Congressman Calls Out Tucker Carlson’s Efforts to Interview Vladimir Putin: ‘It’s Sickening. It’s Un-American.’ https://www.mediaite.com/tv/congres...vladimir-putin-its-sickening-its-un-american/ Rep. David Cicilline ripped Fox News and Tucker Carlson over the reported efforts to try and interview Russian President Vladimir Putin amid a threat of war in Eastern Europe, even though there is no indication that those reports are current. MSNBC Contributor, and former RNC Chair, Michael Steele referenced a Daily Beast article by Julia Davis, who detailed comments made by RT’s editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan while appearing on The Evening with Vladimir Soloviev last Wednesday. Davis reports: The show aired a translated clip of Tucker Carlson Tonight from the night before, where Carlson’s guest, retired Army Col. Doug Macgregor, argued that Russia’s intent to subjugate Ukraine should be taken seriously and even respected. Macgregor contended that “Russia has legitimate national security interests in Ukraine” and said that “Russia is about to demonstrate that we are powerless in Eastern Europe to stop them.” Macgregor asserted: “And I do not see any evidence for this overwhelming support around the world for sanctions against Russia over something that most people rightly regard as a matter of national security interest to Russia.” Carlson nodded approvingly. After viewing the video, the head of RT praised Carlson in a way no other American television host is being lauded on Kremlin-funded TV. Delivering her pitch to Putin in the style of former President Trump’s notorious “Russia, if you’re listening,” Simonyan gushed to Soloviev: “You showed the clip of wonderful Tucker Carlson, who—by the way—is dreaming of interviewing Vladimir Putin, simply dreaming about it! It’s not within my purview, but if anyone could make it happen, it would be amazing. He is the most popular host in the United States and perhaps the only one who is reasonable, has the biggest audience, who understands everything the way it should be understood.” Soloviev and guests in the studio nodded approvingly. Filling in for host Medhi Hasan, Steele said to his guest, “It’s being reported that Fox News and Tucker Carlson are working to secure an interview with Vladimir Putin,” citing Davis’s report that “Kremlin representatives actually think this would be a good thing for Putin.” He then asked if he found that frustrating, “It’s not frustrating,” Cicilline replied. “It’s sickening. It’s un-American.” “This is the same man who said, why aren’t we supporting Russia in this conflict? Russia and Ukraine are both foreign countries,” Cicilline continued. “The absurdity of not recognizing that one of them is a democracy where people have elected to turn to the west and don’t want to be part of Russia and the other is a thuggish dictator.” “The idea that he thinks they’re the same is preposterous,” he added. “This is the same person who went to Hungary to interview Victor Orban, and I guess for his encore, he’ll have [Rodrigo] Duterte from the Philippines. It’s shocking, it’s embarrassing, he ought to be ashamed of himself.” While Davis’s report shows how much of Carlson’s talking points are politically simpatico to that of the Kremlin and Putin, it does not make clear that there are current efforts for Carlson to try and interview Putin. Carlson DID effort to interview Putin last year and which was caught by standard NSA surveillance, which he used as evidence he was being spied upon. The NSA found no evidence that that was the case.
Tucker Carlson's pro-Putin propaganda is so good that RT is running it verbatim with Russian subtitles to a Russian audience.
Tucker Carlson's finding that his, let's just say "unrestrained slobbering of Putin knob" for the last 6 months isn't playing so well post invasion, attempts to pretend he never said any of that, and blame the Democrats for not "standing up" to Putin On the eve of war, Tucker Carlson defended Putin. Now he's backpedaling https://news.yahoo.com/eve-war-tucker-carlson-defended-025451248.html
Didn't Dan Rather interview Sadaam a few times, or was that someone else? It was one of those big news guys, and the last interview wasn't long before they caught him as I recall.
Did Rather (or whatever news host) kiss up to Sadaam for months so much that his statements were regularly run on Iraqi TV as support for the dictator?
‘Patently racist’: Tucker Carlson under fire for questioning Ketanji Brown Jackson’s LSAT scores https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...lson-ketanji-brown-jackson-lsat-b2027827.html The Fox News host’s call for Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s LSAT score is ‘patently racist,’ says one Harvard Law School graduate Fox News host Tucker Carlson on Wednesday suggested that President Biden should release the law school admissions test results for his nominee to replace Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer so the public can judge whether she is talented enough to serve on the highest court in the US. While commenting on a section of Mr Biden’s Tuesday State of the Union speech touting District of Columbia Circuit Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s nomination, Carlson remarked that her name may not be known to most Americans because she was only recently confirmed to an appellate court seat. “That's not a name most Americans know because Ketanji Brown Jackson has been an Appellate Judge for less than a year, but Joe Biden assured us she is ‘one of our top legal minds,’" he said. “So is Ketanji Brown Jackson -- a name that even Joe Biden has trouble pronouncing -- one of the top legal minds in the entire country? We certainly hope so … so it might be time for Joe Biden to let us know what Ketanji Brown Jackson's LSAT score was”. The LSAT, or Law School Admission Test, is a two hour and 20 minute multiple choice exam administered by the Law School Admission Council — a nonprofit made up of more than 200 law schools in the US, Canada and Australia — that has long been a requirement for most law schools. Judge Jackson’s alma mater, Harvard Law School, dropped the test as a requirement for entry in 2017, but according to the Internet Legal Research Group, the class admitted in 2020 had an average score of 173 out of a possible 180. But despite Carlson’s suggestion that the jurist’s admissions exam score could shed light on her legal acumen, the test score only measures reading comprehension, logical reasoning, and verbal reasoning proficiency and is not a predictor of legal scholarship ability. Richard Signorelli, a 1987 Harvard Law School graduate and former federal prosecutor, said Ms Jackson’s test score would “probably” be “phenomenal,” but denounced the Fox host’s demand for Ms Jackson’s LSAT score “patently racist” in a series of tweets on Wednesday. “No one asks for it as a qualifying measure for any legal position,” he said. “How about looking at the fact that she graduated magna cum laude from Harvard [as an undergraduate], cum laude from Harvard Law — where she served as an editor with the Harvard Law Review, clerked for 3 judges at all federal levels including the Supreme Court, and has distinguished legal/judicial experience?” Richard Signorelli, a 1987 Harvard Law School graduate and former federal prosecutor, said Ms Jackson’s test score would “probably” be “phenomenal,” but denounced the Fox host’s demand for Ms Jackson’s LSAT score “patently racist” in a series of tweets on Wednesday. “No one asks for it as a qualifying measure for any legal position,” he said. “How about looking at the fact that she graduated magna cum laude from Harvard [as an undergraduate], cum laude from Harvard Law — where she served as an editor with the Harvard Law Review, clerked for 3 judges at all federal levels including the Supreme Court, and has distinguished legal/judicial experience?” Luke Zaleski, the legal affairs editor for magazine publisher Conde Nast, said Carlson’s “coded message” in asking for her LSAT score “is that she’s not qualified and because she’s a woman of colour has been given everything she in fact earned”. “The irony of this sick message coming from the heir to a frozen fish empire is as magnificent as the ugliness and racism coded into it is malevolent,” he added.
Yes, it's certainly racialist to check on someone's reading comprehension, logical reasoning, and verbal reasoning proficiency when considering them for a Supreme Court Justice.
Look at her resume, moron. Did Fucker ask the same questions about the 3 (white) justices Trump brought in? No.
You mean her radical progressive activist resume? The point is that it is not racialist to check on someone's history with regard to how they will perform their duties and if it will be in the best interests of the country.