April 26, 2023 • 32 mins
Robert, James, Gare, and Mia discuss Fox News axing Tucker Carlson, where he might go next, and the impact it would have on the media and political ecosystem
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
It could happen here. It in Today's Harlance, meaning Tucker
Carlson getting fired, because that's what we're talking about today
is Today is one of our classic timely reaction episodes
to the firing of Fox News fascist and popular anti
(00:25):
semite Tucker Carlson. Today on the show to chat about
all of this, I've got Garrison Davis, James Stout, Mio Wong,
and Sophie Lichterman. Hi.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
Everybody, Wow, how was the last time we got like
the whole crew together.
Speaker 1 (00:43):
A long time? This is a this is the bulk
of us. Yeah. Yeah, And so.
Speaker 3 (00:47):
Sophie wasn't here for the com episode.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
No, Sophie. Sophie refused to be on for the come episode,
threatening to quit.
Speaker 3 (00:56):
Sadly.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
Yeah uh yeah. But so you know, today is a
couple of days since we all got the surprising news
that Tucker has been let go at Fox. This was
news that was surprising to Tucker. There's a couple things
that are funny about the announcement itself, namely that he
(01:17):
signed off his last episode saying see you guys next week.
Fox Play in the messaging they've put out was like,
you know, we both agreed that he needed to leave
the network, that this is an amicable split. The Brian Kilmead,
who replaced him the next episode with Fox News tonight,
(01:38):
was like, Tucker and I are still good friends. He's
just decided mutually to take a leave from the company.
This is definitely not true. We'll talk a little bit
about all of this, but the gist of I think
it's kind of worth talking about, like why this happened.
As far as we know, there's not, you know, objective
(02:01):
kind of confirmation about why specifically he got fired, but
the broad speculation some articles have like quoted a Fox
News insider who says that it was due to something
either he said in a recorded but unaired episode of
the show, or that it was something that was found
(02:22):
in the emails that were revealed during discovery that was
profoundly anti semitic. I've heard out, like in one source
at least said that it was anti semitic enough that
it might have been legally actionable. That's obviously, like what
the fuck. I would love to know what that specifically means.
(02:43):
But what we do know is that a former producer
for The Tucker Carlson Show who was a booking for
him is currently suing the network both for a hostile
work environment. She claims that she was exposed to intense
anti semitism while we're working there, and she alleges that
she was basically threatened into changing her deposition. So the
(03:08):
lawsuit came alongside her like issuing a correction to her
deposition and saying that she had basically lied in order
like because she was being threatened by people at Fox,
which is like, So there's a lot going on here.
So that's kind of the gist of what we know
right now as to like why he got shit canned. Yeah,
(03:31):
that's that's the basics.
Speaker 2 (03:34):
It's interesting too that he it's been like a day
now and he has said nothing. There have been multiple
people who said that he's not responding to his texts,
which is extremely funny.
Speaker 1 (03:46):
I saw one.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
Report that I don't I don't know how accurate is.
I saw one report that says he found out ten
minutes before Fox like released a statement.
Speaker 1 (03:53):
Yeah, he was in contract negotiations, so he was in
the middle of presumably getting a Fox to agree to
pay him a shitload more money.
Speaker 3 (04:03):
Yeah, and now he has no money, which is very funny.
Speaker 4 (04:06):
Well, yeah, he'll still probably get a lot of money somehow.
Speaker 3 (04:09):
Yeah, i'd be interesting to see if he like pivots
to something like like o Ann or news Max. I
don't know if they have the means to pay him
what he would probably see.
Speaker 4 (04:19):
Yeah, No, I mean this is this is one of
the questions kind of following this and how and how
this decision is gonna affect, you know, politics going forward,
especially with twenty twenty four two big questions being where
is Tucker going to go and who is going to
take his place?
Speaker 1 (04:37):
For the next few weeks.
Speaker 4 (04:38):
Fox is probably just going to be doing like a
rotating selection of hosts until they like make a final decision.
So you know, a lot of people could could end
up end up with that job. But in terms of
where he's going, there's there's a few interesting options. Now
it kind of does come down to who's going to
be willing to pay the probably pretty high price, or
(04:59):
if he's just going to try to stay independent. But
I think something like Newsmax isn't isn't out of the question.
I think I think this that this is this is
just like a guess, but I think there's a decent
chance that the Daily Wire is going to go after
him really hard. Yeah, he's already pretty friendly with a
lot of the people there. They've been willing to dishout
(05:21):
a lot of money for someone like Stephen Crowder. Now
Tucker will be undoubtedly more, but also he's going to
be more of a pull, and that that is something
that's entirely possible. I mean, The Daily Wire already produces
like usually two of the most popular podcasts in the world,
like in the top ten. They already have a lot,
They have a lot of web traffic. They don't have
(05:41):
like cable, but they get a lot of like other
other ways to to to to spread their work.
Speaker 3 (05:49):
They have a paid streaming service then they yes, yes,
they also have The Daily Wire Plus.
Speaker 1 (05:55):
Yep, they are. I think that they're probably the only
people in their right that can offer Tucker both money
that's broadly in line with what Fox could and an
audience that's that's sizable, potentially even an audience that's larger.
One of the things to kind of keep in mind
is that Tucker was going to get out three and
a half million viewers a night somewhere around there, which
(06:18):
made him the most popular host on cable news, but
also is minuscule based on historical number one, minuscule based
on the kind of audiences that like you can get
on streaming platforms today, which are much larger than cable audiences,
and is minuscule based on like I mean, it was
(06:40):
like ten years ago that three and a half million
viewers on a night ten fifteen years ago would have
been like an unsuccessful show on ANBC, right for some
For some perspective, the most successful TV finale of all
time was the Mash finale, which had like one hundred
and five million viewers. Like cable don't or you know,
(07:00):
television period does not get the kind of viewership that
it does anymore. And I think when you're looking at
Tucker he is the main draw for him has to
be the audience. He's not and he's the heir to
the Campbell or to the Swanson, you know, Dinner of Fortune.
