This is the second of four articles on Tucker Carlson. If you are interested in this topic, I suggest you begin with the article I published on October 30, 2025. 

I ended the first article (excerpt) by noting I was a fan of Tucker Carlson Tonight on Fox News. I will continue from there.

+++ The Start of Excerpt 2 +++

The show that is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, and groupthink

That (above) is the phrase that Tucker periodically used to describe Tucker Carlson Tonight. If I were to modify it, I would add the word “hypocrisy” – also present in the swamp – in Washington DC. The hypocrisy leading up to the election in 2022 reeked – the way that the creatures of the swamp (from the press to the FBI) continued to treat Trump in comparison to Biden – Republicans in comparison to Democrats. 

While I was writing this chapter, Tucker took on many examples of lying, pomposity, smugness, groupthink, and hypocrisy – four of which especially bothered me (immigration, vaccinations, presidential character, and election integrity). In a sense, all four of these issues, and many others, involved freedom of speech – what was allowed to be said – and maybe more importantly, what could be disseminated. 

Tucker and his guests still had the ability to speak freely – if they had the courage to risk their careers and Twitter accounts – if they had the courage to risk being ostracized and canceled. But what was more dangerous was the swamp’s ability to restrict the dissemination of any speech inconsistent with their approved narratives. This became more obvious after Elon Musk bought Twitter. If speech cannot be heard; if speech is stifled; is it truly free? And who has the right to stifle it; does the government have that right; does the Federal Bureau of Investigation have that right; do corporations have that right?

I won’t get into detail regarding my four major concerns. Books can and have been written on all four topics. And remember, my concern is not so much on who was right and who was wrong, but why were some points of view taboo – why were some voices and points of view restricted?

Immigration: Tucker Carlson Tonight is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, and groupthink. With my own eyes, I watched thousands of people walk across the US-Mexico border while Alejandro Mayorkas, the secretary of homeland security stated “Look, the border is secure.” The vice president’s [Kamala Harris’] vague and largely undefined search for the “root cause” did not secure the border. 

Stating that the immigration system is “broken” is not an excuse to abandon the immigration laws that were previously passed by congress and signed into law by a president. If these laws were sound enough for the legislative branch of government to pass, if these laws were signed into law, if these laws survived judicial challenges; then these laws were sound enough for the executive branch to enforce – until they were changed, improved, or made more equitable. Doing anything less is a dereliction of duty. 

 Vaccinations: I am old. I was and am at high-risk. I breathed easier after being vaxed and boosted; the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines may have saved my life. I commend the government and the pharmaceutical companies for bringing these vaccines to fruition in record times. I appreciated and accepted the risks inherent in the expedited approval process. 

On the other hand, I observed that COVID was not especially harmful or deadly for children and young adults. I appreciated that most such viruses, on their own, over time, create a herd immunity that may be as good or better than any manufactured vaccines. I recognize that there are some risks associated with all medicines and vaccines – probably more so if they are released under an emergency use authorization. I believe that time has demonstrated that the COVID vaccines were not as efficacious as the vaccines developed for such diseases as tuberculosis, polio, and smallpox. I have come to believe that COVID was never a disease of the unvaccinated (as President Biden so often and pompously snarled).

I believe that the government (via the CDC and Biden administration) was heavy-handed with its COVID rules and regulations. I believe that Tucker Carlson and his guests provided an alternative account of the efficacy of the vaccines and the government’s remedial rules and regulations. I believe that freedom of speech – the freedom to disseminate contrary (and factual) information was unfairly restricted. I believe that the termination of any employment (e.g., military) based on one’s COVID vaccination status was wrong and unfair. A more public and robust debate of such policies may have resulted in more fairness and justice.

If you got your news from CNN, MSNBC, or the Today Show on NBC, you got a vastly different view of COVID than you did if you viewed Tucker Carlson Tonight or some of his hour-long interviews on Tucker Carlson Today. I know because I compared them.

Presidential Character: Tucker Carlson Tonight is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, groupthink – and hypocrisy (my add). The mainstream media did an outstanding job of identifying the character flaws and potential misdeeds of Donald Trump – not so much with Joseph Biden. The hypocrisy and groupthink reeked. I will list only two examples:

Ukraine: Why was President Trump impeached for requesting that the Ukrainian government “investigate” corruption (before giving them more US tax dollars to corrupt with), while Vice President Biden, who publicly bragged about threatening the Ukrainian government with an “actual” quid pro quo, was either ignored or applauded? 

This to me was Hypocrisy with a capital “H.” I can understand why the Democratic Party chose to be hypocritical. I cannot understand how this disparity can go unquestioned – how this disparity can become the media’s groupthink, how the voices of those questioning such hypocrisy can be stifled or otherwise marginalized. 

