material benefit, since it’s something that has a commercial value.
But in all these cases it has to be pursuant to an actual arrangement, not just him expressing his opinion sua sponte.
Tucker is quite possibly controlled opposition. That’s why he has access to White House, Putin, other world leaders etc.
I asked Google “What makes a person a ‘foreign agent’ under FARA?”
Here is the salient portion of the response:
Under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), a person (individual or organization) becomes a “foreign agent” by acting at the order, request, direction, or control of a foreign principal—such as a foreign government, party, or entity—to engage in political activities, public relations, or lobbying within the U.S. that influence government policy or public opinion, or by collecting/disbursing funds on their behalf.
Key Requirements to be a Foreign Agent
Acting on Request: The person acts at the “order, request, or under the direction or control” of a foreign principal.
Foreign Principal: The principal is a foreign government, political party, person outside the U.S., or a foreign corporation.
Specified Activities: The person must perform certain activities within the U.S., including:
Political activities designed to influence U.S. officials or the public.
Public relations counsel, publicity agents, or information service employees.
Political consulting or advising a foreign principal.
Soliciting or dispersing funds or other things of value.
Representing the foreign interest before U.S. government agencies or officials.
If Tucker’s politics seem to be/are favorable to any foreign nation (much less an enemy nation), mere communication with officials in those nations wouldn’t be sufficient to make him a “foreign agent,” even if he was soliciting advice or gathering information from the foreign nation. If Tucker wasn’t acting under an order, by request, or “under the direction & control” of Iranian officials, then he wouldn’t be a “foreign agent” as defined by FARA, even if he was engaged in any of the “Specified Activities.” Those “activities” must be conducted at the behest of the foreign power, rather than by the volition of the actor. Arguably, Tucker has chosen to oppose American military action against Iran. This isn’t the same thing as being “pro-Iran,” nor does it necessarily mean that he’s a “agent” of Iran (as defined by FARA).
Add the complication of his presence at certain official meetings, allowing him to argue that he was acting for the Trump administration as a “back channel” conduit to Iranian officials. Difficult to prove, but a denial by the administration would likewise prove nothing. (How many times have we seen official denials turn out to be false?)
Indeed. As I wrote, “If he was paid by Iran to act on its behalf, or agreed to act on its behalf for free”. Those are the only ways that he would have a FARA problem. So long as he is acting only on his own initiative, it doesn’t matter how much he is helping Iran or how much he wants to help it.
That’s why AIPAC has no FARA problem. AIPAC is a group of Americans who act as they think best to promote Israel’s interests in America, and do not take direction from the Israeli government. They may occasionally consult the Israeli government for any advice or opinions it may have to offer, but they decide whether to accept what they hear, and what if anything to do about it.
However all that changes once the war started. Treason doesn’t require acting on the enemy’s behalf. All if requires is adherence to the enemy’s cause, combined with an overt act that gives the enemy aid and comfort, and is seen by two witnesses or admitted to in court. The adherence is the key element; without it there is no treason even if one knows that ones actions, taken for ones own purposes, do give the enemy aid and comfort. Adherence without an overt act is technically treason but is not punishable, whereas the other way around is not treason at all.
Does the law on Treason make a distinction between a declared war and a de facto state of war?
The Constitution doesn’t make such a distinction, but it does say that only Congress can declare war.
The problem with the Press is that they act like political elites who think that laws that apply to the rest of us don’t apply to them. Any intelligent reporter should assume that all of their communications with any foreign government, friendly or not, would be read by the intelligence agencies of many countries, not just ours and theirs.
As others have stated, the CIA probably would not be reading his communications unless another intelligence agency, like the NSA, MI5, KGB, NKVD, Mossad, etc. gave it to them.
No. The constitution refers merely to the USA’s “enemies”. An enemy is anyone who is at war with you. And while the people who adopted the constitution may or may not have had the idea that an undeclared war was not legally a war, the courts put an end to that notion the very first time the USA went to war. The first war in which the USA participated was the “quasi-war” with France in the John Adams administration; neither side bothered to declare it, but the courts ruled that a state of war nonetheless existed between the USA and France.
