Tucker Carlson Putin Interview

[7Seconds]

So it IS how you intended it

It wasn’t my intention to come across as “I'm smart enough to process complexity and nuance, but nobody else is" because I am fairly aware that I am as blind as anyone to my own biases. In fact, with the obligatory “no homo” one thing I appreciate about our discussions is you are very good at pointing this out.

Not sure why you are so fiercely opposed.

I don’t think I am “fiercely opposed” to it as I am just defending my initial post. But as someone who thinks it is in our geopolitical interest to aid Ukraine I do have some concerns that Carlson will frame this interview in what I believe will be incredibly distorted way. I can see him

1. ⁠Unfairly portray Ukraine as unreasonable for not seeking to give up territory to Russia in return for peace even though Russia is the aggressor.
2. ⁠Frame the conflict as, on a net basis, negatively impacting US interests even though the US is greatly benefiting strategically from funding Russian loses for cents on the dollar with no US personnel at risk + having a more united EU and NATO
3. ⁠Give emphasis to the view that Russia attacked because Ukraine was on its way to joining NATO.

60 Minutes would do it and it has made many interviews with our enemies and 60 Minutes is on the opposite side of the political spectrum than Tucker.

Yeah, that post was me misunderstanding the post below. Which is unfortunate as minutes before I had disparaging remarks about another poster’ reading comprehension skills.

Agree 100%. It's all propaganda from both sides. We should have access to both so we can make our own reasonable judgments.

For whatever reason I was thinking he was referring to the propaganda from both sides in the domestic discussion on whether we should give aid to Ukraine. Which seemed odd to me that we would include Putin in this. I still don’t really understand the point I was trying to make. Long story short, afternoon edibles for me should probably not continue.

[mtpockets]

https://twitter.com/i/status/1755731595305296301

[mtpockets]

[7Seconds]

About half an hour of the interview was Putin explaining why he should invade Ukraine by giving a history lesson of the Kievan Rus's historic claim over the land. Not exactly sure why anyone in America, a former colony of a kingdom, would side with this man.

And Poland is apparently the source of all evils and started WW2 as he says when Germany invaded Czechoslovakia Russia asked Poland if it could send troops to stop them but the Nazi aiding Poles refused.

Then he suggests Hungary should take back its former territory in Ukraine.

Although what really shone through is he is a cold war relic. I’s obvious he really does drink his own kool aid. It’s crazy how he kept bringing up how the CIA is behind everything. I mean he is not just paranoid, he is too unaware of himself to see he is still living in the Soviet educated KGB mentality of those times.

Added a bit of bourbon to those edibles, so probably need to watch this again tomorrow.

[Bando]

Don't know much about him but I think he is intelligent enough to do something other than that toupee, no one wears them anymore.

Dude just work with what the creator gave you.

[7Seconds]

Russian telegr@m channels reported that the interview with Carlson and Carlson himself was not to Putin's liking, and the interview itself was considered a failure:

"The Kovalchuk clan sharply criticizes the idea of an interview with the American journalist Carlson. They say that the problem is the unpreparedness of the interview arrangement - it was Gromov's and Peskov's mistake. Putin should have talked about conservative values, the creation of a conservative alliance, and moving on - but he went into history and platitudes about Ukraine. Naryshkin, who allegedly planted ideas with documents of Bohdan Khmelnytskyi and nonsense with Poland, also played a negative role here. He set Putin up to the fullest. Medinsky would not allow such a thing."

According to reports, Putin didn't like Tucker Carlson - "a snob and a useful idiot who got a meaningful fee, but was lazy and lacked creativity."
Kovalchuk family believes they could have done better with Tucker Carlson, but "everything was wasted." There's a wave of complaints in the Kremlin.

https://x.com/gerashchenko_en/status...D3Bfn63DOLnnXw


I don’t think Tucker was too happy either. I imagine he went there hoping for affirmation of conspiracy theories, pro-Maga chest thumping and anti-Ukrainian propaganda, but what he got was a rambling 2 hour lecture on Eastern European, Slavic Culture and Eastern Orthodox history.

