A CNN host said the (not-so) quiet part out loud in suggesting that Josh Shapiro “reads too Jewish” for the Democratic nomination.
The panel, hosted by Elex Michaelson, included a conversation with Eric Messersmith about Senator Jon Ossoff’s potential in the 2028 presidential race.
Earlier in the panel, Michaelson gave the usual dismissive description of the antisemitism epidemic in the Democratic party: “Some of the fringes of the DSA, not everybody in the DSA, are certainly pretty close to antisemitism, if not antisemitism.” Sure, Elex. And some of the fringes of the Spanish Inquisition didn’t love Jews either.
Rather than counter that the antisemites would not be allowed to bully the rest of the party, Michaelson <a href="https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/tsiem/date/2026-06-30/segment/01">responded</a>, “As Jew, some people read a little more Jewish than others. And Jon Ossoff may not read as Jewish as Josh Shapiro does, for whatever that&#8217;s worth.”
Mr. Michaelson, a Jew himself, may be right, but his analysis ought to raise concerns that he’s standing on the wrong side.
Shapiro was a serious contender for Kamala Harris’s vice president, who was ultimately passed over for Minnesota Governor Tim Walz. By any metric, Shapiro dwarfs Walz in eloquence, political acumen, and general intelligence. It didn’t take a rocket scientist to see what the Harris campaign didn’t like about him.
I wonder, if antisemitism is confined to the fringe as Michaelson claims, why should Jon Ossoff “reading less Jewish” meaningfully increase his odds?
Rather than exorcise the virulent antisemitism from their movement, the establishment has adopted a strategy of appeasement. The question is no longer “Why would it be offensive to nominate a Jew?” it’s “Who’s the least Jewish Jew we can nominate?”
Ladies and gentlemen, the tolerant Left.
Amidst instances like this one, it can be appealing for the fence-sitter to decry “extremism on both sides.” It is true that influencers Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly have embraced antisemitism wholeheartedly and make full-time jobs out of pushing the envelope when it comes to anti-Israel sentiment.
But there are several key differences between the Left-wing problem and the Right-wing one. The antisemitic right-wing influencers seem far more numerous than they actually are. <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/702440/israelis-no-longer-ahead-americans-middle-east-sympathies.aspx">Recent polling</a> still shows strong support for Israel and the Jewish people within the Republican party, and the opposite amongst Democrats.
This is also reflected by elected officials in both parties. While the ranks of the Democrats are crawling with the likes of AOC, Ilhan Omar, and Zohran Mamdani, their Right-wing counterparts are few and far between. The closest thing is perhaps Representative Thomas Massie, who has an unsavory habit of crying “AIPAC” whenever things don’t go his way. Mr. Massie was primaried even as an incumbent in deep-red Kentucky.
Simply put, even if there is an equivalency between Left and Right-wing commentators when it comes to antisemitism, that equivalency is not reflective of the parties. The antisemitism of the Right is still a largely online phenomenon relative to its sweeping, observable influence on the Left.
After all, in the same week that Tucker Carlson left the Republican Party, multiple Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) candidates unseated longstanding establishment Democrats in the New York primary races. Republicans rejected Massie, but Democrats embraced the DSA. Enough said.
None of this is to dismiss the gravity of the far Right’s antisemitism problem. In recent years, sympathies towards extremism have become far more mainstream than they once were. J.D. Vance’s reluctance to condemn Tucker Carlson, for example, is legitimate cause for concern.
But still, to any objective analyst, there can be no comparison between Vance and the festering antisemitism in the Democratic Party.
The Democrats may nominate Jon Ossoff, but it will have to be because he distanced himself from Judaism, not because they distanced themselves from antisemitism. That’s not political pragmatism — it’s moral surrender.

