Whats wrong with interviewing Putin?

You said there's nothing wrong with interviewing Putin. So why do you have a problem with Tucker interviewing Putin?

Can you cite an example of "kissing his ass and spreading his lying propaganda" ...or did you just make that up?

Did you watch or listen to the interview ...or are you just talking out of your ass like everyone else who didn't watch it but thinks they know everything about it?

 

I do not see anything wrong with Tucker Carlson interviewing Vladimir Putin. I wish he had asked difficult questions, like "How did you become one of the richest people in Russia?" and "Why do your opponents fall out of windows?"

 

What I saw was a game of softball that facilitated Putin putting forth his bullshit about negotiating a peace on HIS terms. No I saw clips not the whole interview, but even tucker used the defense of course he lies, it's not real news. So, that's what I expect from him. I'm old school, either you're a liar or your not; tucker is. I wouldn't trust him with something I absolutely didn't give a **** about.

 

Republican would not ask hard questions, they are hoping Putin helps Trump win again

 

What did Tucker lie about?

 

I didn't say "HE" lied in the interview, Putin did. But as a liar tucker has no compunction about facilitating a liar.

 

You say Tucker is a liar. What did he lie about?

 

Analysis of Putin's interviews in the Russian media

Modest Kolerov is a historian, publisher and public figure

— I don't think the West and the United States will listen to Putin. It's not because they didn't know something, it's not because there's something new for them, no! They knew all this, acted in their right mind and firm memory against Russia in Ukraine. For this reason, the position of the Russian Federation is fundamentally unimportant for them. They don't give a damn what Russia thinks about it. I think I'm not exaggerating if I say that Putin's interview expresses a certain consensus that exists in the Russian Federation about the war in Ukraine. So, the West was fundamentally against Russia, against its consensus, wishing death to our country. But the sensation is different: the fact that the Western popular majority did not know about this, they used the agitation that the aggressive Western government provided them. Tucker Carlson has already received about 60 million viewers of this interview, I think that the audience in the West will reach about 100 million, these tens of millions are hearing Russia's position for the first time, it's true, yes. Thanks to Carlson. He is doing this in his own interests, but it has served Russia, without any doubt. This minimal enlightenment of the Western majority is the main achievement of the interview.

But the West as the government, the West as the aggressor, the West as a consolidated force that wants Russia dead, will not change its decision. The popular Western majority will not be able to influence its political forces. I think that Trump will replace Biden, but the essence of Western hostility towards Russia will not change from this. The West must first experience a "hard landing" from its megalomania, and then it will be possible to think about coexistence with it.

 

Next

Karen Shakhnazarov Director, CEO of Mosfilm

— It would be naive to expect that this interview will decisively overturn the entire Western policy, the policy of the United States. But I think the interview will have a certain impact on the West. Actually, we see it. Since there is a rejection of Carlson's figure, Clinton said he was an idiot. This is an indicator of how nervous the American elite is. She does not want Russia's position to be widely available. I think this is a very useful interview; in the West, Russia's position in the information field was not represented at all. Everything is cut so much that it is difficult to convey at least some Russian position. The elite are afraid, which means that they understand that they lie a lot. By the way, it looks very much like the late Soviet Union. Unfortunately, they were also very afraid of free information back then. The same thing is happening to them now.

 

Indeed .By doing this interview, Tucker gave Putin the platform he wanted to get his message to the west. While giving nothing in return.

My goodness, the RW gang is all over the place and lacks order and stable consistency .

Putin is a vicious dictator, but he is no fool. This would benefit him more than it would anyone else.

 

Next

Marat Bashirov is a political strategist

— Almost the main political event of the week, but of the year, was the very fact of Vladimir Putin's interview with American journalist Tucker Carlson. Let's just say that Carlson's interview is an event in journalism that will remain in memory for decades. It doesn't matter what awards Tucker receives, but this is something that citizens of many countries have not heard about the events that are currently taking place in the world. This applies not only to Ukraine, but also to global security issues. Therefore, of course, this is why there is such a huge excitement and interest. It is important to note that Tucker represented the part of Western society that did not understand what was happening, he asked those questions and received answers that are very important for understanding them. He was very patient, which is important for a journalist who is trying to find the truth.

