In the last few days, we saw reports that Tucker Carlson was in Moscow, along with speculation that he was there to interview Vladimir Putin. We always thought it was weird that everyone assumed he was there to interview Putin. There are millions of other people living in Russia, after all, and off the top of our heads, we can think of are several other people in Russia who might have been interesting choices to interview. For all they knew, he was there to interview Edward Snowden or Tara Reade, who said that they had to flee to Russia to be protected from American authorities. In any case, this earned a great deal of anger from leftists and their allies, such as charges of treason such as this …
This, @TuckerCarlson, is treason. If you were British, you would go straight to The Tower. https://t.co/VBpG5eurMh
— John Sweeney (@johnsweeneyroar) February 4, 2024
… and a suggestion by Bill Kristol that Carlson be refused the right to return to the country of his birth. You know, because jokes about doing fascist things are funny!
But today, Carlson ended speculation. He explained that he was indeed interviewing Putin and released this video on why he had done so:
Why I'm interviewing Vladimir Putin. pic.twitter.com/hqvXUZqvHX
— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) February 6, 2024
We are of the opinion that it is perfectly normal for journalists—and we define the term ‘journalist’ very broadly—to interview even the heads of countries we are at war with. Still, you as a viewer should be very careful with the claims Putin makes when the full interview airs. We do not trust Putin to tell the truth, and you should give people some time to respond before drawing any hard conclusions. We say that as a person who has generally soured on Ukraine because Ukraine has ceased being a Republic, suspending elections, throwing journalists in prison and banning entire religions. We used to root for Ukraine, now we are indifferent, though it we were Ukrainian, we supposed we would still prefer not to be ruled by Russia.
We also are not sure Carlson will push back if Putin tries to mislead him. He has become a pretty soft interviewer, for the most part. If Carlson does push back, we hope he is careful about what he touches. Let’s just say there is a history of Putin’s enemies suddenly dying.
Still, we generally think there is nothing wrong with listening to what Putin has to say. And as for the silly claims of treason, the law sets down the definition of treason in the last place most leftists would look: The actual text of the Constitution. Here's the relevant language:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
Let’s break that down. The first part requires the person to wage war, and we don’t think anyone would try to claim that Carlson was waging war. And the crucial element needed for the second part is that Putin has to be our enemy. Now, Putin is a tyrant and Russia is unquestionably a rival power. Maybe you would say colloquially that Russia is currently our enemy. But to be an enemy in a legally cognizable manner, you need some kind of actual legal declaration, or a set of facts that makes the conclusion inescapable. For instance, a formal declaration of war against Russia might count, or one of those authorizations of military force usually given in lieu of such a declaration. We are aware of anything that officially declares Russia to be our enemy in a legally cognizable way.
And perhaps if America was presently under attack in a manner that amounted to an act of war, and an American citizen helped the attackers, that might count. So, if an American saw the attack on Pearl Harbor and decided to run to an American base under attack and shoot at some of the American personnel, then perhaps that language in the Constitution could be stretched to call that treason, too. But nothing like that is happening as of this writing.
And it is important to interpret the Treason Clause narrowly to honor the founders words and intent. Bear in mind, the people who wrote the Treason Clause were themselves traitors. They had just fought a war against Britain. That was treason and if they had been captured by the British, the best-case scenario would be a mere execution.
(The worst-case scenario is more or less what was depicted at the end of ‘Braveheart.’)
The point is that the founders had lived under a regime where just denouncing the government could be considered treason and while a great deal of our laws and even rights came from British tradition, the founders didn’t want to adopt that. They defined treason narrowly precisely so that someone couldn’t go to prison for the ‘crime’ of Journalism in the First Degree or any other form of expression, and we are the better for it.
Still, we will say probably the least surprising sentence written on this website: There were reactions.
Not a single American journalist has interviewed the leader of a nation waging a war that has taken hundreds of thousands of lives. America's propaganda cabal has conducted literally hundreds of pep rallies for the other leader, however.
— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) February 6, 2024
We need real journalism. https://t.co/JdcGgYSjCi
Mainstream media journalists have interviewed Putin many times before. The only difference now is that they can’t control the narrative.
— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) February 6, 2024
Zelensky has been given numerous primetime interviews. Osama Bin Laden has been interviewed before. We have a right to hear from everyone—no… https://t.co/qQ9b4jkEwh
The cut off text reads:
We have a right to hear from everyone—no matter how you feel personally about them.
And that is what is important in freedom of expression. It is not merely about how good and sometimes cathartic it feels to be able to say what is on your mind—though that is definitely a part of it. It is also about our right to receive information—which can’t happen unless people are free to create and transmit the information in the first place.
Tucker is only Western journalist with the guts and capability to pull this off
— Darren J. Beattie 🌐 (@DarrenJBeattie) February 6, 2024
Completely outclasses the entire Western media https://t.co/7ma8KkSays
This is a good monologue but Tucker should not have to explain why interviewing Putin is important for understanding global events
— Saagar Enjeti (@esaagar) February 6, 2024
The fact that an explanation is offered and freak out precedes it is evidence of just how lost our news media is today https://t.co/Ouvx1wXlNr
Honestly, we suspect there would be value in Carlson just saying ‘why am I interviewing Putin? Because I feel like it, and the last time I checked, America was supposed to have freedom of the press.’ And then, crucially, end the video right there. Shame on the many Americans for even asking the question.