Bobulinski: My second example can be summarized by one name – that being Tony Bobulinski. If you only watched the mainstream media before the last election, you may never have heard of Tony Bobulinski. If you, at that time, were trying to determine which candidate for the presidency demonstrated the best character, which candidate lied or embellished the least, which candidate was the most corrupt, you probably did not hear of (or hear) Tony Bobulinski. 

If you were one of the 7.6 million viewers who watched Tucker Carlson Tonight on October 27, 2020, you would have heard a credible interview with a former business associate of Hunter Biden (and other Biden family members). If you watched that interview you would probably question some of Joe Biden’s public statements about his lack of knowledge concerning Hunter Biden’s business dealings with China.

If you watched that interview, you might have questioned Joe Biden’s character, as compared with President Trumps (as extensively reported by the mainstream media). If you didn’t watch that interview or Fox News you probably heard nothing of that interview – no clips or summaries on CNN or MSNBC.

This was another case of “free speech” not being “freely disseminated.” The swamp and its media allies put the kibosh to the story and the related stories about Hunter’s laptop. We can discuss and argue the credibility of Bobulinski, the Bidens, and Hunter’s laptop – but only if that speech is allowed, protected, and heard.

Election Integrity: This is a topic ripe with emotion – the big bad Republicans trying to restrict the rights of minorities versus the defenders of liberty – the virtuous members of the Democratic Party. It is a topic now caught up and intwined with the attack, assault, riot, or insurrection that took place on January 6th, 2021. Likewise, the word “integrity” is linked to another word often mentioned in the context of elections – that word being “fraud.” As to fraud and integrity, the issue gets caught up in semantics – like Bill Clinton’s issues with “sex” and “marijuana.” 

I might conclude, from my above verbiage on Bobulinski, that the integrity of the last election was compromised by the stories that the mainstream media chose to report or not report. 

I might conclude that the integrity of the last election was compromised by “emergency executive decisions” (versus legislative laws) which sent out mail-in ballots to everybody in the voter database (including those who died or moved) – and then cavalierly authenticated the signatures on the ballots returned. 

I might conclude that the integrity of the last election was compromised by the generosity of a wealthy social-networking website founder – via his get-out-the vote practices “entwined” into the election offices in some “selected” states.

I might conclude that an election was compromised when the powers in office – via their processes and procedures – via their voting equipment, software, and ballot paper – via their deliberate intent, ineptitude, or malfeasance – made it difficult to impossible for some people to actually vote on ELECTION DAY (and for others to monitor the voting processes).

For those interested in a more detailed dive into election integrity and election fraud, I recommend that you read The 2020 Coup: What Happened, What We Can Do. In that book, Patrick Colbeck gets into the nuts and bolts of the election process, voting machines and their software, and the various voter databases that the states maintain. My conclusion, after reading the book, was that if no fraud occurred during 2020 – it was because nobody tried. I believe that one would have to be quite naive to believe that.

In any case, I recognize that election fraud – extensive enough to impact a national election is extremely difficult to prove, given the time constraints and inclinations of most everyone. Voiding an election that has already been “called” at the national level is unchartered water. The answer is to make the system robust – to the point that it is virtually impossible to massively corrupt. And apparently not everyone wants such a robust system.

Tucker and his guests talked about the above issues. Others ignored them or tried to quash such discussions, by linking such talk to the “insurrection.” Most of the people at the Washington Mall on January 6th, 2021, were concerned about election integrity. Via their protest, some were trying to note potential fraud and work for more robust laws. Some of those folks decided to skip the early bird buffet at their hotel and meandered up to the capitol to continue their protest. Some of those people were jailed for attempting to exercise the freedoms of assembly and speech given to them in the Bill of Rights. Tucker would talk about such people. 

 +++ The End of Excerpt 2 +++

Excerpt 2 – An Update

Since I wrote the above, I sense a slight shift towards freedom of speech and integrity, on the part of the corporate/legacy press – but it has come grudgingly, without much soul-searching, or any apparent and collective commitment to do better. If a building collapses, an investigation will take place to find out why it collapsed, and to prevent similar failures. Have there been any investigations about why the fourth estate collapsed – any actions taken to prevent more failures?

As to “election integrity,” it seems to be more of an issue with some Democrats nowadays – how did Trump manage to get elected (unbelievable). Democrats seem to be today’s election deniers. Apparently, it is okay for them to deny.

As to “immigration,” it has become obvious to me that the Biden administration’s actions (or lack of) were deliberate and an example of “world-class gaslighting.” I don’t sense that there were many humanitarian aspects to their policies – just a way to build their political base. In any case, if there had been some kind of faith-based humanitarian aspect to it, then why was it not proudly acknowledged – why was the public lied to? By the way, did Kamala ever issue a report on the root cause(s) of the immigration problem (with executable action items)? 

Coming soon – Excerpt #3