Harvard University Anti-Israel Camp

Antisemitism Is Not A Fringe Position In The Democratic Party

antisemitism

Democrats

DW Opinion

Jewish

John Ossoff

Tucker Carlson

As we approach the 250th anniversary of the founding of our country, there are two forces that wish to wreck America stem to stern, and seek to destroy it: The DSA Left and the Woke Right.
And they are coming together.
The things that matter most to the United States and Americans are under assault. Core principles: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and private property. These things are under assault. Also, the very idea of America being an amazing place, a place that is good and great. The idea of American peace through strength.
All of these things are currently under assault from the Left.
Of course, the DSA, the Democratic Socialists of America, is eating the Democratic Party wholesale. These are not normal Democrats who are worried about tax rates or entitlement programs. They truly despise the country, and they are full-scale socialists.
What the DSA is doing all over the country is not fun and games; it has consequences. The Democratic Party is on the verge of taking over not just the House in the midterm elections, but also the Senate.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ben-shapiro-show-ep-2458?elementPosition=0&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=Recent+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-981859" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner.avif" alt="" width="1024" height="171" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner.avif 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner-300x50.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner-768x128.jpg 768w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
In the Senate races, in North Carolina, Democrats are up; in Ohio, it&#8217;s a dead heat. In Maine, a dead heat. In Texas, a dead heat. A dead heat in Alaska. In Iowa, a dead heat. That&#8217;s six seats. If Democrats were to win four, they would take control of the Senate. If they win six, they would have 53 seats. Statistician Nate Silver says there&#8217;s about an 80 to 90% shot Democrats take the House and there&#8217;s a 40% shot they take the Senate.
And remember, increasingly, these are not establishment Democrats. These are not John Fetterman, moderate Democrats. These are Democrats who are in thrall to the DSA. They understand which way the winds are blowing and they&#8217;re moving in the direction of those winds.
So what would happen if the Democrats win? We should keep this in mind because this is the backdrop to Tucker Carlson announcing that he wants to start a third party, which, by the way, is nonsense.
What would happen if Democrats were to win? You need to understand the stakes, to understand the game that Tucker is playing, which is a very dangerous game.
The prime example is judicial nominees. The Supreme Court makes decisions that affect all of us on a wide level.
You can either have people in positions of power who are going to do things like strike down Roe v. Wade, curb the administrative state, or ensure the checks and balances of the Constitution, or you can have a bunch of leftists who greenlight every Left-wing policy.
Justice Clarence Thomas is currently 78. Justice Samuel Alito is 76. Unless either one of them or both retire in the next couple of months, and if Democrats win the Senate, you are likely to see them replaced at some point by a Left-leaning member of the Supreme Court.
If you get two justices who shift from Right to Left, or from originalist to the “living Constitution” crew, you end up with a majority on the Supreme Court in favor of every radical social, fiscal, and foreign policy that the Democrats could ever imagine.
That’s a full-scale disaster area.
That’s why the Senate is crucial.
Democrats are going to start stacking up the district courts. They&#8217;re going to start moving those district courts in the direction of Left-wing social policy. If they were to gain control of the Senate, they would move to impeach President Trump. There&#8217;s an outside shot they could even get a conviction in a Senate split between a Democratic majority and maybe some rogue Republican senators.
They will stymie any effort to fund our military, to restock Patriot missiles, to build the new kind of military we need to actually challenge our enemies in the world.
That all happens if the Democrats win the Senate. This is very, very serious stuff.
That sets it up for 2028. Because if Democrats control the Senate and the House in 2026, they are one step away from having a trifecta in 2028.
It’s true that Republicans have an uphill battle in 2026. We all know this; it&#8217;s an off-year election. This is normal.
What&#8217;s exacerbating that, other than the obvious fact of the president&#8217;s unpopularity, is a group of people purportedly on the Right who are openly saying they want the Republicans to lose.
Tucker Carlson is doing this. This is Tucker&#8217;s entire game. Tucker Carlson wants the Republicans to lose, because what he wants is a party that takes the place of the Republican Party, that mirrors all the presumptions of the Woke Left, except for trans issues.
Tucker Carlson truly dislikes the country. There&#8217;s no way to consistently watch his show and believe otherwise. He literally hosted an arms dealer from Russia to talk about the evils of America.
Carlson does not actually like any of the things that classically have made America awesome. He does not like free markets; you&#8217;ll recall him praising feudalism over free markets. He has praised pretty much every jihadi group he can imagine or pretended they don&#8217;t exist. He has said that Iran is actually the wondrous force in the region, and Carlson&#8217;s unending, lavish praise for Vladimir Putin is laughable at this point.
But here&#8217;s the actual story. Carlson is discussing launching a third party. This is the schtick.
You can see why he&#8217;s doing this; his friends are getting kicked out of the government. People like Marjorie Taylor Greene, Joe Kent, and Thomas Massie.
In an interview with the Columbia Journalism Review this week, he said, “I do know what really matters is war and finance. Where does the money come from? Where does it go and who gets killed? And on those questions, the parties are in lockstep solidarity with each other.”
That is a lie. It is not true. If you think that there&#8217;s no distinction between Democrats and Republicans on how taxing works, where the money comes from, how markets work, how foreign policy ought to work, if you think that they&#8217;re the same, it&#8217;s because you&#8217;re stupid or lying.
I don&#8217;t think Tucker is stupid. I think he&#8217;s lying. He said:
<blockquote>That&#8217;s not a democracy. That&#8217;s a one-party state posing as a democracy and it needs to be broken. And there&#8217;s going to be a third party, and I&#8217;m going to do everything I can to bring that about. And that&#8217;s the lesson of the last two and a half months to me. If you vote for Trump and you still wind up in a regime change war &#8230; then we need options, or else let&#8217;s just give up and be ruled by the most unscrupulous people. And I&#8217;m just too young to accept that. We need a third party. I&#8217;m going to help build a third party.</blockquote>
Then he segued into his National Socialist spiel: “I mean, if you make $60,000 a year, you&#8217;re degraded, your life expectancy has gone down, and the promise of your children&#8217;s lives is likely gone.”
That is not true. Upward mobility in the United States remains available.
He says “no one seems to care,” which is, of course, Tucker&#8217;s constant refrain, that all the people who oppose his bizarre and unsavory policy prescriptions just don&#8217;t care. They&#8217;re not “caring enough.”
That’s very feminized Left-wing language from Tucker Carlson on a consistent basis.
What about Hamas? He said, “I officially don&#8217;t care about Hamas.”
That&#8217;s weird, because the dude talks about the Middle East more than anyone who does a broadcast. He cannot stop talking about the Middle East. He&#8217;s obsessed with it.
He says the U.S. government should have as its first priority the welfare of its own people, which, of course, I agree with.
Then he says, “I don&#8217;t want to be a candidate&#8230; I was tempted to say to the New York Times, ‘I&#8217;m running on the pro-patriarchy ticket.&#8217; Just to make sure I gain no new fans.”
This is always Tucker’s shtick; he says a bunch of Left-wing stuff, and then he throws out a Right-wing red meat red herring, and then goes on his merry way.
Tucker has no intention of starting a third party. That is not his actual game. He&#8217;s not going to do that. He&#8217;s too lazy. He has another game in mind.
What is Tucker doing? He&#8217;s not launching a third party. Tucker is not stupid. He is ideologically vile, but he is not stupid. He&#8217;s not going to run a third party because third parties fail.
To take the most obvious comparison, remember the Reform Party? Ross Perot ran as an Independent candidate in 1992, and he was focused largely on the evils of NAFTA and the idea that global economics was bad. He withdrew in July, and then jumped back in in October, and he ended up with 19% of the popular vote, which was the highest percentage for a third party since Teddy Roosevelt’s Bull Moose Party in 1912.
In 1995, he launched the actual Reform Party, and this was a giant dud.
The United States is built for a two-party system because building a national infrastructure is extremely costly and very difficult. Perot won roughly 8% of the national popular vote in 1996.
But here&#8217;s the thing. I hope Tucker launches a third party.
Why? Because it&#8217;ll get crushed. Third parties get crushed. I would love to see a clean referendum on Tucker&#8217;s perverse views, but he&#8217;s not going to do that.
Here&#8217;s the game. Tucker sees that Republicans are probably going to have a bad 2026. What he wants to say is that the reason Republicans had a bad 2026 is that they alienated key people like him. Thus, if you wish to win in 2028, you need to shift the entire policymaking direction of the party back in his direction.
Tucker is not launching the Reform Party. Tucker is launching the TSA, the Tucker Socialists of America. His goal is for Republicans to lose in 2026. He&#8217;s not hiding the ball here. He has said he&#8217;s not voting Republican. He wants Republicans to lose. He is here to demoralize conservatives prior to 2026.
That is the goal; the worse Republicans do, the more Tucker can then try to pretend that the reason Republicans lost is that they disappointed voters like Tucker Carlson.
The reality is that if Republicans lose in 2026, there will be many factors at play. It&#8217;s an off-year election; Trump has been unpopular for a year.
Tucker is not launching some sort of rival to the Republican Party. He&#8217;s standing outside the Republican Party and then saying that because they didn&#8217;t hand it to him, they lost.
That&#8217;s the goal.
And that is just another reason we have to fight. Because people who care about the country, people who deeply care about those fundamental principles of America, the stuff we&#8217;re going to be celebrating this weekend, have to fight two forces: One is the Left, along with the DSA, and the other is the force of their twisted allies on the Woke Right, who are holding hands with them, who are hugging them.
There is a reason why Tucker Carlson and Cenk Uygur are hugging buddies now.
Our principles matter. Some of us have had the same principles for our entire political careers. Some of us have never moved, not one iota. Some of us have always defended private property and free markets. Some of us have always defended peace through strength. Some of us have always defended traditional virtue and traditional values.
Some of us have not moved. We&#8217;ve been here the entire time.
That is why the Daily Wire exists. It&#8217;s why it was founded: not just as some sort of generalized anti-Left brand, but because we actually care about the fundamental principles that undergird the country&#8217;s foundation.
So as we celebrate July 4th this weekend — and obviously we should, because America is the greatest place in the history of planet Earth, and the greatest privilege you have, other than being born into a solid family, is being born in America — we all must keep in mind there&#8217;s an immense responsibility that we all bear in these very perilous and difficult times.
We need to make sure that America makes it from the 250th anniversary to 251, then to 300, and then to 500.
And that only happens if we keep standing for the principles that matter.