Many of his questions were segues into criticisms of the Left. "You felt threatened in 2022, why?" was intended to lead to a dunk on Biden's foreign policy... except Putin went into an explanation of 1200 years of Slavic history. "So you're saying the president was overridden by his agency heads" was supposed to lead into a dunk on the DOJ, DHS, FBI, etc, but Putin didn't let the thread play out and instead made it about Russia.

And then Putin fcking bodied Tucker with the "Good thing you got rejected by the CIA, they're a professional agency after all" line.

[Karl_Hungus]

https://x.com/gerashchenko_en/status...D3Bfn63DOLnnXw


I don’t think Tucker was too happy either. I imagine he went there hoping for affirmation of conspiracy theories, pro-Maga chest thumping and anti-Ukrainian propaganda, but what he got was a rambling 2 hour lecture on Eastern European, Slavic Culture and Eastern Orthodox history.

And then Putin fcking bodied Tucker with the "Good thing you got rejected by the CIA, they're a professional agency after all" line.

^^ Perfect example of what I was referring to earlier. You are so focused on your hatred for Tucker that the majority of your observations are simply re-expressions of your a priori guesses about Tucker's motives...none of which are actually relevant. Divorcing your emotions from your reasoning would strengthen your thinking IMO.

I watched the interview but only half paid attention because I was multitasking, but did find some interesting bits in it. Putin has apparently created quite the elaborate post-hoc justification for his actions dating back nearly 1000 years. Not sure anybody is going to even be remotely swayed by that line of reasoning.

Putin seems personally insulted by the West, claiming several times that he has reached his hand out in friendship only to have it slapped away. He perceives the West as arrogant, patronizing, and dismissive. I suppose that is not terribly surprising, but I was a little surprised that he took it so personally.... almost as if his feelings were hurt.

I didn't like Tucker's line of questioning where he was asking Putin to reconcile his actions with his claimed religious affiliation/beliefs. I thought that was kind of dumb and didn't provide anything useful. This kind of interview doesn't happen every day, so seems silly to waste the time on something like this.

I was glad the he pushed back a little bit on the imprisoned journalist (Evan Gershkovich) accused of "spying".

Overall, I think the interview could have been more focused. I think the language barrier combined with Putin's tendency to ramble for minutes on end didn't help. I imagine he isn't used to having his thoughts interrupted by interviewers.

Those were my initial impressions, but I probably need to watch it in more detail later. I wasn't able to pay as close attention as I would have liked as I was in the middle of other things when I watched.

[weiss1967]

I expected more from papa Putin. He is getting old and soft. Struggling for words. Mumbling about not important schiesse. Dodging the points, trying to smooth the corners. Mocking pols.
I think he should retire to a lake cabin and tell stories to drunk neighbours instead.

We need an interview with Lavrov.

[7Seconds]

^^ Perfect example of what I was referring to earlier. You are so focused on your hatred for Tucker that the majority of your observations are simply re-expressions of your a priori guesses about Tucker's motives...none of which are actually relevant. Divorcing your emotions from your reasoning would strengthen your thinking IMO.

I do agree with your point but I would push back a bit in this particular instance. To me this interview exposed just how much of Putin’s motives are based on the kind of 500 y/o Euro-grievence culture and irredentism that is incomprehensible to Americans and how much RU foreign propaganda trims that up into a US-friendly anti-imperialist/christian nationalist narrative.

The fact that Tucker had to steer Putin into certain talking points his audience had been primed on multiple times and Putin only gave them lip service points to this being a complete breakdown in cultural expectations and framing.

For Putin, Tucker was just scenery. Putin invited him to be listened to, not to answer questions, and to me all of this is relevant.

I do probably need to watch it again as well, as I got into the bourbon somewhere between the Vikings and Catherine I but I do mainly agree with your other observations.

