Phil Defranco, yesterday:
The New York Post has weighed in, with Josh Christenson holding the pen:
WASHINGTON — One of the largest conservative think tanks in Washington, DC, has been roiled by their president’s embrace of Tucker Carlson after the conservative podcaster hosted white nationalist Nick Fuentes on his show, prompting an outcry from senior staff...
In Carlson’s two-hour interview, which has racked up more than 17 million views on X, Fuentes called himself “a fan” of Soviet dictator Josef Stalin and denounced the influence of “organized Jewry” in US politics, while Carlson accused American Christians who support the state of Israel of being heretics with a “brain virus.”
I’m seeing reports from several sources now that describe long-time financial contributors to Heritage, now beating a path to the exits, like they’re trying to escape a burning building. In a sense, they are.
Fuentes is a problem for MAGA and always has been, and Carlson should know that as a matter of instinct. In my observation, the Carlson of Fox News evenings certainly would have and would play the thing differently.
As an example of the evidence to that point, it was just over three years ago when Kanye West brought Fuentes to Mar-a-Lago, an action I wrote at the time was specifically designed to damage Trump. The intent was to attach him to the MAGA movement and set him up as a straw man. A photo of the handshake would be a bit of anti-Trump gold. Why wouldn't Carlson see what a problem that would be to tarnish Heritage’s name with such a creature?
Sorry, Tucker, but for all the good you’ve done over the years, I have to wonder, based on your more recent actions, if your meds don’t need to be adjusted. Did you forget that dynamic? Or have you suddenly gone anti-Trump? Or perhaps, given the passage of time, both?
Okay, maybe that's a bit harsh, but come on.
Look, I could see bringing Fuentes in if Carlson were more confrontational. Expose him by bringing him in and then knocking down his arguments after he has spouted. But that’s not what happened. Instead, he allowed Fuentes to be the straw man that Kanye West intended that night at Mar-a-Lago.
Instead of calling Fuentes out, Carlson spent the whole two hours of that interview tossing softballs. For example, Fuentes accused Trump of betraying America. Instead of drilling down on that point, which should have been the easiest thing in the world to do, Carlson simply ignored the charge. Fuentes spewed his hatred for Jews and claimed Winston Churchill was the villain of WWII. That is just a sample of the downright embarrassing nonsense Fuentes came up with both in that interview and outside of it as well. It all slipped by Tucker, apparently.
Kind of hard not to come to the conclusion that Carlson agrees with Fuentes. At least it gives those on the left a basis for argument against Heritage, Carlson, and, for that matter, conservatives in general. Perhaps said more correctly, it’s hard to not call Carlson out for giving Fuentes an essentially unchallenged platform in a supposedly right leaning environment like Heritage. Then, Heritage defending the man instead of acknowledging the problem is unconscionable.
Let's also admit that there is a Democrat double standard feeding the outrage we see on this, a lot of which is pure drama. Fuentes seems to be applauding white Christian America becoming politically active (well, at least white America). Think, now: Democrats have no problem campaigning in black Christian churches and have done so for decades. Such were instrumental in the civil rights movement. They also have no problem with Muslims becoming politically active. (See also, Zohran Mamdani). But if white Christians, or Jews, for that matter, become politically active, the left immediately starts hyperventilating about an imminent theocracy. In this, I must include Fuentes. (Sorry, I don't accept Fuentes as being "right wing" at all.)
Understand me here. I’m not calling for Carlson to be ousted over this, nor am I saying Heritage needs to sit in the corner with the pointed hat for a while. With all respect to people like Mark Levin and Ben Shapiro, whose opinions I value highly, I’m not a "cancel culture" kind of guy. I can understand the response of Heritage's President, Kevin Roberts, taking the position he did after the fact, to some degree. When you take on sensitive subjects like Fuentes' whole shtick, you're going to have these controversies follow. It's simply part of the game. Any publicly outspoken conservative becomes a target before the echo from their words dies. Trust me, I know from personal experience.
The fact is, in that statement, Roberts should have at least acknowledged the terrible optics of the thing in his first official response to this issue. He didn't. That resulted in some serious damage to the conservative movement, and Roberts particularly needs to acknowledge that, both publicly and soon.
Admittedly, he did come back later with a stronger anti-Fuentes statement, but by then the damage was done. The friends of both Carlson and Heritage might want to communicate the idea that appearances count.
The first time, more than any other. Or, perhaps if Carlson wasn't going to play hardball with him, he shouldn't have brought Fuentes in in the first place.