IMG_4692

The Most Dangerous Alliance In American Politics

America 250

American History

Ben Shapiro

Democratic Socialists Of America

Opinion

third-party

Woke Right

Tucker Carlson announced this week that he’s leaving the Republican Party. And while many conservatives reacted with shock, <a href="https://x.com/GatesGarciaFL/status/2069500906471879012?s=20">I took to X to frame it in a different light. </a>
While I disagree with his decision, it didn&#8217;t catch me off guard. This has been building for years.
Many see the Nick Fuentes interview as the moment everything changed. I see it as one breadcrumb in a trail that had been leading here all along. His criticism of Republican politicians gradually became criticism of the Republican Party itself. After the Iran conflict, Carlson said he regretted supporting Trump and apologized for misleading people. That’s a major shift from criticizing a decision to questioning his support for the central figure of the movement. What once sounded like a call for reform increasingly sounded like preparation for an exit.
Carlson joins a long line of media figures — and even politicians themselves — to reach that conclusion, and he won’t be the last. But his announcement raises a more important question that all politically engaged Americans eventually face: What do you do when your party disappoints you?
America, for better or worse, is a two-party system. Since the Republican Party emerged as the nation’s second major party in the 1850s and elected Abraham Lincoln in 1860, no third-party candidate has won the presidency, and this is not for lack of trying. Some efforts have influenced the national conversation, no doubt. Some have even temporarily disrupted the political landscape (e.g., Teddy Roosevelt and the Bull Moose Party, Ross Perot, and others). But all have failed to replace the reality that American politics is ultimately a contest between two major movements.
Once we accept this reality, another one becomes obvious. Neither party will ever perfectly represent your beliefs. I’ve personally criticized Republicans for abandoning the fiscal discipline they all champion on the campaign trail.
But political parties are coalitions, not churches. They are alliances of people who agree on enough major issues to work together while disagreeing on countless others. It’s no different from a corporate board, where rarely does everyone sit around a table agreeing on every issue. There are disagreements over priorities, strategy, and spending. But so long as the company is still moving forward and adhering to its mission statement, you stay, persuade, and build consensus. In other words, you work to move the organization in a better direction.
Rational citizens understand this. When voting, they ask: Which party advances my principles more often than not? The irrational citizen asks: Which party never disappoints me? The catch is, only one of those questions has an answer.
For me — especially as a father — the calculation isn’t particularly difficult. When I canvass the major cultural and political battles of our time, I know which side I’m on.
I believe unborn children deserve protection. I believe parents, not the government, should raise their kids. I believe women and girls deserve fairness in sports and privacy in bathrooms. I believe religious liberty is worth defending. I believe the Second Amendment matters. I believe in strong borders. I believe strong families matter. I believe government functions best when it’s limited and accountable. I believe America, despite its flaws, remains a force for tremendous good in the world and should be celebrated rather than apologized for.
Does the Republican Party bat a thousand on these issues? Of course not. Often, the party compromises when it shouldn’t and fails to deliver on promises. But if you’re looking for a party that perfectly executes on its foundational principles, you’ll be looking forever. But if the question is which political coalition advances those principles more consistently, the answer is incontestable.
And that’s where Carlson makes a mistake. He confuses disappointment with abandonment. Because the party falls short of perfection, it is no longer worthy of his support.
Carlson claims that many people will follow him. And while I doubt this, it introduces a problem. When you withdraw support from a political party closest to your beliefs, you don’t create a vacuum. You strengthen the coalition furthest from them.
Nonetheless, it is undeniable that Carlson has a meaningful following. And thus, we must acknowledge that every political decision carries consequences beyond oneself. One approach says, “My party isn’t perfect, so I’m leaving.” The other says, “My party isn’t perfect, so I’m staying and fighting to improve it.” One caters to personal satisfaction while the other strives to achieve outcomes. One protects your purity. The other protects your principles. One is selfish. One is selfless. The former feels better. The latter accomplishes more.
None of this implies blind loyalty. Parties should be criticized — your own, perhaps more. Politicians should be challenged and held accountable. Bad ideas should be rejected. In fact, healthy political movements depend on internal debate. This is the beauty of elections and is a defining characteristic of our American political system, which our Founders put in place 250 years ago.
But there is a profound difference between reforming a coalition and abandoning it. One strengthens the movement. The other weakens it. The American tradition has never been built by people waiting for perfect institutions. It has been built by citizens willing to work within imperfect systems.
That is how abolitionists transformed the Republican Party. That is how Reagan conservatives transformed the Republican Party.
They didn’t leave. They stayed, persuaded, organized, fought… and won.
So, Tucker Carlson is free to leave the Republican Party. That is his inherent American right. But for those who still believe in protecting children, defending families, securing borders, preserving religious liberty, protecting constitutional freedoms, and limiting government power, join me.
Because I’m staying, fighting, building, and will continue working to leave the party better than I found it.
***
Gates Garcia is the host of the YouTube show and podcast &#8220;We The People.&#8221; Follow him on Instagram and X @GatesGarciaFL.

happy family with the flag of america USA at sunset outdoors

Political And Cultural Battles Are Wars For The Soul. Choose Wisely.

Conservatism

Political Ideology

Republican Party

Tucker Carlson says he no longer supports the Republican Party.
That’s the same as Nick Fuentes, Candace Owens, and Marjorie Taylor Greene.
For a long time, I&#8217;ve been talking about ideological borders for conservatives, because words have meanings and political movements must have borders. It turns out these “Republicans” are self-deporting, which is a good thing, because what we don&#8217;t need in the party are people who won&#8217;t assimilate to our culture or our values and who would like our enemies to win.
Good riddance.
Vice President JD Vance was recently on Megyn Kelly&#8217;s show in order to trot out his defense of the Iran deal, and he said something interesting: that even if you disagree with the administration, you should vote Republican, because the alternative is to put Democrats in power. That makes sense.
Let’s put aside all of the nonsense that the vice president was peddling about how we really need a bunch of people who love the Iran deal to stay in, because otherwise the neocons are going to win, etc., etc.
The whole point of what people on the horseshoe Right, or the woke Right, are doing is to destroy the Republican Party from within, to throw their support to someone else in order to get the Republican Party to run after them.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/the-ben-shapiro-show-episode-2451?elementPosition=1&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=Recent+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-981859" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner.avif" alt="" width="1024" height="171" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner.avif 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner-300x50.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner-768x128.jpg 768w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
I&#8217;m okay with people who are rabidly anti-American leaving the party. I don&#8217;t think we need them here. I think that if you came into the Republican Party because you were a refugee from your home party or from your home ideology, and we brought you in here as a kindness, and then you proceeded to take advantage of our system and proceeded to believe that we were going to change all of our principles for you, it&#8217;s time for you to self-deport.
Now, Tucker Carlson is self-deporting from the Republican Party. He&#8217;s very upset with the administration because the administration is not pro-Russia or pro-Iran enough for him.
Yesterday, he announced on the “Can&#8217;t Be Censored” podcast — I have to admit, I find it somewhat hilarious that there are podcasts with sizable audiences that claim that they&#8217;re being “censored” — that he no longer supports the Republican Party; he can&#8217;t because it&#8217;s just too immoral. A moral Republican Party would have sided with Hezbollah, Iran, and the Russians.
Don&#8217;t let the door hit you on the way out.
He said:
<blockquote>How could I or any American voters support a political party that&#8217;s not loyal to the United States, that puts the interests of a foreign country above those of its own citizens &#8230; 
I voted Republican my entire life. &#8230; I&#8217;ve been a consistent defender for 35 years of the Republican Party. &#8230; But there&#8217;s no defending this because it&#8217;s immoral. And it&#8217;s exactly the opposite of what a political party in a democracy is charged with doing, which is representing its own voters, its own citizens, its own nation. And they&#8217;re not doing that. So no, I&#8217;m out.</blockquote>
Tucker acts like he&#8217;s been a Republican for 35 years. That&#8217;s weird, because he was a registered Democrat from 2006 to 2020. He said he did that so he could vote for the Democrats in primaries and manipulate the system — except that Washington, D.C., where he was living, has a closed primary system.
I have some questions.
If the Republican Party will not support Vladimir Putin&#8217;s aspirations in Ukraine, if the Republican Party will not sing the glories of Russian bread and Russian subways and Russian hamburgers, if the Republican Party will not bend over for Qatar completely, if the Republican Party refuses to just cheer on the Iranians as they foster terrorism throughout the region, my goodness, what are we even doing here?
Marjorie Taylor Greene echoed, “There is [sic] a lot of us that are absolutely fed up and will not support a party that betrays its voters and country. That does not mean we are turning into Democrats either. But we are done with the America Last Republican Party.”
Megyn Kelly told JD Vance that she never believed she should simply leave because she&#8217;s upset over what the Republicans are doing. But two weeks ago, she was with Sean Ryan talking about forming a horseshoe coalition with Ana Kasparian, who has tweeted support for terrorism.
The important point is that the Republican Party has certain principles. If you do not accord with those centralizing principles, e.g., peace through strength, then probably you shouldn&#8217;t be here. That&#8217;s okay. You can leave.
But you should not be the lodestar of a new Republican Party.
Self-deportation is a good policy for people who joined up for the wrong reasons in the first place.

tucker_divorce_padded_left (1)