He cannot be motivated primarily by the paycheck, right that
(07:22):
that that there's He's simply like it. Just that can't
be the reason he's doing it. It has to be
the fame, you know. And so Daily Wire I think
is a likely place for him as a result of that.
Speaker 3 (07:39):
Yeah, another thing that's interesting. I thought it is, like
Mea mentioned that he hasn't said anything yet and he's
probably taking advice from his lawyer, Brian Friedman, who incidentally
is the same dude who's representing Don Lemon who lost
his job on the same day, which which is.
Speaker 1 (07:57):
A good year for that guy, It.
Speaker 3 (08:01):
Is a good year for this guy. He like, this
is the guy who gets a shit ton of money
from networks when people get fired from networks, like he
has represented like Megan Kelly before. Like, when you hear
of a famous person getting let go by network, it's
probably this guy who's representing them. I thought it was
utterly hilarious that, yeah, both of them retained the same
(08:24):
guy on the same day having been fired. But thinking
about lawyering up, it made me think about like Topi
mentioned it that like Carlson defames people, he lies on
an almost daily basis. Right, we recently spoke about how
he took the statistics of Russian deaths from those Leaks documents,
(08:45):
that he used the blatantly altered version of those documents
long after everyone knew they'd been altered. Right, he needs
serious legal clout to defend him from the fact that
he lies. Into fames people every single day, So like
going even though he has a sign simple fortune, going
out on his own would be costly in the sense
of like he would almost have to be permanently defending himself.
Speaker 2 (09:07):
Yeah, and I think I think this is one of
the things where, well, I'm it's not clear to me
what the impact of the Alex Johones trial has been,
but this is one of those things where I think
the dominion people actually just nailing Fox to the wall
is going to be a sort of big factor here
because it makes it seem easier and more plausible on
things that like lawyers are willing to risk getting in
fights about for actually going after these people, for just
(09:30):
like defending people. And so yeah, it'll be it'll be
interesting to see, like how how long Tucker can last
on his own before he gets into a giant court
battle with someone, and whether he is I don't know,
attempts to be slightly more careful.
Speaker 3 (09:47):
Yeah, like I yeah, exactly, I didn't think if he's
if he goes to YouTube or don't think he's not
going to be spending his his frozen dinner fortune on
legal fees. I don't think. So he just and he
can't do what he does without spouting shit, right, Like
his right thing is just straight up lying and doing
this sort of credulous fool routine that he does, which
always results in these ridiculous conclusions that he comes to.
(10:08):
So like, I don't know with that, maybe the daily
why I can sudstain that I don't really have a
good sense of sort of their clout if people aren't familiar.
Should we summarize the Dominion case? I know you've spoken
about it on Fast.
Speaker 1 (10:21):
Yeah I did. I mean, you can listen to the
two parter I did with Katie and Cody on the
Dominion lawsuit where we basically just go over the entire
document that Dominion prepared for that. But the gist of
it is that Tucker knowingly and knowingly We know that
he knew because the discovery process revealed a bunch of
(10:42):
his text messages and emails where he talked about knowing
that the election fraud conspiracy theory was bullshit and he
propagated it and attacks against Dominion and another company, smart Matic,
in order to keep his audience on board, which is
a criminal you know, defamation or not criminal, but at
(11:03):
least like legally actionable you can sue as as Dominion
did and one like eight hundred million bucks. So and
I do think that's really worth that. That is kind
of pertinent when we're talking about who's going to take
him next, because like, obviously the Daily Wire would want
a guy like Tucker except for the fact that he
could cost them another eight hundred million dollars, which has
(11:24):
to be has to be part of the calculus of
any company looking at taking him on. And I think
is something none of us, nobody really knows what's going
to happen with this, but I think there is a
good chance he is permanently marginalized in terms of audience
just because of how much like eight hundred million dollars
is not enough to sink Fox on its own, but
(11:44):
it is enough to make anybody looking at bringing Tucker
on board the second guest himself.
Speaker 2 (11:49):
Yeah, I SA also numbers that were I think I
think they were saying he was bringing in the highest
like amount of revenue of any like like him will
do his anchor, but was like it was like seventy
eight million dollars a year and he lost like so
he lost ten years of his income.
Speaker 1 (12:07):
He basically lost everything he'd made Fox during the time
when he was the number one Kettle news house.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Yeah, and that has to be that has to be
a huge part of the coculus of like, Okay, you
know these are these people like as as as as
much as the right is ideological, it is also capitalist
and the risk award on that is terrifying.
Speaker 4 (12:29):
Yeah, and I like, especially when it comes to the
Daily Wire, a cost like that would just probably make
their entire company fold.
Speaker 1 (12:36):
Because they don't have Murdock behind them.
Speaker 4 (12:38):
They're not they're they're not that big of a company.
They just have a disproportionate amount of influence because their
hosts are really good at like marketing and social media manipulation.
Speaker 3 (12:48):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I ad revenue now would be a
great time for us to pivot to And there's some
go to coins with Reagan.
Speaker 1 (12:55):
Oh yeah yeah. You can hear the ads for the
new podcasts that are your colleague Tucker Carlson's gonna be doing.
Speaker 3 (13:02):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's way heyman, Don Lemon just.
Speaker 1 (13:05):
Have yeah, him and Don Lemon, we we're calling it.
Speaker 4 (13:09):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (13:10):
I don't know, there's there's a good there's a good
there's a good joke with their two names somewhere. I
haven't figured it out yet though, So you do that
for yourselves, audience. Ah, what a good what a good
(13:31):
time that we're talking about here. This is just just
a just a great day, great week. Uh So, yeah,
we're looking at you know, I think kind of when
we're talking about what's possible here and Daily Wirey agree
is kind of the most likely thing. If you look
at what leaked recently during their drama with Stephen Crowder.
(13:51):
The contract that we're offering Crowder was somewhere around thirty
million dollars, which from everything people have said, is a
big deal for them. That's one of the biggest bigger
offerings as they're capable of doing. Uh. That is, you know,
probably the most Tucker is realistically going to be able
to get. But also, uh, one of the things that
(14:13):
kind of is noteworthy about the contract they were offering
Crowder is that it included clauses where like crowders take
home could be reduced significantly if he got kicked off
of platforms and fucking Tucker Carlson is not going to
keep it a YouTube count.