[mtpockets]

I didn’t watch the interview, pointless in my opinion. Putin is a communist piece of sh!t who will eliminate anyone not in line with his thinking in a heartbeat if need be. He was also a KGB foreign intelligence officer for over 15 years and this fukker is intelligent enough to play to his audience and tell them what will best win them over. Carlson is no match for Putin and is way out of his league. This was nothing more than a dog and pony show. At the end of the day Putin is still a total piece of sh!t that is playing people and sadly enough some idiots are buying into it.


Fuk Putin and anyone who is aligned or sympathizes with him.

That's my couple of coppers, which is not up for debate..

[Karl_Hungus]

I do agree with your point but I would push back a bit in this particular instance. To me this interview exposed just how much of Putin’s motives are based on the kind of 500 y/o Euro-grievence culture and irredentism that is incomprehensible to Americans and how much RU foreign propaganda trims that up into a US-friendly anti-imperialist/christian nationalist narrative.

Do you believe that is the real reason? Or do you think that is a post-hoc narrative constructed to disguise more proximal (and selfish) reasons by embedding it within a larger historical context? My initial impression was the latter, but that may be my own perspective as an American where we don't think on broad historical scales as you mentioned. To your point, one thing that struck me when I visited China was how contemporary symbolism, architecture, and culture are still very connected to events and mythology spanning thousands of years. That is a perspective completely foreign to many Americans (including me) whose history only spans a few hundred years.

[7Seconds]

Do you believe that is the real reason? Or do you think that is a post-hoc narrative constructed to disguise more proximal (and selfish) reasons by embedding it within a larger historical context? My initial impression was the latter, but that may be my own perspective as an American where we don't think on broad historical scales as you mentioned. To your point, one thing that struck me when I visited China was how contemporary symbolism, architecture, and culture are still very connected to events and mythology spanning thousands of years. That is a perspective completely foreign to many Americans (including me) whose history only spans a few hundred years.

I’m obviously nobody, but I do believe that. Despite his obvious intelligence and political skill, Putin, in my opinion, is an irrational ideologue hiding behind the facade of a coldly rational man.

Russia used to have a pretty effective propaganda narrative about how they stood for national sovereignty and NATO were the real imperialists. For a while this propaganda was pretty successful at influencing non-Russian audiences to be more sympathetic. But it isn't what Putin appears to believe, instead he believes this Russian Imperial Revanchism which is much less appealing to non-Russian audiences, but may reflect how older Russians think. I guess he doesn't feel that he needs to repeat the propaganda line, even if it would be more effective in some ways.

All this makes me think that the interview could have been directed more at a domestic audience. It's the same script he's used domestically for years, that the west perpetrated a "century of dishonor" against Russia. And the way he kept dumping on Tucker is not the right approach if he wanted to appeal to a crowd who respect Tucker, but if he wants to convince a domestic audience that western media are inept, ignorant slanderers of Russia, it makes more sense.

[mtpockets]

[paulinkansas]

Fuk Putin and anyone who is aligned or sympathizes with him.

Keep a piece if someone in a trenchcoat you don't know knocks at your door. KGB. Ded srs. Well, maybe not srs. Don't let that make you paranoid, srs.

[mtpockets]

Keep a piece if someone in a trenchcoat you don't know knocks at your door. KGB. Ded srs. Well, maybe not srs. Don't let that make you paranoid, srs.

Ha Ha.... I have bears visiting on the regular...

12 gauge is always at the door ready to go..

1st one bear banger, next 2 slugs.

[Paul Kreul]

To be fair I don't think anybody would be able to do an interview with Putin and have it not be a propaganda piece.

He's not exactly known for being friendly to dissenters or critics.

Which is why no organization with journalistic integrity would agree to the stipulations (explicit or implicitly understood) Putin has likely required to get it to happen in the first place.

Just lol, you know how many interviews Putin did in the past with CNN, ABC, 60minute anchors..but those were all legitimate & true works of journalism integrity..right?