The Political Divorce Everyone Saw Coming

Candace Owens

JD Vance

Marjorie Taylor Greene

Megyn Kelly

Nick Fuentes

Republicans

Tucker Carlson on Thursday downplayed and defended Maine Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner’s Nazi tattoo.
On the Canadian &#8220;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzL_fmyMJJ0&amp;list=PLAxb11SPUbo6zjovYj1FPmfsMPxqtG387">Can’t Be Censored</a>&#8220; podcast<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzL_fmyMJJ0&amp;list=PLAxb11SPUbo6zjovYj1FPmfsMPxqtG387">,</a> the former Fox News host sat down with Travis Dhanraj and Karman Wong to discuss President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, Israel, Iran, and why he says he can no longer support the Republican Party.
Carlson raised eyebrows with his defense of Platner’s candidacy to challenge incumbent Republican Senator Susan Collins in Maine, where Carlson also lives. Republicans across the country have targeted Platner over a series of personal scandals, including a Nazi tattoo that women around him have said he understood the meaning of.
“Look at Graham Platner, this guy who&#8217;s running in the state of Maine, where I live … he&#8217;s a Democrat, he&#8217;s liberal, I don&#8217;t have strong feelings about it,&#8221; <a href="https://x.com/JustinUSA/status/2067951494289145935?s=20">Carlson said</a>. &#8220;But rather than respond to what the guy&#8217;s positions are, they just have called him a Nazi for the last month, because he had a tattoo that was not a swastika, but apparently it was connected to the German military at some point, it&#8217;s not even clear he knew that.” 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
As expected, Tucker Carlson has rushed to Graham Platner’s defense.
He claims Platner didn’t even know about his Nazi tattoo, and insists the real reason people are attacking him is because he’s “not sufficiently supportive of Israel.” <a href="https://t.co/R30ZKXdtSv">pic.twitter.com/R30ZKXdtSv</a>
— Justin (@JustinUSA) <a href="https://x.com/JustinUSA/status/2067951494289145935?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 19, 2026</a></blockquote>
Then, the podcaster speculated why Republicans don’t support the Bernie Sanders-backed leftist. 
“They&#8217;ve attacked the guy, and his personal life. They don&#8217;t like him because he&#8217;s not sufficiently supportive of Israel,” Carlson added. 
Several women, including an ex-girlfriend, have gone on the record to say Platner knew the meaning behind his infamous Nazi tattoo, with one telling the <a href="https://nypost.com/2026/06/11/us-news/graham-platner-cheated-on-fiancee-bragged-about-nazi-tattoo-ex-girlfriend/?utm_term=MANUAL&amp;utm_medium=browser_notifications&amp;utm_source=pushly&amp;utm_content=All%20Push%20Subscribers&amp;utm_campaign=142895716">New York Post</a> the symbol reminded him that “the U.S. was the evil bad guy overseas.” The Senate hopeful’s former political director also disputed Platner’s account and accused him of “a pattern of dishonest behavior.”
The Platner campaign insists he picked a “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/new-accuser-platner-said-nazi-tattoo-reminded-him-u-s-was-the-evil-bad-guy-overseas?author=Jacob+Wheeler&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=23&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=New+Accuser+Reveals+What+Platner+Said+About+His+Nazi+Tattoo">skull-and-crossbones tattoo off a wall</a>” to “commemorate surviving Ramadi and his friends who were killed there.” 
“Graham has also since covered up the tattoo and answered countless questions about it,” a spokesperson for the campaign has said. 
In the same interview, Carlson cast doubt on the motive behind Charlie Kirk’s assassination. 
“He was not murdered for his opinions on transgenderism,” Carlson insisted with no evidence. “Obviously, he was — I believe, and most people who knew him well, as I did, and was friends with him as I was — believe he was most likely murdered for his evolving views on Israel.” 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
Charlie Kirk was not murdered for his opinions on transgenderism. Obviously.
Those of us who knew him best and called him a friend believe he was most likely murdered for his evolving views on Israel. 👀
— Tucker Carlson 🇺🇸 <a href="https://t.co/D1mf5UXwHi">pic.twitter.com/D1mf5UXwHi</a>
— Travis (@NihiloX) <a href="https://x.com/NihiloX/status/2067799643979759965?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 19, 2026</a></blockquote>
Prosecutors say Tyler Robinson, the Utah man accused of assassinating the Turning Point USA founder, wrote in a message to his trans-identifying boyfriend that he had an “opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk, and I took it,” <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/inside-the-twisted-confession-tyler-robinson-is-accused-of-making-to-his-boyfriend">The Daily Wire</a> previously reported. 
Carlson, a vocal critic of the Trump administration’s foreign policy, said he has no interest in running for president but announced a permanent split with the Republican Party.
“The Republican Party in Washington is just completely out of control. I don&#8217;t share their values on any level, their personal values, the way they live, greedy, bizarro sex lives, loyal to a foreign country above the United States,” Carlson said, before taking shots at individual elected officials. 
“Beginning with the speaker of the House, Speaker Mike Johnson, and extending to the president and the leaders in the Senate. I have nothing in common with these people at all. I do not share their values. I find their priorities appalling, and so I&#8217;m just not going to participate in that party,” he said.

Tucker Defends Platner’s Nazi Tattoo, And Adds A Shot At The GOP

2026 Midterms

graham platner

Maine

News

Historically, Russia was very, very good at what we call psyops, psychological operations designed to undermine the United States.
They are still good at it. The Op is happening. It&#8217;s live, right in front of us. Candace Owens, Andrew Tate, and other Woke Right influencers have now landed in Moscow, and they&#8217;re basically Jane Fonda on the Vietcong anti-aircraft guns during the Vietnam War.
They propagandize for our enemies.
If you somehow believe that these people are just good-hearted folks who are invested in Christianity and the West and traditional conservative values, I hate to break it to you, but you are the sucker. If your head is attached to your shoulders, the Op has never been more obvious.
The dictator who currently runs Russia is Vladimir Putin. He was a member of the KGB. His task: Intelligence and counter-intelligence. He worked under a man named Yuri Andropov, who was then leading the KGB. Later, Andropov became the Premier of the Soviet Union, the dictator of the Soviet Union.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ben-shapiro-show-ep-2438?elementPosition=1&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=Recent+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-981859" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner.avif" alt="" width="1024" height="171" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner.avif 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner-300x50.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner-768x128.jpg 768w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
And here&#8217;s what Andropov said about psyops directed at Soviet enemies: “Disinformation is like cocaine. Sniff once or twice. It may not change your life if you use it every day, though it will make you an addict, a different man.”
It seems like a lot of people in the West are now all coked up.
Candace Owens is in Russia sitting on Russian propaganda panels. She&#8217;s praising what she describes as Russia&#8217;s approach to families.
Spoiler alert: Russia&#8217;s idea of family values is encouraging couples to have kids so there is an ample supply of soldiers to fight in the Ukraine war.
Meanwhile, Marjorie Taylor Greene is doing the same sort of stuff, signaling her support for Candace&#8217;s big Russian adventure. And Buckley Carlson (a.k.a. Tucker Carlson, minus the skincare regimen) is openly saying that Russia&#8217;s leader looks out for his people&#8217;s interests, and he wishes we had that here. Tucker, of course, says exactly the same thing.
None of them are simply making critiques of America. They&#8217;re all saying that Russia is somehow better, that Russia&#8217;s leadership is somehow better.
And that&#8217;s the tell: There&#8217;s a big difference between saying “countries act in their own national interest” or “America has problems,” and “I wish our country were run more like Vladimir Putin&#8217;s Russia.” Those are not the same arguments.
One of those is rooted in realism. The other is just crazed fan-fiction conspiracy nonsense.
That is what this has become: Geopolitical fan fiction for people who think America sucks so much that countries like Russia not only ought to be a model for us, but ought to have more global power.
This is all part of what I have called a demoralization op.
Demoralization is the effort to destroy basic moral principles and dogmas and replace them with divisive fringe ideologies. It is step one in collapsing your enemies.
That is what is happening here. Enemies of America are using every resource at their disposal to do it — and there is good news for them: There’s an entire online repository of complete dunderheaded morons and conspiratorial America haters to do their dirty work for them, and lots of people online to click into the echo chamber.
The exact same people who built their brands around “Don&#8217;t trust the regime” and “Don&#8217;t trust the media” and “Don&#8217;t trust the propaganda” are suddenly very much in favor of trusting a regime, (when it&#8217;s Russia), the media, (when it&#8217;s Russia Today) and the propaganda, (when they are controlled by the Russian government and tell them America is decadent and the West is collapsing and Putin is strong and Russia protects tradition).
Suddenly, these people are on board all the way. They&#8217;re not investigating or questioning.
This is not skepticism. This is credulity. This is absolute, credulous stupidity. And they are nodding along either because they are bought and paid for, or because the message actually flatters their priors, and their priors are obvious: America sucks. America is in decline. America, in fact, is evil.
These are the ideas they parrot: We took the wrong side during World War II. We were vicious during the Cold War. We were the bad guys in the modern era. We were the great despoilers of innocent Muslims in the Middle East.
In the end, the result is all the same. The only way to fix all of this is to unburden the brutalized, demonized American soul, and give more power to America&#8217;s enemies.
We need — wait for it — multi-polarity. That&#8217;s how the Op works. The goal is to convince you that America is irredeemably crappy morally, and that the people we&#8217;ve always seen as our geopolitical opponents are actually not that bad. Russia is not that bad. In many ways they&#8217;re better than we are. Iran is not that bad. They don&#8217;t bother us. Maybe they could be our friend. China is not that bad.
That&#8217;s the Op, and it&#8217;s working on a large number of people who spend too much time online watching Tucker Carlson or Candace Owens or Sean Ryan or Andrew Tate or Megyn Kelly or any of the increasingly anti-American grifters and clickwhores willing to crap on America, either because they believe it, or for fame and money.

