RU ‘Mr. Carlson is not correct’: Kremlin fact-checks Tucker on ‘interview’ claim harder than Fox News ever did

Link (Archive)

‘Mr. Carlson is not correct’: Kremlin fact-checks Tucker on ‘interview’ claim harder than Fox News ever did​

The Kremlin on Wednesday issued a fact-check to comments made by journalist Tucker Carlson ahead of the release of his interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Carlson the day prior published a video to X confirming the interview after the former Fox News host was spotted in Russia earlier this week.

In his remarks, Carlson outlined his reasoning for meeting Putin before questioning why he was the only Western journalist to attempt such an interview amid the country’s conflict with Ukraine.

“Not a single Western journalist has bothered to interview the president of the other country involved in this conflict, Vladimir Putin,” Carlson said. Most Americans have no idea why Putin invaded Ukraine, or what his goals are now. They’ve never heard his voice. That’s wrong.”

Yet shortly after releasing the video, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told Russian media outlets that Carlson’s allegations were incorrect.

“Mr. Carlson is not correct. In fact, there’s no way he could know this,” Peskov said. “We receive numerous requests for interviews with the president, but mostly, as far as countries in the collective West are concerned, these are from major network media: traditional TV channels and large newspapers that don’t even attempt to appear impartial in their coverage.”

Peskov added that Putin has “no desire to communicate with this kind of media” but agreed to Carlson’s request given that he “stands in clear contrast to the position of the traditional Anglo-Saxon media.”

Carlson’s interview, which has not yet been released, has stirred pushback from critics who fear the journalist will not only fail to push back on Putin but will instead amplify Kremlin propaganda.

And the Kremlin isn’t the only one to issue a fact-check on Carlson’s claims. Numerous journalists also noted on X that they had repeatedly attempted to interview Putin to no avail.

“Interesting to hear @TuckerCarlson claim that ‘no western journalist has bothered to interview’ Putin since the invasion of Ukraine,” BBC journalist Steve Rosenberg wrote. “We’ve lodged several requests with the Kremlin in the last 18 months. Always a ‘no’ for us.”
BFEEC2E0-1705-42BA-858D-C58C5FB17ACA.jpeg
Christiane Amanpour, CNN’s Chief International Anchor, likewise noted that Putin had been declining interview requests for several years.

“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.
FCB3F897-7B5C-4F94-93DA-FE78A1EC4096.jpeg
Russian journalist Yevgenia Albats, an expert on the KGB, described Carlson’s statement as “unbelievable.”

“Unbelievable! I am like hundreds of Russian journalists who have had to go into exile to keep reporting about the Kremlin’s war against Ukraine,” Albats wrote. “The alternative was to go to jail. And now this SoB is teaching us about good journalism, shooting from the $1000 Ritz suite in Moscow.”
1F2CB3BB-6378-4395-B86F-4B428478C919.jpeg
Carlson has repeatedly praised Putin in the past, even going so far as to suggest that the U.S. should side with Russia over Ukraine.

“It may be worth asking yourself, since it is getting pretty serious, what is this really about? Why do I hate Putin so much? Has Putin ever called me a racist? Has he threatened to get me fired for disagreeing with him?” Carlson said in 2022. “These are fair questions, and the answer to all of them is: ‘No.’ Vladimir Putin didn’t do any of that.”

The Wall Street Journal has reported that Carlson’s interview may go live on his website and X on Thursday.
 
From what I understand the 2020 US election had the machines rigged up to the internet for live results, the election workers were not non-partisan, no ID was required, there was a flood of fake mail-in ballots, and they shoved thousands of fake votes into the machines after they realized Trump had clearly won when they counted the results. That is why the live results were suddenly paused for hours as they scrambled to steal the election.
I followed it when it happened.
>they have no voter ID, you don't need to show any card or proof you exist, they just let anyone wander in and vote.
>the poll workers all wore "vote for biden" facemasks or "nevertrump" t-shirts
>the guy in charge of the voting machines openly claims that trump is a fascist and has called for violence against trump supporters several times
>when Trump was pulling ahead a little too much, they started shooing all the pollwatchers out of the polling stations and covering up the windows, surveillance footage that didn't come out until after the fact showed them pulling stacks of ballots out of drawers to feed into the ballot box
>in one particularly infamous case, they claimed there was a pipe burst and had everyone except the pollworkers removed from the building. Coincidentally they 'found' 150k new ballots that had to quickly be shipped to the polling station because for mysterious reasons they were stored half-way across town. The company in charge of fixing pipes in that building was later asked and said they never received so much as a phone call about a pipe burst, it was a complete lie
>a normal ballot filled out by a person usually involves not just marking the president/party but also governments/congressmen/other politicians. All the 'newly found' votes shipped when the fix came in had 'biden' checked and absolutely nothing else.
>despite not having voter ID, their elections aren't really anonymous either. They did keep data on the voters on servers that were not only perpetually online, but also so easy to get into that random anons did. In one case they managed to alter the data to have a governor's address listed as the 'based department' in 'peepeepoopoo rd' and an absurd amount of voters were 120+ years old.

>the DNC was already exposed by admission of high-ranking members for hiring people to drive from state to state to vote in large amounts of polls, and somehow never got any legal recourse for that
>when the republican councils in various districts were calling for investigations, democrat rivals threatened to have their children killed on livestream and never got legal recourse for it
>all the efforts by trump, giuliani etc to fight the result legally were pointless from the start because the US literally does not have any laws on what to do when an election result is proven to be fraudulent. Even if the judges didn't turn it into a shitshow out of TDS, the legal mechanisms to overturn the result if proven false do not even exist. They have nothing in case that happens.

The aftermath was a big spectacle where people from all kinds of countries like Mexico, India, Indonesia, Senegal etc all came together to lay out how many safeguards their own elections have despite how irreputable they are, just to dab on the US for being leagues worse than all of them. India can manage having voter ID, why can't the US?
 
Back