Join the fight and contribute to our war chest

Ditch the ads for $5 per month or $49 per year

When Tucker Carlson sat down with a prominent world leader, the regime media went into a mouth-frothing frenzy. Suddenly, it’s taboo to interview figures like Vladimir Putin. Yet, we’ve seen George Stephanopoulos, Chris Wallace, and Barbara Walters, among others, do just that. So, why is Tucker branded a “traitor” for doing the same thing?

Image

The answer is simple. Legacy media uses finally-crafted “gotcha” questions that support their far-left and warmongering narrative. In contrast, Tucker’s goal was to genuinely inform the American public. And that’s precisely why the legacy media is up in arms. After all, it’s difficult for them to fuel a CIA color revolution and mislead millions when real journalism comes into the picture.

To understand even more what Tucker was really up to, check out this fantastic interview where he explains his approach to the interview. Tucker aimed to dive deeper because the West is flooded with misconceptions about Putin’s worldview. After all, for about a year now, the lying mainstream media has been spinning tales of Putin being on his “deathbed.” You truly can’t believe anything they say. So, Tucker wanted to cut through the noise and offer his viewers the opportunity to hear Putin’s perspective straight from the source and make up their own minds. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with this approach—it’s journalism as it ought to be.

Revolver covered the uproar among the regime media following Tucker’s interview with Putin. It was astonishing to witness how they quickly circled the wagons to protect their propaganda machinery. It’s clear the regime doesn’t want Americans to hear “both sides” to form their own opinions. They’re after complete dominance over what we think and believe.

Revolver:

Left-wing journalist and activist Melissa Chen went on a diatribe about how Tucker was “duped” by Putin:

Look I know you hate legacy media. You see Tucker as an avatar of renegade journalism staking out unorthodox positions and seeking truths unsanctioned by the establishment.

Fine. Interviewing a sitting world leader is itself part of the job description. But that same world leader did not acquiesce to countless other requests for interviews from other journalists.

I wonder why? Why did Putin grant access to Tucker?

Because he knew how it would turn out. Because he knows who Tucker’s audience is and who trusts Tucker’s brand.

This same audience, who for aesthetic reasons have aligned themselves with Putin as they see him as the figurehead of a purely idealized conservatism that is antagonistic to “Western degeneracy,” (never mind that Putin himself doesn’t live a particularly Christian life, and that Russian society has high rates of alcoholism, domestic violence, prostitution, sex trafficking, etc.), will then go on to adopt policy positions that toe the line with Putin’s agenda and urge their political leaders to do so too.

There are Western journalists in Russia jailed for covering the war; if you’re Russian and protest the war in Russia, you are arrested and jailed.

For the last four years I have excoriated the democrats for taking ideological positions for no other reason than to reflexively oppose Trump. I’m not saying you cannot be critical of our seemingly unquestionable support for Ukraine in $$$ and arms (I am), nor the stated end points that constitute “winning” the war, nor Ukraine’s corruption problem, nor the media’s fawning coverage of Zelensky.

You can do all of that and just not be a Putin cocksucker.

Disliking legacy media is no excuse for being duped by its opposite of it. Disliking woke is no excuse for being duped by Putin.

So, this woman believes Tucker should’ve turned down the interview with Putin because Russia has journalists behind bars. Meanwhile, Tucker’s out there using his platform to advocate for Evan Gershkovich, a journalist currently imprisoned in Russia. And what has Melissa contributed to the cause? Has she done anything beyond griping and taking swipes at Tucker?

RELATED: The media absolutely loses its mind over Tucker doing his job and interviewing a world leader…

The bottom line is this: believing in myths or spreading lies about our enemies doesn’t do our national interests any favors. It should be about understanding the real narratives, not the fabricated ones, and that’s exactly what Tucker aimed to do, and he succeeded, much to the chagrin of the CIA-operated media.

JOIN THE FIGHT — DITCH THE ADS — READ THE NEWSFEED — FOLLOW ON X — GAB — GETTR — TRUTH SOCIAL