AmericanEagle_RussianBear

How The Woke Right Became What It Hates

Andrew Tate

Family Values

Majorie Taylor Greene

Putin

Positive views of capitalism among American adults have hit a record low of 54%. Sixty-five percent say the country is headed in the wrong direction. And 54% of Americans say they have little to no confidence in the FBI to investigate Charlie Kirk&#8217;s assassination impartially. Support for this nation is eroding, and it’s being accelerated not just by the predictable agitators on the Left, but increasingly by figures on the horseshoe Right.
Tucker Carlson sits at the center of this grievance party phenomenon, where progressive socialists and former-right podcasters converge to paint a portrait of a broken America. As someone whose friends and colleagues are being pulled in by these takes, it’s time we acknowledge that &#8220;just asking questions&#8221; has gone too far, it&#8217;s tiring, and it&#8217;s doing real damage.
Carlson has been telling audiences that the American capitalist system is &#8220;completely doomed,&#8221; made up of a &#8220;corrupt oligarchy&#8221; that hoards wealth while destroying the working class. He says this with the same energy as Hasan Piker and Bernie Sanders. You can dress it up in flannel, a navy blazer, or a Twitch hoodie — the message is still a lie.
The U.S. unemployment rate sits at 4.3%. Prime-age labor force participation is at a multi-decade high. Young people are not “screwed,” they&#8217;re competing in the most dynamic economy on earth. Over the last century, free markets lifted America to the world&#8217;s largest GDP, providing the tax base for infrastructure, defense, and schools. Because companies compete for your money, they are forced to innovate. That competitive drive gives you the internet, the iPhone, and medical treatments keeping your grandparents alive. The American Dream exists because capitalism rewards labor, skill, and entrepreneurship, regardless of starting point.
Tucker even wants to thwart capitalism’s future. He told Ben Shapiro he would ban self-driving cars to protect Midwest truckers — a specious position that would cost the rest of us dearly. Autonomous vehicles are projected to cut logistics costs 30–50%, add upwards of $70 billion to the GDP, and create high-skilled jobs in software, fleet management, and data analytics. Tractors didn&#8217;t kill farming; they multiplied output, allowing farmers to do more with less, and freed labor for entirely new industries. Every major innovation follows that same pattern. Short-term disruption equals massive long-term gains for everyone. Tucker&#8217;s demagoguery doesn&#8217;t save families; it raises prices, slows growth, and guarantees the stagnation he claims to hate.
His position is not conservative. It is the exact mirror of the grievance-party Left.
Tucker’s worldview, that nefarious forces are conspiring against the American people, doesn’t stop at the economy. In his recent New York Times interview, he stated explicitly that President Donald Trump &#8220;had no choice&#8221; but to join Israel in striking Iran, calling him &#8220;more a hostage than a sovereign decision-maker.&#8221; He claims Israel, Jewish donors, and evangelical Christians control U.S. foreign policy. He said Citibank poses a bigger threat to Americans than Hamas and Hezbollah. When asked about the Protocols of the Elders of Zion — a proven 1903 forgery by Russian secret police — he waved it off: &#8220;I don&#8217;t know what that is. I&#8217;ve heard references to it. It&#8217;s like czarist forgery or something.&#8221;
There’s a lot to unpack there.
First of all, Trump’s decision to strike Iran was driven by the nuclear and ballistic missile threat that the Islamic regime posed and a decades-long urge to take out the world’s largest funder of terrorism, which had been bullying America and her allies for decades. That is America First. That is not some slavish loyalty to Tel Aviv. Trump defied neocons, pressured NATO, brokered the Abraham Accords without a single American troop, and has repeatedly pressured Netanyahu to stand down. He is not anyone&#8217;s puppet. He never has been.
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee lobbies like every other interest group, including Saudi Arabia, Big Tech, and public sector unions. There is no evidence of &#8220;control.&#8221; Tucker&#8217;s &#8220;spell&#8221; and &#8220;hostage&#8221; language is the same occult-tinged conspiracy he once mocked when it came from the Left.
As for the Protocols, that document was debunked in 1921 by The Times of London, weaponized by the Nazis to justify genocide, and has zero basis in reality. Tucker knows this. His &#8220;I don&#8217;t know&#8221; is not intellectual humility. It is a deliberate wink. There are 15 million Jewish people worldwide, 6 million of whom live in America among 340 million citizens. Jewish Americans succeed through the same merit, education, and entrepreneurship available to everyone. If you want to talk about foreign influence operations, look at Qatar funding Ivy League campuses, Chinese influence in our social media ecosystem, and Shanghai billionaires funding anti-American protest movements. Those are documented. Those are real.
On Citibank being a threat to Americans…there was a Hezbollah-linked shooting in Michigan last month, and I use Capital One, pay my bills, and budget monthly. So no, Citibank isn’t keeping me up at night, and if it does for Tucker, I would suggest he lay off the ALP pouches.
Tucker&#8217;s final avenue for institutional sabotage is the FBI&#8217;s handling of Charlie Kirk&#8217;s assassination. Listen, friends, I understand why many of us are skeptical of the FBI. Both President Barack Obama and Joe Biden&#8217;s DOJ weaponized federal power against conservative leaders, grandmothers, and a sitting president in ways this country had never seen. That consequential distrust was justified, but here the goalposts have moved to an unrecognizable place: Trump is in office, Kash Patel is running the FBI, Dan Bongino walked out and told us everything, and somehow, even now, it&#8217;s all still a cover-up. At some point, the conspiracy has to end, and the evidence has to begin.
The fact is that Tyler Robinson’s guilt is overwhelming. Prosecutors have matched DNA on the rifle trigger, the towel wrapped around the bolt-action, and the spent casing to Robinson. ATF ballistics confirmed the weapon. Before the shooting, Robinson wrote a letter to his roommate stating he &#8220;had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I&#8217;m going to take it.&#8221; He posted confessions on Discord. Video placed him on the Utah Valley University campus hours before the shot. He surrendered voluntarily within 33 hours after his father tipped off authorities. The investigation wasn&#8217;t sabotaged; it was solved.
Carlson isn&#8217;t defending Kirk&#8217;s legacy. He&#8217;s exploiting a martyr&#8217;s death to erode trust in the institutions conservatives fought to reclaim.
Carlson has been transparent about where this is all heading. He wants a new political party: isolationist on foreign policy, restrictionist on immigration, and — crucially — interventionist in the economy. Ben Shapiro identified it correctly: that&#8217;s a National Socialist Party, and history has a unanimous verdict on that experiment.
Every government that has tried centrally managed economies — the Soviet Union, Maoist China, Venezuela, Cuba — followed the same arc. First, they promise protection from the chaos of the market. Then, they pick winners and losers. Next, shortages, stagnation, and repression follow, inevitably. The Soviet Union&#8217;s GDP per capita in 1990, after 70 years of central planning, was one-seventh of America&#8217;s. Venezuela, once the wealthiest country in Latin America, saw its economy collapse 75% between 2013 and 2021 after nationalizing industries and freezing prices. These aren&#8217;t outliers, they’re the rule. Carlson&#8217;s &#8220;carve-outs&#8221; for truckers and banks are just the polite, populist entry point to a far uglier destination.
Here is the uncomfortable truth about why we&#8217;re even having this conversation: America is so extraordinarily prosperous that we have the luxury of entertaining these ideas. Our poor have air conditioning. Our working class has smartphones. Our life expectancy, even accounting for recent dips, is historically high. When you&#8217;ve never known genuine scarcity — not theoretical scarcity, but Cuban-pharmacy-shelf scarcity — it becomes very easy to romanticize the idea that the system is rigged.
That’s precisely the audience Carlson is playing to: comfortable enough to be frustrated, not desperate enough to remember what actually fails.
Tucker Carlson is not a conservative. He&#8217;s not America First. He is Tucker Carlson First. He’s a man who has found that grievance sells, that &#8220;just asking questions&#8221; about Jewish cabals and FBI cover-ups generates more clicks than defending the free market ever will. His brand is built on the premise that America is broken. He loses his audience if America heals. That is not patriotism. That is a business model.
Reagan proved the alternative. Trump is proving it again. Free markets, applied honestly, have produced the greatest reduction in poverty in human history. They’ve lifted over a billion people out of it in the last three decades alone. Strong borders, enforced consistently, are not racist; they’re necessary. An America First foreign policy means striking Iran when our nation is threatened, not when Tel Aviv asks. Rejecting antisemitic conspiracy theories is not defending Israel — it&#8217;s defending logic, because 15 million people do not secretly run a planet of 8 billion. Sorry.
Tucker Carlson is a talented broadcaster who chose the wrong hill to die on. He can come back, but until he does, I would treat his content the way you&#8217;d treat a teenager having a tantrum: acknowledge the emotion, reject the premise, and don&#8217;t let her near the car keys.