Speaker 4 (14:33):
I mean it is. It is interesting in that sense
of like they were they all of his content was
able to be kept up when he was under Fox,
Like on YouTube you can find all of his segments,
and it'd be interesting to see how the content moderation
differs if like he starts his own channel and how
and how comparatively what things would be would be counted
(14:54):
as like community guideline strikes. But yeah, I mean just
I think I think, like last week Matt Walsh's show
got demonetized on YouTube, which if his contract is anything
like the Crowtters, means that he is going to be
suffering up like a personal financial hit.
Speaker 1 (15:10):
Yeah, he's they're taking probably you know, in the millions
that he's losing.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
Yeah, And there's something I think this is an interesting
thing that's been happening in the last maybe like six months,
has been there's there's been sort of increasing tension between
sort of the far right that's basically sees control the
Republican Party and like the money, and they keep running
(15:35):
into these issues where in order to keep their base going,
they need to say stuff that like their sort of
like corporate backers are like this is either losing us
money or is so far out there that like it's
you know, it's it's either directly losing US money from lawsuits,
or it's losing US elections, or it's losing us like business.
Speaker 1 (15:55):
And now I'm never.
Speaker 2 (15:56):
Gonna claim that like Murdoch is not the far right,
because he is is. But it's interesting that we've gotten
to a point where people like Murdoch are getting more
gun shy about what they can put on air because
it's finally like the money is finally starting to see
actual consequences, and they're starting to pull back from the
(16:17):
stuff a little bit.
Speaker 1 (16:18):
Well, see, that's part of what I'm questioning is I'm
sure that that is something that's entering his calculus more
now since the settlement, but it's at least the early
reporting suggests that's not really why, or at least not
most of the reason why Tucker got shit canned. It's
a bunch of shit like stuff that is not revealed
(16:39):
yet in the deposition that he was saying an email,
I mean, one of the things came out that woman
who is accusing him of creating a sexist and anti
semitic work environment, is that he like when she got hired,
he plastered swimsuit photos of Nancy Pelosi over her office
and that's what we've heard, like the shit that, Like,
(17:00):
I think it's possible, uh that what actually got Murdoch
to make the call to can him is that he
Murdoch himself found out through discovery that he was saying
shit in emails that would sink the company, Like if
he's saying full on Nazi shit. Yeah, and there's there's
(17:21):
documentation of that, which I don't think is unlikely on it,
like yeah.
Speaker 2 (17:27):
There's no there's there's there's no there's no limit at.
Speaker 3 (17:29):
That point, like yeah, no, the like clearly that ship
aligns with his views, and he's made a concerted effort
to mainstream more and more outright fascist and genesis white
supremacist talking points every year that he's had that show.
So it would not especially when they got his text messages,
Like he might be smart enough not to like maybe
use his work email. But I think that the fact
(17:50):
that there were some things in his text messages and yeah,
that wouldn't surprise me. It's either that or he said
something personal about one of the Murdochs and they.
Speaker 1 (18:01):
Well he did. He did talk shit about Fox executives,
which some people have suggested as like part of why
they made the decision. It can him that he actually
just pissed off the moneymen too, and this was kind
of an excuse to take more action. Again, like it's
(18:21):
it's it's kind of unclear exactly what happened. I think
it's probably worth talking about in the last portion of
this what impact, because it is likely that whatever happens,
He's he's going to have less reach, and at least
less reach in like a practical way. Because if Tucker
starts a podcast, even if the podcast has kind of
more you know, through Daily Wire or whatever, even if
(18:43):
it's got on paper more listeners than Fox, I think
there's something about cable news where you're reaching an audience
that's that's different with the ideas that he was He's
when he was on Fox, he was hitting people who
would never have encountered some of this like fascist shit,
(19:04):
this great replacement stuff, Whereas if he's saying the same
thing on a Daily Wire podcast, he's probably talking more
to people who are already pilled, so to speak. So
I do think there's a good chance that overall this
kind of tanks his ability to.
Speaker 4 (19:23):
Actually like influence culture in a meaningful way.
Speaker 3 (19:26):
Radicalize boomers, like everyone listening can probably think of a
person who they know or is in their sort of
greatest circle of people who their friends know, who is
an older person who is very much offline and has
encountered these great replacement ideas through Tucker Carlson and become
a significantly worse person because of Tucker Carlson's program.
Speaker 4 (19:45):
Yeah, I mean, and you can see how all of
the Daily Wire guys like like Walsh and Mike, Michael
Noles and even someone like Andy No, they suck up
to Carlson so much and have been for the past
few years because they realize that that actually gives the
cultural access to be on his show on that platform
in a way that they're much.
Speaker 3 (20:05):
More like Peterson too.
Speaker 4 (20:07):
Pete Peterson, Sure, I think pet Peterson's broken into the mainstream.
Speaker 2 (20:09):
I think a bit more.
Speaker 4 (20:10):
But like all of these other guys like Andy No, Walsh, Knowles,
they're all heavily like Internet people, and they influence like
Internet shit, and sometimes that can start crossing over. But
in general, the cable news platform kind of reiffies things
into broader culture in a way that someone like Walsh
(20:31):
just doesn't because he's like most people don't know who Walshes.
But most people do know who Tucker is, and.
Speaker 1 (20:41):
That is my dad is lifelong Republican voter. And when
I talked to him complaining about shit Matt Walsh is doing,
Like the first thing he said was like, I've never
heard of this guy. Yeah, And it's like, yeah, because
he's he's a fucking internet weirdo. And my dad doesn't
you know, he knows Ben Shapiro because Ben breaks through
to the mainstream, but he knows Been Shapiro from like
catching clips of him randomly being shared on Facebook by
(21:04):
other people in his age group, as opposed to like
seeking this shit out. And that's kind of the power
of Tucker. And I think one of the things you've
seen Gear that you were kind of talking at, which
is the thing that is maybe most hopeful to me,
is how scared people like Andy know Glenn Greenwald flip
the fuck out when this gun announced because they see
(21:27):
this is a major threat to their reach into their
earning potential. Yeah, Tucker can't host them anymore. That's potentially
disastrous for them. And the fact that that's happening right
as we're gearing up for twenty twenty four is something
I'm hopeful about at least I'll say.