If we’re lucky some Iranian asset in this country will off Tucker for being the stooge that helped set up their dear leader.
Hey I can hope.
Otherwise I hope they nail his raggedy ass to the wall and that TC ends up
enjoying 3 square meals a day curtesy of Uncle Sam for a good long time.
But if is ass IS nailed up, it will be at the order of Israel and the Joooooooz.
I’m a Jew but not Israeli. I order his ass nailed up, I have spoken. Make it so.
Nail up Greenwald right next to him but upside down.
There’s no exemption in the law for “journalists”. And there certainly isn’t one in the constitution.
The “press” seems to conveniently forget that “freedom of the press” is NOT for journalists. It is for printers. Basically, 1st Amendment say “saying things and printing things” is safe from government intervention (except in cases of fraud, slander, or actual incitement). No, they aren’t special “because we’re mentioned right there in the BoR”. Most of them are special only in the sense they rode the short bus.
Yes, exactly. To claim that “the freedom of the press” refers to them is like claiming that “the freedom of speech” refers to professional speakers who are registered with an agency, charge $20K, and call themselves “the speech”.
But Don Lemon says it gives him superpowers.
Milhouse…. was the term “press” the same in 1700’s as now? To me, freedom of the press was freedom to publish, to print the news… to dispense information as the printed word via the main form of communication.. the printing press. Look at the attempt to register printing presses in the early 1800’s… (and 3D printers today!) It has morphed away from the single stage press to all means and the people reporting. (Interesting that another freedom has been restricted, registered and banned as technology advanced).
Exactly. Calling the news industry “the press” is like calling the public speaking industry “the speech”. You can do that as a matter of English usage, but that’s not what the first amendment means.
“The press“ in the context that they’re using it didn’t exist back then. that happened somewhere in the 1800s. Well after the original document was written so it definitely wasn’t referring to that.
Tucker Qatarlson does think he is special. Does that count?
You’re making the mistake of looking in the Bill of Rights for the enumeration of every right while ignoring the Ninth Amendment. Not every right is enumerated, and the “press” today covers all sources of information, not merely that distributed via actual printing presses.
BTW, the Bill of Rights was drafted at time when the persons doing the “printing” were also doing the reporting and writing the opinion pieces. They were “journalists/reporters/commentators” as well as being the “printers.” (Benjamin Franklin is a perfect example of this.)
Yes, but presses were also used for all sorts of things that had nothing to do with reporting the news, such as novels, poems, songs, advertisements, feelthy peekchurs, etc., and all of them were equally covered by “the freedom of the press”. There was no special privilege for news reporting.
As for the 9th amendment, to include a right under that one must find evidence that in the late 18th century that right was generally recognized as existing and valid. Generally it will be something that the drafters didn’t bother mentioning because it didn’t occur to them that it would ever be challenged.
There is not a special priesthood that obtains additional rights that normal citizens don’t have. A “journalist“ doesn’t have a license to break the law that other people don’t have. The press in the sense of journalist was not mentioned in the document and “the press absolutely did not have that meaning at that time. Journalists have tried to assert that they have additional rights sometimes with mixed results, sometimes actually being given them by an errand judge, but they don’t actually have them within the legal framework.
He is indeed free to do that. Within the context of the law, he has no more right to violate the law than I do being a journalist doesn’t give him “super rights“
A basic tenet of journalism is reporter don’t make the story about themselves. Tucker isn’t a journalist.
Tucker is a “commentator” or “opinionist.” He has as much right to make his opinion known to others as others have to hear (or refuse to hear) his opinions.
Personally, I’ve stopped listening to him and cancelled the alerts for his postings to Rumble.
Not so ‘cut and dry.’ Try talking to an objective professor about Free Speech and the 4th Estate. Journalists possess broad powers and rights.