Tucker Carlson, former FOX News host and current host of The Tucker Carlson Show

In Tucker Carlson’s World, It’s Not America First, It’s Tucker First

America First

Social Media

A Democratic congresswoman highlighted criticism of President Donald Trump from podcasters Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, and Candace Owens while questioning War Secretary Pete Hegseth during a fiery committee hearing on Wednesday.
Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-CA) asked Hegseth if he believes Trump &#8220;is mentally stable enough to be the commander-in-chief&#8221; and brought up a number of former Trump-supporting podcasters who are now questioning the president&#8217;s mental acuity.
&#8220;In fact, many, many Republicans have had the same questions,&#8221; Jacobs said. &#8220;Marjorie Taylor Greene said he&#8217;s out of control and he&#8217;s gone insane. Candace Owens said the 25th Amendment needs to be invoked — Megyn Kelly, Tucker Carlson, who you used to work with, Alex Jones, Stephanie Grisham, the list could go on.&#8221;
Hegseth dismissed Jacobs&#8217; question and ripped Democrats for raising questions on Trump&#8217;s ability to lead after the party turned a blind eye to issues around former President Joe Biden.
&#8220;Did you ask the same question of Joe Biden for four years?&#8221; Hegseth shot back. &#8220;You did not, and I won&#8217;t even engage with the level of disparagement that you&#8217;re putting on the commander-in-chief &#8230; he&#8217;s the sharpest and most insightful commander-in-chief we&#8217;ve had in generations. And you want to ask that question after you and your fellow Democrats defended Joe Biden, who could barely speak and didn&#8217;t know what day of the week it was. He governed with an autopen. You had a secretary of defense who went AWOL for a week.&#8221;
<div style="max-width: 728px; margin: 0 auto;"><iframe style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; max-width: 100%; width: 100%; margin: 20px auto 5px; border: 0;" src="https://player.mux.com/wk00Wi7eYHJt3xm7TsGYPoUKIbc201MWXv?metadata-video-content-type=embed_video&amp;metadata-video-id=991c8a03-a2fb-4ee7-b6a4-641bbb0ba42d&amp;metadata-video-stream-type=on-demand&amp;metadata-video-title=Democrat%20Invokes%20Tucker%20Carlson%2C%20Megyn%20Kelly%2C%20Candace%20Owens%20&amp;poster=https%3A%2F%2Fdailywireplus-v2.imgix.net%2Fimages%2Fembedded-videos%2Fde2bee5a-a85a-44e4-867a-f20892c8e0a1.png&amp;autoplay=false&amp;accent-color=%23DB3D3B&amp;primary-color=%23ffffff&amp;secondary-color=%23000000" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></div>
The heated exchange took place during a House Armed Services Committee hearing, where Hegseth and Gen. Dan &#8220;Razin&#8221; Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, faced questions about the ongoing war in Iran.
The war has enraged Democrats and podcasters who used to support Trump — like Carlson, Kelly, and Owens — who have ramped up their criticism of Trump in recent weeks. Carlson, who recently apologized for endorsing Trump in 2024, has repeatedly accused Trump of conducting the military operation in Iran at Israel&#8217;s bidding. He also claimed earlier this month that Trump was considering using a weapon of mass destruction “on the population of Iran.” Kelly has also claimed that Trump is being played by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and said the president is “too weak” and “too gullible” to push back on Israel&#8217;s demands.
Owens, meanwhile, has called the Trump administration &#8220;satanic&#8221; and referred to Trump as a &#8220;Mad King,&#8221; while urging the Cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment and remove the president from office.
Trump <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-goes-nuclear-on-tucker-megyn-and-candace?author=Zach+Jewell&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=11&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Trump+Goes+Nuclear+On+Tucker%2C+Megyn%2C+And+Candace">blasted</a> the podcasters earlier this month, calling them &#8220;nut jobs,&#8221; &#8220;troublemakers,&#8221; and &#8220;stupid people.&#8221; The president also pointed out that the podcasters are being hailed by the Left for their opposition to his administration.
“These so-called ‘pundits’ are LOSERS, and they always will be! Now Fake News CNN, The Failing New York Times, and all of the other Radical Left ‘News’ Organizations, are ‘hailing’ them, and giving them ‘positive’ press for the first time in their lives,” Trump said. “They’re not ‘MAGA,’ they’re losers, just trying to latch on to MAGA.”