Speaker 4 (21:42):
Right, it is a massive like rejection of that platform
to yeah, people like that like this type of like
rhetoric that Tucker is doing. Having this be like publicly
rejected in this way will make all these people that
are more on the fringes probably make it harder for
them to breakthrough in little ways like they used to
(22:02):
try to by being on Tucker is a show.
Speaker 1 (22:05):
Speaking of reifying things into the broader culture by these products.
Speaker 2 (22:24):
In Okay, So there's one other thing that I we've
could have been touching on it, but I think it's
really interesting is that Tucker. Tucker basically has a sort
of media ecosystem that revolves around him. And you know,
there's a very established pathway for how you can become
a sort of like a successful and profitable right wing
grifter which goes through you know, you sort of go
(22:45):
viral on Twitter, you go viral on TikTok, and then
you go on to Tucker and you know and like
like people like lives at TikTok, right, Like, I think
I think there's there's a certific kind of media campaign
that even with whoever, like whatever, absolute asshole that like
Fox puts in that slot after Tucker's you know, when
whatever they sort of figure out who that's going to be, Like,
(23:06):
there's still I think going to be sort of a
hole there, Yeah, where I think it gets harder to
run the kinds the very the very very specific kinds
of campaigns like little TikTok, like the sort of mods
for liberty shit that that's been just making the country
unfathomably awful for the past few years.
Speaker 3 (23:24):
With like that, I've been kind of working on writing
something scripted about this trans panic that happened in a
town very near me in Santi right, which like was
an extremely clear like like that was the goal, right,
like like do to speech, go go viral, go on
Tucker create, you know, then go on the speaking circuit,
(23:44):
make money. Like to me, at least, it seems very
clear that that was that was the goal.
Speaker 1 (23:48):
And I yeah, he's he's a weapons system that they
they have learned, like has become kind of the center
of right wing strategy really is like get on Tucker
car as you know, moral panic culture warship yep.
Speaker 2 (24:03):
Yeah, and and you know and like obviously like other
Fox shows do this stuff. It doesn't work anywhere anywhere
near as well.
Speaker 4 (24:08):
And now I think it's the person the person that
gets the closest is probably Laura Ingram, but I think
she she kind of suffers from the glass ceiling problems.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
Yeah, she actually cannot be.
Speaker 4 (24:21):
Yeah, I mean, but.
Speaker 1 (24:22):
I'm brad Masogy.
Speaker 3 (24:25):
I think I stand with Laura.
Speaker 4 (24:27):
Ingram rub Big specifically viewing Tucker as this thing that
was like a targeted weapon. I think it's a really
good way to look at this, and specifically now that
that weapon no longer can like actually aim correctly because
or at.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
Least may not be able to write. I mean, maybe
he'll come back and we're wrong, but I I am optimistic.
I think all say, yeah, it.
Speaker 3 (24:51):
Puts a spanner in the works of the hate machine
that that he built and the folks built, and that's
a good thing.
Speaker 4 (24:56):
But Mia, you were saying before I rudely interrupted you.
Speaker 1 (25:00):
U asshole.
Speaker 2 (25:01):
You cannot remember what what I was gonna say.
Speaker 4 (25:06):
You're talking about how how how other other hosts kind
of do the thing but not.
Speaker 2 (25:11):
The Yeah, well, I mean part of it also is
just you know, part of the power of Tucker is
just the time slot that he's in, Yeah, which is
you know that that that's the one where like all
of the people who've gotten off of work, who are
like turning on the television at night get to But yeah,
like Tuck Tucker was I think was really in the
entirety of the sort of TV and media sphere, was
(25:33):
uniquely good at that stuff. And no one else, no
one else can do it like that. And you know,
like the like if the Fox people will create someone else,
but until they fill that spot, A, there's a gap,
and B it really remains to be seen whether seeing
whether they're going to sort of pick someone who is
as embedded in like that part of the sort of
(25:53):
fascists right as Tucker is, or if they're going to
find someone who's like, i mean still really really right
and sucks but isn't like having ye on.
Speaker 1 (26:04):
Yeah, yeah, and it's I mean, I am kind of
curious slash worried about who's going to follow him into
that time slot. Folks, real old heads will know. Tucker
got his job after Bill O'Reilly, who was the Fox
News fascist of my childhood, got shit canned for sexual
harassment on an industrial scale. Uh, And so that's that's
(26:27):
why Tucker is in and Obviously as bad as Bill was,
Tucker was worse, and maybe the person who follows Tucker
will be worse than Tucker. I do have trouble imagining
what that could be, because my god, he really he went.
He went right up to the edge of putting on
a fucking swastik arm band.
Speaker 3 (26:44):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (26:44):
Yeah, I will say about the Bill o. Riley people,
people have been like, oh, like, Tucker's going to disappear
in the way Bill O'reiley did.
Speaker 1 (26:49):
I don't.
Speaker 2 (26:50):
I don't think that's I think he's going to be
a bigger like, assuming he winds up somewhere, I think
he'll still be a bigger influence than like Bill was
after he got fired.
Speaker 1 (27:01):
But yeah, I mean Bill was also a lot older, right.
Speaker 4 (27:03):
Yeah, yeah, No, I think that is that is an
accurate assessment.
Speaker 3 (27:08):
Mm hmm.
Speaker 4 (27:09):
Well excited, excited to get my new Rumble subscriptions so
we can watch Oh yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (27:18):
No, it's going to be uh glorious to see him
finally pair up with Tim Poole, the two the two
of them carrying AK forty seven, so doing field journalism
in twenty twenty four.
Speaker 3 (27:30):
Yeah, yeah, Tucker casting for those are not familiar, carried
a gun when reporting in a rock, which for many
reasons it's a fucking terrible idea, including putting f one
else doing your job changer.
