'Tucker' on Twitter Episode 3 Raised Some Questions for Me That I Hope to Get Answered
This is part one of a series on Tucker Carlson’s Twitter Episode 3 that was posted on Tuesday, June 13th, 2023. There is so much content in this video, I feel the need to break it up into multiple parts, to focus on specific subjects and lay it out correctly.
I’m going to state right at the onset here that this is not an anti-Tucker Carlson post. I actually would hope that in this article, and in the number of articles I have coming forward breaking down this latest Tucker on Twitter video, Mr. Carlson himself would sit back and ponder some of the points that I raise. I also know that that probably won’t happen but crazier stuff has occurred—like AOC beating an entrenched Democrat in the 2018 primary to go on and beat a hapless Republican opponent in the general election.
I’m just hell-bent on people from the conservative or the libertarian side of the political spectrum to start doing more critical thinking and questioning anybody about why they think the way they do. We have gone way too long with the talking point theocracy and in my ever so humble opinion, it is damaged this country, possibly irrevocably.
Tucker came out firing as he often does, and he went right for the big news story of the day. which yesterday was, of course, Former President Donald Trump Pleads Not Guilty to 37 Federal Counts which was covered right here at RedState.
However, Carlson then went on an off-road journey declaring that this was all predetermined back in February of 2016, while the primaries for the GOP nomination were still up for grabs to face off against Hillary Clinton. Our sister site covered some of that plot twist.
The focus of the episode is his belief that Trump was inevitably going to be indicted for something because he opposed, more or less the military-industrial complex. That’s what he said, take it for what you will.
We also thought it was interesting that Tucker argued that some of Trump’s worst enemies are his most obsequious sycophants, that they were always essentially traitors to his agenda in waiting. The interesting question is this. We feel nearly 100% confident that Trump will watch this. We would be genuinely shocked if he didn’t. What will he think of this? Certainly, Trump has to be distressed that so many people who were once on his side have turned against him, but will he suddenly start to wonder about anyone who has been sucking up to him lately? Only time will tell.
I’ll get to the sycophants aspect of this in a later post but for now, I want to focus on where we were in February of 2016.
Senator Ted Cruz had just polled a couple of points higher than Trump in a national poll, as the #NeverTrump forces were trying to figure out how, or more accurately, who was going to be able to stop Trump from gaining the nomination. Trump, at this time, was not a shoo-in to win and would not be favored to win going into the last week of the POTUS campaign in November of 2016.
Somehow, though, when the topic came up of Obama ending Iraq War and the reason why troops were sent there in the first place, Trump unloaded a can of whoop (you know what), while Jeb! Bush sat there and looked on. This was the moment that Tucker declares is the precise moment that official D.C. decided that Trump must go to jail. From his Twitter Episode 3…
Seven-and-a-half years later we can point to the precise moment that permanent Washington decided to send Donald Trump to prison, here it is: it’s from the Republican candidates’ debate in Greenville, South Carolina.
Trump: We should have never been in Iraq, we have destabilized the Middle East. They lied, okay. They said there were weapons of mass destruction, there were none, and they knew there were none. There were no weapons. We should never have been in Iraq, we destabilize the Middle East.
Now by the time, Trump said that, a lot of Republican primary voters were starting to reach the same conclusion. How could they not? But it was the next line that doomed Trump to today’s arrest: they lied. He said there were no weapons of mass destruction, and they knew it.
I do love watching the part in the video where Trump gets all red-faced, yelling about the lack of WMD in Iraq; and Jeb! just sits there with a weak smirk, while Donald unloads on his brother’s administration.
I agree with Carlson that the permanant class in Washington, D.C., loves to spend taxpayer money to build up defense and weapons programs. As President Eisenhower warned in his farewell address to the nation, a military-industrial complex would be a danger to this country. That has turned out to be a big boon for some and, one could argue, a detriment to others.
However, I don’t think that is why official D.C. decided to go after Trump back in 2016 or anytime after, just based on that issue. Donald Trump himself had no issue spending gobs of money to rebuild the military, as he promised in the 2016 campaign—and he kept that promise.
Trump has also said since he left office that Putin would never have dared invade Ukraine if he were still President.
Here is his exact quote.
I was also the only president where Russia didn’t take over a country during my tenure.
Because I got along with Vladimir Putin very well. I said “Vladimir, don’t do it, you know you and I are friends, don’t take over any countries, because, you know, Moscow will be hit very hard.”
Now, whether the former president actually believed the United States armed forces were in a deteriorated condition and feared the United States could possibly be attacked, will be debated long into the future. However, he did request it, received most of what he wanted, and sure did spend it. I think it is inevitable that when you build the toys of war, they are usually put into action.
And here is the kicker: do you know who the beneficiary of it has been?
Ukraine.
Tucker Carlson and the majority of Trump’s loyal base have a major problem with the war in Ukraine and the United States’ role in it. In this regard, I’m confused as to why.
Trump has made no bones about the fact if he were POTUS, the war would never have happened because of his commitment to the United States’ weapons support to Ukraine. If he actually meant it, that means supplying the Ukrainian army if Putin crosses the border—the same as is being done now. Does anyone really believe that Trump would not have done, on his watch, the same thing Biden has authorized, maybe even a bit more if Putin had challenged him?
So, aside from the fact that Trump has even gone as far as to threaten or scare Putin with nukes to get attention, and that solution might be the ball game in terms of diplomacy, I just don’t see how, going back to February of 2016, Donald Trump had a target on his back because of his calling out invading Iraq. I guess Trump possibly had a target on his back in 2016 because government bureaucrats feared he might do what his supporters hope he does if he wins in 2024.
Which is burn the whole system down.
He didn’t the first time, and I don’t see a candidate running that actually would this time.
I’m truly glad Tucker is back and on Twitter, and willing to put his own money on the line while he tangles with Fox News over his separation from FCC-regulated TV programming. I believe that he can be an innovator on this platform, which Elon Musk has also sunk a ton of his dough into and has done some amazing reforms which will benefit the exchange of ideas.
I hope that very simple truths will be explored going forward on his show, like the fact there would be no war in Ukraine had Putin stayed on his side of the border.
The “no more wars” candidate in 2016 was effective at reducing our forces in Afghanistan and Syria as President, but built more conventional weapons that he threatened to use if Putin did what he eventually did.
Would Trump have done what he is quoted as saying, or was he just blowing smoke?
These questions need to be tackled, and I hope Tucker moves to do this in his brand new home.
Post a Comment