Democrat Invokes Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, Candace Owens In Heated Hearing

Congress

Donald Trump

Pete Hegseth

The amount of misinformation and outright propaganda related to the current war has reached absurd levels. Politicians, commentators, podcast hosts, and activists are now regularly spreading false claims, AI-generated slop, and disinformation originating from the Islamic Republic and its allied sources — all designed to portray the United States as being in a weaker position and losing the war.
The latest example came from Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT), who <a href="https://x.com/ChrisMurphyCT/status/2046345472915206646">responded</a> to a report claiming that Iranian ships were successfully circumventing the U.S. naval blockade with the single word “awesome.” Murphy later defended the post by claiming he was being sarcastic, but the report itself turned out to be completely <a href="https://x.com/FoxNews/status/2046568720781156395">false</a>. Murphy obviously has access to government officials who could have quickly verified the claim, but he couldn’t resist the opportunity to promote the narrative that the U.S. is failing in the war effort.
This has become all too common among critics of the current administration. They are not merely critical of the management of the war or the decision to confront the terror regime in Tehran — they are actively participating in the information war against the United States by consistently promoting false claims that support their preconceived narrative.
Democrats are convinced that Trump has mismanaged the war. That is a legitimate argument to make, but it crosses a line when they actively aid the other side — a terror regime that has killed countless Americans, terrorized the region through its proxies, and massacred tens of thousands of its own people — by spreading falsehoods in the accompanying information war.
Of course, Democrats are not alone in this effort. Several podcast hosts who claim to be on the Right have also gone to great lengths to provide cover for the terrorist regime in Tehran after their previous <a href="https://x.com/AGHamilton29/status/1933334859872862489">alarmist predictions</a> about the likely outcome of a war failed to materialize. Tucker Carlson has promoted misinformation on an almost daily basis, including inventing a claim that Saudi Arabia and Qatar had caught Mossad agents trying to plant bombs, to deflect from the reality of Iranian attacks on those countries. <a href="https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-888793">Both</a> <a href="https://english.alarabiya.net/News/saudi-arabia/2026/03/05/sources-dismiss-claim-mossad-agents-planting-bombs-arrested-in-saudi-arabia-qatar">nations</a> quickly debunked the story. Other recent guests on his podcast have <a href="https://x.com/AGHamilton29/status/2045860836837671387">pushed</a> similarly absurd claims, such as reports of U.S. soldiers being ambushed during a scouting mission. There is a reason these same podcast hosts are now regularly <a href="https://x.com/search?q=tucker%2520RT&amp;src=typed_query&amp;f=top">featured</a> on Russian state television.
The result of these efforts — whether intentional or not — is that they relieve pressure on the leadership in Tehran and make it less likely that the United States will secure a successful agreement to end the war. Such an agreement would require the Islamic Republic to freeze its nuclear enrichment activities, freeze its ballistic missile program, and end its funding for terror proxies throughout the Middle East. While a worse outcome might help Democrats and other Trump opponents politically, it would be disastrous for the United States and the world. Those engaging in these efforts have made their priorities clear.
***
A.G. Hamilton is a writer and commentator. He can be found on X at @aghamilton29.

US-POLITICS-GOVERNMENT-SHUTDOWN

The Information War’s Useful Idiots

Misinformation

President Donald Trump lashed out on Thursday, asking via Truth Social who was “dumber” — former Fox News personality Tucker Carlson or former intelligence official Joe Kent.
“Who’s dumber, Tucker Carlson or Joe Kent? It’s very interesting!” Trump’s post began, and he went on to lay out his case for Kent.
The president explained that he’d first met Kent at Dover Air Force Base during the dignified transfer of Kent&#8217;s late wife, who was killed by Iranian terror proxies in Syria.
“Her casket was being brought to Dover, along with the rest, although he married again, quite quickly, in my opinion,” Trump continued, jabbing at Kent over his Congressional losses. “In any event, a number of years later, I noticed the same person was running for Congress in Washington State, and lost. I then noticed a couple of years later, he was running again, and lost.”
Trump then explained that he’d felt bad for Kent, who had run as a Republican, and for that reason had offered him a position in the administration.
“I told my people, ‘Hire him for the White House. Give him a job, make him feel good, he lost his wife and two Elections.’ They did so and, while I rarely saw him, I certainly didn’t expect disloyalty, but that’s what I got,” Trump added. “He was really a SLEAZEBAG, and some would say, on top of it all, A LEAKER!”
Trump concluded by suggesting that he would no longer make hiring decisions just because he felt bad for someone: “NO MORE MR. NICE GUY!”
Lumping in several other relatively recent critics, Trump compared Kent to Carlson, Megyn Kelly and Candace Owens as well: “Kent is a LOSER, just like Tucker, Candace, Megyn, and the rest of them are LOSERS — You’re born that way, LOW IQ, and there’s not a damn thing they’re going to be able to do about it!”
Kent, who recently resigned as director of the National Counterterrorism Center, cited disagreements over the Trump administration&#8217;s actions in Iran as the reason for his exit and claimed that the United States was acting in Israel&#8217;s interest.

KentTrump

Donald Trump Poses Question To World: ‘Who’s Dumber, Tucker Carlson Or Joe Kent?’

Joe Kent

Ben Shapiro laid into the “low IQ grievance ideology” of Candace Owens, Tucker Carlson, and Megyn Kelly on Tuesday night, urging a packed crowd of college students to reject the conspiracy theories, doomsday predictions, and anti-Trump rage being pushed by the podcasters.
During a speech at the University of Pennsylvania, the Daily Wire founder said that the three are pushing “a grievance-based view of the world in which they and those like them are perennial victims of the American system.” 
Shapiro’s speech came just a few days after President Donald Trump <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-goes-nuclear-on-tucker-megyn-and-candace?author=Zach+Jewell&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=11&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Trump+Goes+Nuclear+On+Tucker%2C+Megyn%2C+And+Candace">ripped</a> Carlson, Owens, and Kelly, saying they all have “Low IQs.” 
“They’re stupid people, they know it, their families know it, and everyone else knows it, too!” Trump wrote on Truth Social. 
Shapiro expanded on the president’s observation and argued that the group of anti-Trump podcasters has bought into “conspiratorial grievance politics,” which he compared to a “zombie infection.” 
“The attraction of low IQ ideology is envy,” Shapiro said. “A belief that lack of success is somehow a reflection not of bad decision-making or the hardship of life, but of a cruel system, designed by a nefarious cadre of evildoers. Envy. As Adam Smith put it, envy is ‘that passion which views with malignant dislike the superiority of those who are really entitled to all the superiority they possess.’” 
<iframe loading="lazy" title="YouTube video player" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/2Q54Jt70-Xo?si=PlQxntGbfSkVmRvp" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
Some of these beliefs have recently been demonstrated by Carlson, Owens, and Kelly, Shapiro said, giving multiple examples of how they have pushed conspiratorial grievance politics. 
“You are indeed rolling in low IQ horesh*t if you believe, as Tucker Carlson does, that the president is a ‘slave’ to Israel, or that Alex Jones is a ‘prophet,’ or that the chief opposition to Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro was ‘globohomo,’ or that Russia is wonderfully run, or that Sharia Law produces wonderfully clean and robust civilizations, or that Winston Churchill was the villain of World War II, or that Nick Fuentes is less evil than Ted Cruz.” 
Shapiro then called out the “low IQ slop” and “conspiratorial trash” pushed by Owens, who has suggested that Erika Kirk and Turning Point USA, along with the Israeli government, were involved in the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Shapiro also blasted Owens for saying that Charlie Kirk appeared to her in a dream and for latching onto the conspiracy theory that Brigitte Macron “has testicles.” 
“And worst of all, you are preying on low-IQ people when you cynically humor all of the foregoing for clicks and cash, as Megyn Kelly does,” Shapiro continued. “Nobody is upset with Megyn Kelly’s facile, trite, hackneyed takes on Middle Eastern politics. People are upset with her absolute cowardice and annoyed by the fact that, as a 55-year-old person, she cosplays courage like a clout-chasing 16-year-old girl.” 
Shapiro said the “low IQ grievance ideology” pushed by Carlson, Owens, and Kelly opposes the basic principles of what Shapiro called “high IQ conservatism.”
“High IQ conservatism rests on four foundations: free minds, free markets, public virtue, and a properly constructed government designed to protect these first three values,” he said. 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
To Make America Great Again, we need high IQ Conservatives. <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@benshapiro</a> <a href="https://t.co/YZ56hkT1ie">pic.twitter.com/YZ56hkT1ie</a>
— YAF (@yaf) <a href="https://twitter.com/yaf/status/2044558892617597251?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 15, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“But low IQ grievance ideology rejects the fundamental basis of these central principles,” Shapiro added. 
He broke down how “low IQ grievance ideology” attempts to tear down free minds by arguing “that we are all victims of a sort of Marxist false consciousness, implanted in us by nefarious outside forces.” The ideology also attacks free markets “in true Marxist style.” 
“Low IQ grievance ideology also argues that public virtue is a sham. The church your parents sent you to as a child? It’s probably fundamentally broken. Either it’s cucked, or it’s intolerant,” Shapiro said.
The ideology says “the people we really need to emulate are true heroes like alleged rapist Andrew Tate and role models like Clavicular,” Shapiro added. “Or people spouting new forms of Christianity that are actually old forms of non-Christianity that revive the Marcion heresy and revel in attributing literally everything to demons, from aliens to underwater sea creatures to strange nighttime dog scratches.”
The line for Shapiro&#8217;s speech at UPenn, his first college speech this year, stretched around the block.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Students are lining up around the block to see <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@benshapiro</a> speak tonight at the University of Pennsylvania! <a href="https://t.co/qTakAnsrNt">pic.twitter.com/qTakAnsrNt</a>
— YAF (@yaf) <a href="https://twitter.com/yaf/status/2044185131716325859?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 14, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