 

Next

Malek Dudakov is an American political scientist

— Talking about the whole West is too broad. But the part of him whose ideas Tucker Carlson expounds, of course, will hear him. We are talking about a conservative Republican America. Perhaps other Western countries that sympathize with her, or maybe they adhere to the same traditionalist conservative views, will also hear. Tucker Carlson is currently the most popular journalist in the United States with a huge audience. It is for right-wing America that he is a cult figure, a trendsetter. Therefore, of course, they will hear him, well, they will hear the point of view of Russia, which our president conveyed in this conversation.

This interview is an opportunity for the President of the Russian Federation to convey Russia's point of view without censorship, distortions and provocations, which just caused outrage from liberal circles and the liberal press. They are used to always managing discourse and media processes in such a way as to distort any point of view that does not suit them. That's why they complained that "Putin does not give us interviews, because we will ask provocative questions, and then we will cut it all in such a way that the meaning will be the opposite." Putin gave an interview to Tucker, who does not do this. Tucker Carlson came to Russia at a very interesting moment when public opinion in the United States is turning away from Ukraine. I think Tucker understands that the war in Ukraine will become increasingly unpopular in the United States, and he is further promoting all these processes.

 

Next

Artyom Prokofiev Deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation from Tatarstan

— The interview caused such a stir in Western countries precisely because no alternative point of view about Russia, our country's politics, as well as events in Ukraine is allowed in the West. There is a rigid monopoly there, which is built up with the help of administrative, political levers and even the repressive machine of these states, up to criminal prosecution. In this sense, of course, Tucker Carlson is a brave man, but the question is: how much can one interview influence and resist the monopoly of information, harsh propaganda that the Western establishment has built against our country? This is an open question, but, as they say, let those who have ears hear, therefore, the fact that such journalists appear who convey an alternative point of view to a Western audience, of course, should be welcomed.

 

Next

Sergey Tolstykh , head of the Zastava group of security organizations

— I think that the West has been hearing not only Carlson, but also other reporters and other sources for a long time. But it's one thing to hear, another to take some action, because the West is governed, as I understand it, by a certain elite that appoints the same Biden, and Trump before him, is a clan war. And clan wars are always about financial interests. Their interests are common — investing in the US economy, in their military-industrial complex.

At the time of Carlson's dismissal from CNN, he was at the peak of popularity, people are really listening. Therefore, Carlson will simply escalate the situation now, but unfortunately, it is not the people of America who make the decision, not the same ordinary Germans, but a certain circle of people. No matter what Vladimir Vladimirovich says now and no matter what Carlson shows on his channels, the policy of the West today will be steady in the current aggressive course towards Russia. After all, the issues here are simple, economic, strategic, and, unfortunately, nothing will change from what Carlson says now.

 

The last part.

Alexey Chadaev is a political scientist

— There is a conflict of two principles, one is freedom of speech, the other is the "culture of abolition". These two principles have clashed with them, and now they are finding out which one is more important. What matters here is not the hype about the interview itself, but the hype around the fact of this event. To what extent is this even possible: to interview Vladimir Putin and give him a broadcast, if he is such and such? These two deeply Western ideas are arguing with each other in the person of their representatives.

 

He's told so many lies he had to admit it in court.

(are you following this? Have you noticed you're siding WITH Russia against your own country?)

 

The regime doesn't want a counter-narrative to their propaganda.

 

Absolutely, that's why they invited tucker to interview putin.

 

It does seem like a publicity stunt.....that might have benefit for Tucker/ and Putin.....but reveals nothing of substance.

 

IMO, anything that makes us weaker benefits the Putster. Division is an asset for Russia.