No, they don’t. The minute you prate about a “fourth estate” I know you’re full of it. Nine out of ten people who use that term for the news industry can’t name the first three, because they have no idea what an “estate” even is.
Reporters (calling them “journalists” is an affectation like calling garbage men “garbologists”) are members of a trade, not a profession, and they are no more important than carpenters, plumbers, hairdressers, or telephone sanitizers. They have no more rights than those other tradesmen, and no more constitutional role.
Isn’t the “fourth estate” from the French Revolution?
It’s from France before the revolution. The three estates were the clergy, the nobility, and the commoners. So apparently the news industry considers itself none of the above. Except that the real reason they call themselves that is that they have no idea what it means.
Google’s response to “What exemptions to FARA are there for journalists?”
AI Overview
Journalists and media entities may be exempt from FARA registration if they engage in bona fide news activities, are not owned or controlled by a foreign principal (government, party, etc.), and are at least 80% owned by U.S. citizens. Qualified news organizations, as defined by Section 611(d), can cover foreign affairs without registering, provided they are not acting as agents of a foreign power, say the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and FARA.us.
Key FARA Exemptions for Journalists and Media
Bona Fide News/Journalistic Activities: Section 611(d) of FARA (22 U.S.C. § 611(d)) exempts entities engaged in legitimate journalistic activities, according to Congress.gov.
The 80% U.S. Ownership Rule: For a media outlet to claim this, it must meet specific criteria: organized under U.S. law, at least 80% owned by U.S. citizens, and operated by U.S. officers/directors, notes Congress.gov.
Independence from Foreign Principals: The entity must not be owned, directed, supervised, controlled, or financed by a foreign principal (e.g., a foreign government, political party, or foreign media entity), explains Congress.gov.
Private/Nonpolitical Activities: Journalists engaged in activities that are not political or acting to directly promote the interests of a foreign government or foreign political party, such as promoting tourism, may be exempt, as described on the United States Department of Justice (.gov) website.
Exceptions to the Exemption: The exemption does not apply if the foreign principal is a government or political party that controls the dissemination of the information, which is a major point of concern noted by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.
It is important to note that the Department of Justice interprets FARA’s exemptions narrowly, and any media entity acting as a public relations agent or lobbyist for a foreign government is likely required to register, says the Department of Justice (.gov) website.
The prostitute, Qatarlson, has been smoking too much of that Iranian hashish, while reaping his filthy Qatari baksheesh.
I’ve thought about it all day, and I’ doubt there will be criminal charges.
The damage has been done by Tucker himself.
I actually doubt this is going on. I think it’s Tucker making an accusation of conspiracy, because you can never fully disprove a conspiracy.
The government denies it? Well, that’s just what the government would say, right? Right? And he can then just keep on making a thing of it, despite any evidence it’s bullcarp.
And…. now there’s a tweet out there saying Trump used Tucker as a known leak to tell the mullahs he wouldn’t bomb anymore, then went and shwacked them.
Yes, the tweet is likely way too good to be true. But it’s a fun conspiracy theory, given various Mossad ops over the last few years and Tucker’s seeming lamprey-like adherence to the backside of money interests in Qatar.
William A. Jacobson :
Once again, there’s no “like button”
Why are typos eternal on LI? 🙂
Because LI can’t afford a copy editor?
I second that motion to let posters edit their comments to fix typoooos.
When deployed overseas, even before 911, we knew that even your calls home to your wife or girlfriend were monitored. It is an essential part of force protection. Tucker is genuinely retarded.
When I was stationed overseas or spent considerable time overseas between 40 and 50 years ago, I was told that the Government could listen to my phone calls and read my mail (even though it was coming from an APO address) that went back to the U.S. Carlson is stupid for not knowing that what he sends overseas or communications he makes when overseas can be intercepted by the Government (NSA or whoever).
And it wasn’t only our people who were monitoring your calls home!
By all means, they should investigate. Mr Carlson may not like what they find.