Speaker 1 (27:41):
But it is really funny, it's very well. I will,
I will say that it is funny.
Speaker 2 (27:46):
I I genuine like part of me doesn't, but part
of me does. Hope he decides to do a thing
where he's like, I'm gonna go do field journalism in
Ukraine and just seemed so, I will.
Speaker 1 (27:57):
It's fucking marked by God, damn like happens.
Speaker 4 (28:01):
No, no, no, you know what happens. He he imbeds
with the aesof battalion. Yeah, and they all get taken
out God willing kindness. But I think one thing I
was deerfinally thinking about, like the past few years, less
less so that this this like past year specifically, but
(28:22):
for a while it was a quite frightening prospect to
think about what if Tucker was going to run for president?
And I don't think he is. He is not going
to do that in twenty twenty four. Absolutely, that's that's
that's not happening. But I mean it's still possible he
could in the future. Twenty twenty eight is likely. Uh,
if if he wants, But I think the loss of
(28:44):
this position at this point in time will probably affect
that decision because it's something he's certainly been thinking about.
Considering he's one of the most influential conservative people on
the Yeah, like on the planet.
Speaker 3 (28:57):
He determines policy or did it if he did?
Speaker 4 (29:01):
Yeah, and and and now it's interesting with him with
him leaving his job in this way, it'll be interesting
to see if how that, how that affects any kind
of potential of prospect for him for him, yeah, running
for office.
Speaker 1 (29:15):
My big question around all that, and this is kind
of unanswerable, is like, does Tucker have any appeal outside
of the right wing base? Three and a half million
cable news viewers is not evidence of the kind of
broad based appeal that can drawn independence and win an election.
And Tucker has never you know, the one the closest
thing he's been to a political candidate is when he
(29:35):
went up against John Stewart and that didn't go great
for him. No, he and he moved aft after John
Stewart kind of destroyed his crossfire career. He moved to
a situation where he was he had unprecedented control over
his show, It was almost entirely recorded and stuff out
of a studio in Maine that he set up. He
built everything he was doing around being able to totally
(29:58):
control how he was seen, what was shown, what of
his was like put out to the public. And you
simply can't do that as a presidential candidate. You have
to accept and be able to make work for you
the fact that every eye is on you and you
do not have total control over what about you is
put out and published, among other things. You're going to
(30:20):
be repeatedly questioned in situations where you can't edit the
footage or stop things from going out afterwards. And I
don't know that Tucker has what it takes to succeed
in that kind of environment.
Speaker 2 (30:33):
Yeah, enchilade, he fucking never succeeds again and we never
have to hear about him.
Speaker 3 (30:39):
Yeah, we should shout out this lady, kat Ab Gazzale,
that the person who had to watch Tucker Carlson for
years and years and years and then explain it to people.
She works at Media Matters for America, but she is
taking the biggest victory lap that anyone has ever taken
right now, and it's kind of glorious to.
Speaker 4 (30:57):
Watch doing the lord's work. Truly.
Speaker 3 (31:00):
Yeah, taking on trauma for all her stuff was quite good.
Like she she did a good job explaining how toxic
Tucker was to people who might not have been aware
of it.
Speaker 1 (31:12):
Yeah. Anyway, in conclusion, Tucker, we would love to have
you on at cool Zone totally welcome to come host
your own podcast. We'll bring you on to It could
happen here. You can do a bastard's guest appearance. He can, Yeah,
right into the jungle.
Speaker 3 (31:33):
Directly.
Speaker 1 (31:34):
Come on, come on, Tucker, We'd love to have you anyway.
I think that's I think that's a sode. It could
happen here as a production of cool Zone Media. For
more podcasts from cool Zone Media, visit our website cool
zonemedia dot com, or check us out on the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.
Speaker 4 (31:56):
You can find sources for It could Happen here, updated
monthly at cool zone meedia dot com slash sources. Thanks
for listening.
It could happen here. It in Today's Harlance, meaning Tucker
Carlson getting fired, because that's what we're talking about today
is Today is one of our classic timely reaction episodes
to the firing of Fox News fascist and popular anti
(00:25):
semite Tucker Carlson. Today on the show to chat about
all of this, I've got Garrison Davis, James Stout, Mio Wong,
and Sophie Lichterman. Hi.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
Everybody, Wow, how was the last time we got like
the whole crew together.
Speaker 1 (00:43):
A long time? This is a this is the bulk
of us. Yeah. Yeah, And so.
Speaker 3 (00:47):
Sophie wasn't here for the com episode.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
No, Sophie. Sophie refused to be on for the come episode,
threatening to quit.
Speaker 3 (00:56):
Sadly.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
Yeah uh yeah. But so you know, today is a
couple of days since we all got the surprising news
that Tucker has been let go at Fox. This was
news that was surprising to Tucker. There's a couple things
that are funny about the announcement itself, namely that he
(01:17):
signed off his last episode saying see you guys next week.
Fox Play in the messaging they've put out was like,
you know, we both agreed that he needed to leave
the network, that this is an amicable split. The Brian Kilmead,
who replaced him the next episode with Fox News tonight,
(01:38):
was like, Tucker and I are still good friends. He's
just decided mutually to take a leave from the company.
This is definitely not true. We'll talk a little bit
about all of this, but the gist of I think
it's kind of worth talking about, like why this happened.
As far as we know, there's not, you know, objective
(02:01):
kind of confirmation about why specifically he got fired, but
the broad speculation some articles have like quoted a Fox
News insider who says that it was due to something
either he said in a recorded but unaired episode of
the show, or that it was something that was found
(02:22):
in the emails that were revealed during discovery that was
profoundly anti semitic. I've heard out, like in one source
at least said that it was anti semitic enough that
it might have been legally actionable. That's obviously, like what
the fuck. I would love to know what that specifically means.
(02:43):
But what we do know is that a former producer
for The Tucker Carlson Show who was a booking for
him is currently suing the network both for a hostile
work environment. She claims that she was exposed to intense
anti semitism while we're working there, and she alleges that
she was basically threatened into changing her deposition. So the
(03:08):
lawsuit came alongside her like issuing a correction to her
deposition and saying that she had basically lied in order
like because she was being threatened by people at Fox,
which is like, So there's a lot going on here.