ben low iq

Ben Shapiro Lays Into The ‘Low IQ’ Podcast Class

College

In a recent <a href="https://tuckercarlson.com/april-14-2026-morning-note">Morning Note</a> newsletter, Tucker Carlson Network told subscribers: “The people in charge don’t want you to know this, but Muslims love Jesus.” The post <a href="https://x.com/TCNetwork/status/2044060521901576664?s=20">highlighted</a> Islam’s reverence for “Isa” as a major prophet and miracle-worker who will one day return to defeat the Antichrist. It even linked this supposed common ground to Iran’s president Masoud Pezeshkian’s outrage over a painting depicting Donald Trump as the Son of God.
This is classic Tucker: contrarian, anti-elite framing designed to expose what “they” don’t want you to know. But it collapses under scrutiny. It peddles an interfaith platitude that flattens irreconcilable theology, whitewashes 1,400 years of conquest and subjugation, and ignores the systematic, ongoing slaughter of Christians in Muslim-majority nations — facts documented year after year by credible monitors. Carlson, who built his brand exposing cultural rot and elite lies, is here recycling the very “religion of peace” trope he once mocked. Worse, his recent comments reveal a broader pattern of downplaying radical Islam as a threat while Christians die for the faith he claims to defend. Tucker appears to sympathize with Muslims (as individuals or against “hate”) more than he spotlights their brothers and sisters in Christ being hunted.
The doctrinal chasm makes true “love” impossible. Islam does revere “Isa,” but the Quran’s version is a human prophet, not divine. He never claimed godhood, never died on the cross for sins, and never rose from the dead. Explicitly: “They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but it was made to appear to them so” (Surah 4:157). The Trinity is condemned as polytheism (Surah 5:73). Isa is a forerunner to Muhammad, not the eternal Son of God whose blood atones. To say Muslims “love Jesus” while stripping Him of deity, crucifixion, and resurrection is like praising Abraham Lincoln while insisting he never opposed slavery. It is not the biblical Christ. Core Islamic texts treat Christianity as corrupted and superseded. The dhimmi system (Quran 9:29) codifies Christians and Jews as second-class subjects paying jizya tax in humiliation — protected only insofar as they submit. Apostasy from Islam carries the death penalty in traditional jurisprudence. Individual Muslims can be kind neighbors — especially as minorities in the West. But when Islamic ideology holds power, the pattern is subjugation or elimination, not “love.”
The data from Open Doors’ <a href="https://www.opendoors.org/persecution/WWL-2026-International-Advocacy-Report.pdf">World Watch List</a> 2026 is unambiguous and devastating. More than <a href="https://www.opendoorsus.org/en-US/stories/5-things-you-need-to-know-about-open-doors-2026-world-watch-list/">388 million Christians</a>, one in seven globally, face high levels of persecution and discrimination for their faith. In the top 50 countries alone, over 315 million endure very high or extreme levels. During the reporting period (October 2024 to September 2025), 4,849 Christians were killed specifically because of their faith. Nigeria alone accounted for 3,490 of those deaths — an increase from 3,100 the previous year. Sub-Saharan Africa saw 93 percent of all faith-related Christian killings worldwide.
After North Korea (No. 1, the only non-Islamic state at the top and it has held that spot for 24 years), the list is dominated by countries where Islamic extremism is the primary driver: Somalia (No. 2), Yemen (No. 3), Sudan (No. 4), Eritrea (No. 5), Syria (No. 6), Nigeria (No. 7), Pakistan (No. 8), Libya (No. 9), and Iran (No. 10). Open Doors identifies Islamic extremism as the main source of persecution in roughly 40 of the top 50 nations.
In Nigeria, Boko Haram, ISWAP, Fulani militants, and other jihadist groups have made the country the deadliest place on earth for Christians. Villages are burned, churches razed, and families slaughtered with near-total impunity — attackers have been recorded declaring their intent to destroy Christians. In Pakistan, blasphemy laws rooted in Islamic doctrine trigger mob lynchings and death sentences over alleged insults to Muhammad or the Quran. In Iran, Christian converts face arrest, torture, or execution. The pattern holds across the Middle East, North Africa, and parts of Asia: wherever Sharia influence grows, Christian populations shrink or vanish. This is not ancient history — it is 2024–2025 reality, and the numbers show Muslim-majority nations and Islamist groups are the world’s leading perpetrators of violence against Christians.
History confirms the incompatibility. Christianity was once the majority faith across the Middle East and North Africa. After the 7th-century Islamic conquests, jizya taxes, legal discrimination, church destruction, and periodic violence reduced it to scattered minorities. Christians comprised 13–20 percent of the region’s population a century ago. Today, they are roughly <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_the_Middle_East">5%</a>. In Iraq alone, the Christian population fell from about 1.4 million before the 2003 U.S. invasion to between 300,000 and 500,000 now. North Africa’s once-thriving churches were virtually erased. This was gradual attrition under institutionalized inferiority — exactly what dhimmi status and apostasy laws enforce. When Muslims achieve demographic or political dominance, the ideology produces the outcomes Open Doors documents annually.
Carlson’s framing is especially disappointing because it mirrors the Left’s reflexive defense of Islam while ignoring the body count. But it’s jarring from him. In a December 2025 interview with <a href="https://www.theamericanconservative.com/tucker-carlson-talks-the-west-collective-punishment-and-antisemitism/">The American Conservative</a>, he dismissed fears of radical Islam in the United States as an “Israeli government psyop” pushed by “its many defenders and informal employees in the United States.” He stated flatly: “I don’t know anyone in the United States in the last 24 years who’s been killed by radical Islam.” He added that he sees “millions of Americans being destroyed, and none of it is at the hands of radical Islam,” and has called hostility toward Muslims “disgusting.” He has defended Muslims against anti-Islam rhetoric, praised Christian-Muslim “harmony” in places like Jordan, and criticized Protestant and evangelical leaders harshly while downplaying threats from Islamist ideology. Tucker appears to prioritize anti-Israel/anti-neocon rhetoric. As an Episcopalian who calls himself Christian, ignoring that “Isa” rejects Christ’s core claims — and that real followers of the real Jesus are being slaughtered — undermines the very faith he invokes.
The Iranian president’s offense at a Trump-as-divine painting is trivial next to the daily reality: Actual followers of Jesus are hunted, beaten, and murdered across the Islamic world. Scripture demands we discern spirits and false prophets, not pretend incompatible faiths “love” the same Lord. The data, doctrine, and history are not “Islamophobic,” they are simply facts. Ignoring them helps no one, least of all the persecuted.
***
Bethany Miller is the Director of Communications at NRB, Managing Editor of The Conservateur, and a Senior Fellow at Concerned Women for America.

Menu