Public intellectual, evolutionary biologist and progressive Jew, Bret Weinstein, just did a very lengthy and cordial interview with Tucker Carlson. He does not consider Carlson an anti-Semite. The continued denouncing of Carlson as an antisemite because he opposes the power of the Israeli lobby smacks more of a take-no-prisoners approach to anything except full throated, enthusiastic support of Israel. Tucker has never made pejorative comments about Judaism itself as far as I know.
Carlson makes it clear he has been drenched in contacts with the intelligence services since youth because of his father’s front job at Voice of America.
I only watch Carlson selectively because I don’t care for his manner. I also don’t listen to his views on Israel because he is no authority. This continued denunciation reminds me of what minority groups do to whites, heaping constant abuse and searching for gotcha moments.
Qatarlson displays no honesty or objectivity, in his “criticisms” of Israel.
You omit mention of Qatarlson being caught, a few weeks ago, brazenly lying about allegedly being “detained” by Israeli immigration authorities, at Ben Gurion airport — a claim disproven by video accounts of the event. Or, his idiotic and purely spiteful statement that nothing of beauty exists in Israel. Or, his dishonest claim that Israel is solely responsible for destroying Beirut and Lebanon, with no blame laid at the feet if Hezballah and other Muslim terrorist/Islamofascist groups.
Just a few of this piece of excrement’s brazen lies, distortions and omissions. A person who traffics in persistent lies and prevarications, and whose so-called “commentary” and “analysis” is grounded in obvious anti-Israel and anti-Jewish animus, isn’t someone who possesses intellectual honesty and credibility, at all.
Qatarlson denounced Bill Ackman, one of the most successful and savvy American investors, who happens to be Jewish, as an alleged money-lending usurer whose crimes would have to be discussed with “your God.” That’s blatant trafficking in Jew-hating stereotypes. Qatarlson, despite his loudly-professed statements about his “Christianity,” seems ignorant of the theological fact that Christianity arose from Judaism and that Christ was born a Jew, as he crudely accused Jews of having murdered Christ, and, by extension, Charlie Kirk, at Kirk’s memorial service.
That you actually earnestly believe that Qatarlson offers substantive and legitimate critiques of the “Israeli lobby” speaks to your own gullibility, stupidity and dishonesty — none of which surprise anyone who reads your infantile and moronic posts, on this website.
Is Bret Weinstein gullible and moronic? You probably don’t even know who he is since you watch so much cable garbage.
He may be knowledgeable about other things, but he knows nothing about his own people. The fact that he taught at Evergreen right through the St Rachel the Pancake era, and had no problem there until he started up with the BLM crowd, shows how unqualified he is to express an opinion on the subject of zionism, anti-zionism, and antisemitism.
Correct. Most comments here miss those key, objective facts. Carlson is very good at obtaining long-form interviews with all types of leaders (in government, industry, research, religion etc) and teasing out their core positions. Typically that is not a crime. Also, people need to understand that it is quite possible that Tucker is controlled opposition, given his immense access to the White House and almost all corridors of power.
In that spirit, people can learn a lot about issues if they’re able to calmly parse through Tucker interviews.
Here is another highly charged yet informative example.
Tucker Carlson:
“Does the [Administration’s] Christian catechism require loyalty to Benjamin Netanyahu? Apparently it does, as Carrie Prejean Boller learned the hard way….Unwilling to compromise her Christian beliefs for a temporal position, even one appointed by the President of the United States.”
https://rumble.com/v772bqk-are-christians-required-to-pledge-loyalty-to-bibi-netanyahu-carrie-prejean-.html
Carrie Prejean is a filthy antisemite and does not belong on any panel that’s supposed to address antisemitism, just as you don’t put a Klansman on a panel to address racism. Her “Christian beliefs” are despicable and unacceptable, just like the “Christian beliefs” of the Klan, or of the Fred Phelps family (the so-called “Westboro Baptist Church”, which is neither Baptist nor a church). The fact that Carlson defends her proves that he is also an antisemite (as if we didn’t already have enough proof), and the fact that you defend her says the same about you.