So that's kind of the gist of what we know
right now as to like why he got shit canned. Yeah,
(03:31):
that's that's the basics.
Speaker 2 (03:34):
It's interesting too that he it's been like a day
now and he has said nothing. There have been multiple
people who said that he's not responding to his texts,
which is extremely funny.
Speaker 1 (03:46):
I saw one.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
Report that I don't I don't know how accurate is.
I saw one report that says he found out ten
minutes before Fox like released a statement.
Speaker 1 (03:53):
Yeah, he was in contract negotiations, so he was in
the middle of presumably getting a Fox to agree to
pay him a shitload more money.
Speaker 3 (04:03):
Yeah, and now he has no money, which is very funny.
Speaker 4 (04:06):
Well, yeah, he'll still probably get a lot of money somehow.
Speaker 3 (04:09):
Yeah, i'd be interesting to see if he like pivots
to something like like o Ann or news Max. I
don't know if they have the means to pay him
what he would probably see.
Speaker 4 (04:19):
Yeah, No, I mean this is this is one of
the questions kind of following this and how and how
this decision is gonna affect, you know, politics going forward,
especially with twenty twenty four two big questions being where
is Tucker going to go and who is going to
take his place?
Speaker 1 (04:37):
For the next few weeks.
Speaker 4 (04:38):
Fox is probably just going to be doing like a
rotating selection of hosts until they like make a final decision.
So you know, a lot of people could could end
up end up with that job. But in terms of
where he's going, there's there's a few interesting options. Now
it kind of does come down to who's going to
be willing to pay the probably pretty high price, or
(04:59):
if he's just going to try to stay independent. But
I think something like Newsmax isn't isn't out of the question.
I think I think this that this is this is
just like a guess, but I think there's a decent
chance that the Daily Wire is going to go after
him really hard. Yeah, he's already pretty friendly with a
lot of the people there. They've been willing to dishout
(05:21):
a lot of money for someone like Stephen Crowder. Now
Tucker will be undoubtedly more, but also he's going to
be more of a pull, and that that is something
that's entirely possible. I mean, The Daily Wire already produces
like usually two of the most popular podcasts in the world,
like in the top ten. They already have a lot,
They have a lot of web traffic. They don't have
(05:41):
like cable, but they get a lot of like other
other ways to to to to spread their work.
Speaker 3 (05:49):
They have a paid streaming service then they yes, yes,
they also have The Daily Wire Plus.
Speaker 1 (05:55):
Yep, they are. I think that they're probably the only
people in their right that can offer Tucker both money
that's broadly in line with what Fox could and an
audience that's that's sizable, potentially even an audience that's larger.
One of the things to kind of keep in mind
is that Tucker was going to get out three and
a half million viewers a night somewhere around there, which
(06:18):
made him the most popular host on cable news, but
also is minuscule based on historical number one, minuscule based
on the kind of audiences that like you can get
on streaming platforms today, which are much larger than cable audiences,
and is minuscule based on like I mean, it was
(06:40):
like ten years ago that three and a half million
viewers on a night ten fifteen years ago would have
been like an unsuccessful show on ANBC, right for some
For some perspective, the most successful TV finale of all
time was the Mash finale, which had like one hundred
and five million viewers. Like cable don't or you know,
(07:00):
television period does not get the kind of viewership that
it does anymore. And I think when you're looking at
Tucker he is the main draw for him has to
be the audience. He's not and he's the heir to
the Campbell or to the Swanson, you know, Dinner of Fortune.
He cannot be motivated primarily by the paycheck, right that
(07:22):
that that there's He's simply like it. Just that can't
be the reason he's doing it. It has to be
the fame, you know. And so Daily Wire I think
is a likely place for him as a result of that.
Speaker 3 (07:39):
Yeah, another thing that's interesting. I thought it is, like
Mea mentioned that he hasn't said anything yet and he's
probably taking advice from his lawyer, Brian Friedman, who incidentally
is the same dude who's representing Don Lemon who lost
his job on the same day, which which is.
Speaker 1 (07:57):
A good year for that guy, It.
Speaker 3 (08:01):
Is a good year for this guy. He like, this
is the guy who gets a shit ton of money
from networks when people get fired from networks, like he
has represented like Megan Kelly before. Like, when you hear
of a famous person getting let go by network, it's
probably this guy who's representing them. I thought it was
utterly hilarious that, yeah, both of them retained the same
(08:24):
guy on the same day having been fired. But thinking
about lawyering up, it made me think about like Topi
mentioned it that like Carlson defames people, he lies on
an almost daily basis. Right, we recently spoke about how
he took the statistics of Russian deaths from those Leaks documents,
(08:45):
that he used the blatantly altered version of those documents
long after everyone knew they'd been altered. Right, he needs
serious legal clout to defend him from the fact that
he lies. Into fames people every single day, So like
going even though he has a sign simple fortune, going
out on his own would be costly in the sense
of like he would almost have to be permanently defending himself.
Speaker 2 (09:07):
Yeah, and I think I think this is one of
the things where, well, I'm it's not clear to me
what the impact of the Alex Johones trial has been,
but this is one of those things where I think
the dominion people actually just nailing Fox to the wall
is going to be a sort of big factor here
because it makes it seem easier and more plausible on
things that like lawyers are willing to risk getting in
fights about for actually going after these people, for just
(09:30):
like defending people. And so yeah, it'll be it'll be
interesting to see, like how how long Tucker can last
on his own before he gets into a giant court
battle with someone, and whether he is I don't know,
attempts to be slightly more careful.
Speaker 3 (09:47):
Yeah, like I yeah, exactly, I didn't think if he's
if he goes to YouTube or don't think he's not
going to be spending his his frozen dinner fortune on
legal fees. I don't think. So he just and he
can't do what he does without spouting shit, right, Like
his right thing is just straight up lying and doing
this sort of credulous fool routine that he does, which
always results in these ridiculous conclusions that he comes to.