But we think Carlson wanted to shoot his mouth off on a lot of topics besides freedom of press, and he knew that his video would be well watched (over 25 million views as we write this, and we expect that number to go up by the time we hit publish), so he knew he had a big soapbox.
Real Journalism. https://t.co/WtQfrkoF7t
— Matt Gaetz (@mattgaetz) February 6, 2024
This is “we don’t like any money going to Ukraine so we’re interviewing the poor, misunderstood Putin.” Giving a listening ear to a murderous dictator just because he is the enemy of your enemy, Biden, doesn’t make you principled. But the usual righties will slobber. Yuck. https://t.co/Zc88qAndmU
— Kimberly Ross (@SouthernKeeks) February 6, 2024
Tell us you don’t understand freedom of the press without saying you don’t understand freedom of the press.
One point we also think is important is that one doesn’t have to be unbiased to engage in freedom of the press. In 1791, when the First Amendment was ratified, there was no concept of an ‘unbiased press.’ Every newspaper was a party organ. Indeed, newspapers were seen as critical to party growth. Thaddeus Stevens, called the Father of the Fourteenth Amendment, would try to spread the Republican party by first funding a newspaper in an area dominated by Democrats, as a way to drum up support for Republicans. It was only in the Twentieth Century that newspapers started to claim to be unbiased and there is a real question of whether or not they ever were actually unbiased. Carlson has his own opinions and he wears that bias on his sleeve. We think in a real way it is more honest than the many partisan hacks who pretend they aren’t biased.
Does Tucker really think we journalists haven't been trying to interview President Putin every day since his full scale invasion of Ukraine? It's absurd -- we'll continue to ask for an interview, just as we have for years now. https://t.co/pW8F2zbq1i
— Christiane Amanpour (@amanpour) February 6, 2024
Tucker's interview with Putin is going to break the internet https://t.co/nmd3CtwRjt
— Monica Crowley (@MonicaCrowley) February 6, 2024
Well, probably not as much as Kim Kardashian’s hindquarters but who knows?
In order to remain free, we must be able to speak freely.
— Conservative Momma (@conmomma) February 6, 2024
The right to speak freely or to vote your conscience is almost as important as the right to keep and bear arms. Almost.
just here for the mental breakdown of the Biden folks
— -- GEROMAN -- time will tell - 👀 -- (@GeromanAT) February 6, 2024
This site positively runs on lefty tears. It's like our jet fuel.
It is a literal violation of the NATO treaty for you to interview or even talk to someone form a communist country, especially a communist leader. Delete this or go to jail
— Three Year Letterman (@3YearLetterman) February 6, 2024
He’s joking. His sense of humor remains odd, but it’s plainly a joke.
Should be fun watching journos absolutely meltdown while Tucker does the job they pretend to do https://t.co/xmfp7WKUfx
— Auron MacIntyre (@AuronMacintyre) February 6, 2024
I got no problem with anyone interviewing Putin. I believe in freedom. The problem is that @TuckerCarlson is a dishonest, authoritarian-embracing propagandist. And he’s a Putin toady. In this preview of his interview, Tucker attacks Zelensky, western media, & America. Not one… https://t.co/aSKecjkSLt
— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) February 6, 2024
Sadly, he goes on:
Not one critical word about Putin. He refers to Putin as ‘the other person in this conflict.’ Not the dictator who invaded a sovereign nation. Not the guy who started this war. Tucker is free to interview who we wants. And I am free not to listen. Tucker is profoundly dishonest. He lies to his audience/followers on a regular basis. He blames America and bows to Putin. I feel sorry for anyone who believes what Tucker says. I truly do.
But this is how the media works all the time. For instance, Hillary Clinton would never let Tucker Carlson interview her, because he would ask her a ton of questions she wouldn’t want to answer. She only will do an interview with a person friendly to her. This is called access journalism and we see it all the time. And to single out Carlson just reveals Walsh’s own bias.
And a reasonable Krassenstein showed up, too:
I disagree with Tucker Carlson on many issues, including many of his past statements about Putin and Russia.
— Brian Krassenstein (@krassenstein) February 6, 2024
The fact that the Mainstream Media has felt the need to report:
"ELON MUSK PROMISED NOT TO SUPPRESS OR BLOCK THIS INTERVIEW."
Should be quite alarming to you all. Why… https://t.co/fcj0cOdO4T
The cut off text reads:
Why on earth would any social media platform ban an interview with a world leader, no matter how terrible a person that leader is? The fact that this is even news baffles my mind.
Information is not the enemy.
Even if Tucker won’t be as hard on Putin as another person would, at least he is getting the guy talking. You never know what this might reveal.
Finally, we have this thought:
I’m grateful for the stupidity of Rupert Murdoch, the wisdom of Elon Musk and the courage of Tucker Carlson that resulted in the most important interview of our time. I’m looking forward to watching it.
— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) February 6, 2024
‘The stupidity of Rupert Murdoch…’ Heh.
Honest question: Has Fox News ever recovered from the hit of taking Carlson off the air?
***
Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Twitchy’s conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 50% off your VIP membership!
Join the conversation as a VIP Member