FFS, you are Your posts are like a Democrat bot wrote them

[Thebigzub]

The only thing missing from that interview is Putin being cooled with a fan from 2 Russian hookers while he drank popov straight out of the bottle.

Waste of time.....my $0.02

[7Seconds]

Just lol, you know how many interviews Putin did in the past with CNN, ABC, 60minute anchors..but those were all legitimate & true works of journalism integrity..right?

The timing of the interview matters, no western journalists have had access since the war started.

[mtpockets]

Putin’s Myths About Ukraine, Debunked


https://time.com/6693504/vladimir-pu...nkId=318053695

[weiss1967]

Putin’s Myths About Ukraine, Debunked


https://time.com/6693504/vladimir-pu...nkId=318053695

isn’t “Putin’s myths”, this is reality. Putin didn’t invent Russian fairy tales with “Ukrainian” ancient towns in it. Ukraine is Russia. Same as Taiwan is China.

Separatists should be hung on telegraph poles, before some Californian’s wackos start toying with wrong ideas.

[mtpockets]

isn’t “Putin’s myths”, this is reality. Putin didn’t invent Russian fairy tales with “Ukrainian” ancient towns in it. Ukraine is Russia. Same as Taiwan is China.

Separatists should be hung on telegraph poles, before some Californian’s wackos start toying with wrong ideas.

LMAO... Ok

[LWW]

The tougher war hero’s don’t piss and whine like this guy. They are tough and don’t give thier 2cents publicly. They also don’t call themselves by tough guy nicknames like “bad” publicly.

What a silly rant.

[7Seconds]

The tougher war hero’s don’t piss and whine like this guy. They are tough and don’t give thier 2cents publicly. They also don’t call themselves by tough guy nicknames like “bad” publicly.

What a silly rant.

Who are you talking about?

[LWW]

Who are you talking about?

Bad Brad.

I’m not talking about the other guy here who likes to bragg how bad and how much trouble he is.

[7Seconds]

Bad Brad.

I’m not talking about the other guy here who likes to bragg how bad and how much trouble he is.

Bad Brad? Do you mean Vlad Putin? Because he wasn’t a war hero. The official Russian position is that Putin was a relatively low-level KGB staff member who spent his Cold War years behind a desk, although there is evidence to believe that might not be necessarily true. Exactly what he was doing from his post in East Germany is a bit of a mystery.

[mtpockets]

I’m not talking about the other guy here who likes to bragg how bad and how much trouble he is.

What other guy?


Are you having trouble speaking in full sentences today Little Man?

[LWW]

Bad Brad? Do you mean Vlad Putin? Because he wasn’t a war hero. The official Russian position is that Putin was a relatively low-level KGB staff member who spent his Cold War years behind a desk, although there is evidence to believe that might not be necessarily true. Exactly what he was doing from his post in East Germany is a bit of a mystery.

Bad Brad sounds like a cry baby.

Puttten doesn’t call himself tough guy names like “bad boy” etc and will never let you get that impression about him if you’d ever meet him. Then he’d have ya killed before ya know, that’s how “bad” and dangerous a man like him is. I never said he was a war hero though. I was talking bout Merican war heros.

[7Seconds]

Bad Brad sounds like a cry baby.

Who the fck is Bad Brad?

This guy?


https://x.com/mikesington/status/175...D3Bfn63DOLnnXw

[LWW]

What other guy?


Are you having trouble speaking in full sentences today Little Man?

Little man keeps growing and growing because he doesn’t spend his days wrapped up on Dons daily drama.

Getting big over here, it’s too funny how much growth is taking place.

I repped the chit out of those 70s in flyes yesterday before doing the 80s.

I’ve had three workouts today, ALL PRs!!!!!!

[mtpockets]

little man keeps growing and growing because he doesn’t spend his days wrapped up on dons daily drama.

Getting big over here, it’s too funny how much growth is taking place.

I repped the chit out of those 70s in flyes yesterday before doing the 80s.

I’ve had three workouts today, all prs!!!!!!

lmao