(10:08):
So like, I don't know with that, maybe the daily
why I can sudstain that I don't really have a
good sense of sort of their clout if people aren't familiar.
Should we summarize the Dominion case? I know you've spoken
about it on Fast.
Speaker 1 (10:21):
Yeah I did. I mean, you can listen to the
two parter I did with Katie and Cody on the
Dominion lawsuit where we basically just go over the entire
document that Dominion prepared for that. But the gist of
it is that Tucker knowingly and knowingly We know that
he knew because the discovery process revealed a bunch of
(10:42):
his text messages and emails where he talked about knowing
that the election fraud conspiracy theory was bullshit and he
propagated it and attacks against Dominion and another company, smart Matic,
in order to keep his audience on board, which is
a criminal you know, defamation or not criminal, but at
(11:03):
least like legally actionable you can sue as as Dominion
did and one like eight hundred million bucks. So and
I do think that's really worth that. That is kind
of pertinent when we're talking about who's going to take
him next, because like, obviously the Daily Wire would want
a guy like Tucker except for the fact that he
could cost them another eight hundred million dollars, which has
(11:24):
to be has to be part of the calculus of
any company looking at taking him on. And I think
is something none of us, nobody really knows what's going
to happen with this, but I think there is a
good chance he is permanently marginalized in terms of audience
just because of how much like eight hundred million dollars
is not enough to sink Fox on its own, but
(11:44):
it is enough to make anybody looking at bringing Tucker
on board the second guest himself.
Speaker 2 (11:49):
Yeah, I SA also numbers that were I think I
think they were saying he was bringing in the highest
like amount of revenue of any like like him will
do his anchor, but was like it was like seventy
eight million dollars a year and he lost like so
he lost ten years of his income.
Speaker 1 (12:07):
He basically lost everything he'd made Fox during the time
when he was the number one Kettle news house.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Yeah, and that has to be that has to be
a huge part of the coculus of like, Okay, you
know these are these people like as as as as
much as the right is ideological, it is also capitalist
and the risk award on that is terrifying.
Speaker 4 (12:29):
Yeah, and I like, especially when it comes to the
Daily Wire, a cost like that would just probably make
their entire company fold.
Speaker 1 (12:36):
Because they don't have Murdock behind them.
Speaker 4 (12:38):
They're not they're they're not that big of a company.
They just have a disproportionate amount of influence because their
hosts are really good at like marketing and social media manipulation.
Speaker 3 (12:48):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I ad revenue now would be a
great time for us to pivot to And there's some
go to coins with Reagan.
Speaker 1 (12:55):
Oh yeah yeah. You can hear the ads for the
new podcasts that are your colleague Tucker Carlson's gonna be doing.
Speaker 3 (13:02):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's way heyman, Don Lemon just.
Speaker 1 (13:05):
Have yeah, him and Don Lemon, we we're calling it.
Speaker 4 (13:09):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (13:10):
I don't know, there's there's a good there's a good
there's a good joke with their two names somewhere. I
haven't figured it out yet though, So you do that
for yourselves, audience. Ah, what a good what a good
(13:31):
time that we're talking about here. This is just just
a just a great day, great week. Uh So, yeah,
we're looking at you know, I think kind of when
we're talking about what's possible here and Daily Wirey agree
is kind of the most likely thing. If you look
at what leaked recently during their drama with Stephen Crowder.
(13:51):
The contract that we're offering Crowder was somewhere around thirty
million dollars, which from everything people have said, is a
big deal for them. That's one of the biggest bigger
offerings as they're capable of doing. Uh. That is, you know,
probably the most Tucker is realistically going to be able
to get. But also, uh, one of the things that
(14:13):
kind of is noteworthy about the contract they were offering
Crowder is that it included clauses where like crowders take
home could be reduced significantly if he got kicked off
of platforms and fucking Tucker Carlson is not going to
keep it a YouTube count.
Speaker 4 (14:33):
I mean it is. It is interesting in that sense
of like they were they all of his content was
able to be kept up when he was under Fox,
Like on YouTube you can find all of his segments,
and it'd be interesting to see how the content moderation
differs if like he starts his own channel and how
and how comparatively what things would be would be counted
(14:54):
as like community guideline strikes. But yeah, I mean just
I think I think, like last week Matt Walsh's show
got demonetized on YouTube, which if his contract is anything
like the Crowtters, means that he is going to be
suffering up like a personal financial hit.
Speaker 1 (15:10):
Yeah, he's they're taking probably you know, in the millions
that he's losing.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
Yeah, And there's something I think this is an interesting
thing that's been happening in the last maybe like six months,
has been there's there's been sort of increasing tension between
sort of the far right that's basically sees control the
Republican Party and like the money, and they keep running
(15:35):
into these issues where in order to keep their base going,
they need to say stuff that like their sort of
like corporate backers are like this is either losing us
money or is so far out there that like it's
you know, it's it's either directly losing US money from lawsuits,
or it's losing US elections, or it's losing us like business.
Speaker 1 (15:55):
And now I'm never.
Speaker 2 (15:56):
Gonna claim that like Murdoch is not the far right,
because he is is. But it's interesting that we've gotten
to a point where people like Murdoch are getting more
gun shy about what they can put on air because
it's finally like the money is finally starting to see
actual consequences, and they're starting to pull back from the
(16:17):
stuff a little bit.
Speaker 1 (16:18):
Well, see, that's part of what I'm questioning is I'm
sure that that is something that's entering his calculus more
now since the settlement, but it's at least the early
reporting suggests that's not really why, or at least not
most of the reason why Tucker got shit canned. It's
a bunch of shit like stuff that is not revealed
(16:39):
yet in the deposition that he was saying an email,
I mean, one of the things came out that woman
who is accusing him of creating a sexist and anti
semitic work environment, is that he like when she got hired,
he plastered swimsuit photos of Nancy Pelosi over her office
and that's what we've heard, like the shit that, Like,
(17:00):
I think it's possible, uh that what actually got Murdoch
to make the call to can him is that he
Murdoch himself found out through discovery that he was saying
shit in emails that would sink the company, Like if
he's saying full on Nazi shit. Yeah, and there's there's
(17:21):
documentation of that, which I don't think is unlikely on it,
like yeah.