First of all, to get it off the board, there can be no Judaism without the Land of Israel, but that’s irrelevant because antisemitism is not opposition to Judaism, but to Jews. The whole point of coining the word “antisemitism” was because people who hated Jews for themselves rather than for their religion needed something to call themselves, and “Jew-haters” didn’t sound scientific enough. Antisemitism is different from the traditional Christian hatred of Judaism, precisely because antisemites hate all Jews regardless of their religion. Antisemites hate atheist Jews, Catholic Jews, Buddhist Jews, etc., every bit as much as they hate “Jewish Jews”.
Second and far more importantly, anti-zionism is functionally indistiguishable from antisemitism. Almost all opponents of Israel are motivated exclusively by hatred for Jews. And that is the case for all those who oppose Israel but support the “Palestinians”.
I can only think of three non-antisemitic reasons why one might oppose zionism, and not only are all three very uncommon, but all three would make one oppose the “Palestinian” cause even more strongly. I can’t think of any reason other than hatred of Jews why anyone would oppose the existence of a Jewish state in the Holy Land but support the establishment of an Arab state there.
Carlson is denounced as an antisemite because he’s acting like an antisemite. If something walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is indeed a member of the family anitidae.
Enjoyed watching that POS nervously sweat in the video.
Trump admin would not launch an investigation and ruin a perfectly good counter intel asset, lol. They would keep milking the cow.
Maybe Tucker realized hed been played twice and by outing himself, he thinks they wont dare use him again.
TC has lost the plot. There’s no contradiction in supporting ‘America First’ and the USA delivering a well deserved, long delayed beat down of the Iranian regime which has since ’79 targeted, injured and killed US Citizens and Service Members. In fact this is exactly the sort of military operation outside our hemisphere we should be doing but also restricting ourselves to; kicking the snot out of Nations that deliberately seek to harm the well being of the USA and its Citizens.
Along with regime change so the sorts of people who support terrorism are no longer in charge.
IOW, “American first” doesn’t necessarily mean “non-interventionism” or “no new wars” (although the current war isn’t “new” and was started by Iran 47 years ago). It means doing what’s in America’s (long-term) interests. If that means intervening or warring, so be it.
Well…I would say it does mean following a general policy of non intervention and restricting any intervention outside our hemisphere to ones which have a direct and significant National Security threat to the the Citizens of the USA.
Where a Nation like Iran has earned their butt kicking by targeting, harming and killing US Citizens no problem let the curb stomping begin. That’s not an ‘intervention’. An intervention would be poking our nose into something that has little to no bearing on the direct economic prosperity and National Security interests of the broad middle-class 70% in between top 15% and bottom 15%. Ukraine as one example. Kosovo as another.
When we do break our non intervention policy it should be on a very transactional basis in which we take possession of resources; oil/gas, rare earth minerals and truly strategic locations as compensation for our efforts.
This is some seriously deranged commentary. The article, too. Carlson is an idiot. It seems Jacobson might be one as well. Laura Loomer should change her last name to Looney. What a loser she is.
Why all you folks want to get in the hot tub with these ridiculous takes?
well, if he is in fact communicating with a foreign government and not under the powers of a current admin,,be it gop or dem etc,,,then I would say he is open to gov scrutiny
that would hold true for any on us..even if we were trying to get a passport do business with etc etc a foreign country,,a friendly one or not , that could a legit reason to at least be reviewed by the government
Hopefully the government would prioritize who gets the look over
Tucker sounds more like Candace every day. LOL
Tucker qatarlson on payroll as influencer for al jazeera? Useful idiot of islamofascists.
No free speech in persian gulf countries. There are unwritten and unspoken rules. Tucker will be treated as honored guest until he says wrong thing. Then they change the locks on his front door without notice and tell him to his visa expires in 24 hours. Or he just disappears like khashoggi.
They aren’t reading HIS texts.
They’re reading the texts of the Iranian scumbags they are monitoring.
Why are you texting them, Qatarlson?
Leave a Comment