Speaker 2 (17:27):
There's no there's there's there's no there's no limit at.
Speaker 3 (17:29):
That point, like yeah, no, the like clearly that ship
aligns with his views, and he's made a concerted effort
to mainstream more and more outright fascist and genesis white
supremacist talking points every year that he's had that show.
So it would not especially when they got his text messages,
Like he might be smart enough not to like maybe
use his work email. But I think that the fact
(17:50):
that there were some things in his text messages and yeah,
that wouldn't surprise me. It's either that or he said
something personal about one of the Murdochs and they.
Speaker 1 (18:01):
Well he did. He did talk shit about Fox executives,
which some people have suggested as like part of why
they made the decision. It can him that he actually
just pissed off the moneymen too, and this was kind
of an excuse to take more action. Again, like it's
(18:21):
it's it's kind of unclear exactly what happened. I think
it's probably worth talking about in the last portion of
this what impact, because it is likely that whatever happens,
He's he's going to have less reach, and at least
less reach in like a practical way. Because if Tucker
starts a podcast, even if the podcast has kind of
more you know, through Daily Wire or whatever, even if
(18:43):
it's got on paper more listeners than Fox, I think
there's something about cable news where you're reaching an audience
that's that's different with the ideas that he was He's
when he was on Fox, he was hitting people who
would never have encountered some of this like fascist shit,
(19:04):
this great replacement stuff, Whereas if he's saying the same
thing on a Daily Wire podcast, he's probably talking more
to people who are already pilled, so to speak. So
I do think there's a good chance that overall this
kind of tanks his ability to.
Speaker 4 (19:23):
Actually like influence culture in a meaningful way.
Speaker 3 (19:26):
Radicalize boomers, like everyone listening can probably think of a
person who they know or is in their sort of
greatest circle of people who their friends know, who is
an older person who is very much offline and has
encountered these great replacement ideas through Tucker Carlson and become
a significantly worse person because of Tucker Carlson's program.
Speaker 4 (19:45):
Yeah, I mean, and you can see how all of
the Daily Wire guys like like Walsh and Mike, Michael
Noles and even someone like Andy No, they suck up
to Carlson so much and have been for the past
few years because they realize that that actually gives the
cultural access to be on his show on that platform
in a way that they're much.
Speaker 3 (20:05):
More like Peterson too.
Speaker 4 (20:07):
Pete Peterson, Sure, I think pet Peterson's broken into the mainstream.
Speaker 2 (20:09):
I think a bit more.
Speaker 4 (20:10):
But like all of these other guys like Andy No, Walsh, Knowles,
they're all heavily like Internet people, and they influence like
Internet shit, and sometimes that can start crossing over. But
in general, the cable news platform kind of reiffies things
into broader culture in a way that someone like Walsh
(20:31):
just doesn't because he's like most people don't know who Walshes.
But most people do know who Tucker is, and.
Speaker 1 (20:41):
That is my dad is lifelong Republican voter. And when
I talked to him complaining about shit Matt Walsh is doing,
Like the first thing he said was like, I've never
heard of this guy. Yeah, And it's like, yeah, because
he's he's a fucking internet weirdo. And my dad doesn't
you know, he knows Ben Shapiro because Ben breaks through
to the mainstream, but he knows Been Shapiro from like
catching clips of him randomly being shared on Facebook by
(21:04):
other people in his age group, as opposed to like
seeking this shit out. And that's kind of the power
of Tucker. And I think one of the things you've
seen Gear that you were kind of talking at, which
is the thing that is maybe most hopeful to me,
is how scared people like Andy know Glenn Greenwald flip
the fuck out when this gun announced because they see
(21:27):
this is a major threat to their reach into their
earning potential. Yeah, Tucker can't host them anymore. That's potentially
disastrous for them. And the fact that that's happening right
as we're gearing up for twenty twenty four is something
I'm hopeful about at least I'll say.
Speaker 4 (21:42):
Right, it is a massive like rejection of that platform
to yeah, people like that like this type of like
rhetoric that Tucker is doing. Having this be like publicly
rejected in this way will make all these people that
are more on the fringes probably make it harder for
them to breakthrough in little ways like they used to
(22:02):
try to by being on Tucker is a show.
Speaker 1 (22:05):
Speaking of reifying things into the broader culture by these products.
Speaker 2 (22:24):
In Okay, So there's one other thing that I we've
could have been touching on it, but I think it's
really interesting is that Tucker. Tucker basically has a sort
of media ecosystem that revolves around him. And you know,
there's a very established pathway for how you can become
a sort of like a successful and profitable right wing
grifter which goes through you know, you sort of go
(22:45):
viral on Twitter, you go viral on TikTok, and then
you go on to Tucker and you know and like
like people like lives at TikTok, right, Like, I think
I think there's there's a certific kind of media campaign
that even with whoever, like whatever, absolute asshole that like
Fox puts in that slot after Tucker's you know, when
whatever they sort of figure out who that's going to be, Like,
(23:06):
there's still I think going to be sort of a
hole there, Yeah, where I think it gets harder to
run the kinds the very the very very specific kinds
of campaigns like little TikTok, like the sort of mods
for liberty shit that that's been just making the country
unfathomably awful for the past few years.
Speaker 3 (23:24):
With like that, I've been kind of working on writing
something scripted about this trans panic that happened in a
town very near me in Santi right, which like was
an extremely clear like like that was the goal, right,
like like do to speech, go go viral, go on
Tucker create, you know, then go on the speaking circuit,
(23:44):
make money. Like to me, at least, it seems very
clear that that was that was the goal.
Speaker 1 (23:48):
And I yeah, he's he's a weapons system that they
they have learned, like has become kind of the center
of right wing strategy really is like get on Tucker
car as you know, moral panic culture warship yep.
Speaker 2 (24:03):
Yeah, and and you know and like obviously like other
Fox shows do this stuff. It doesn't work anywhere anywhere
near as well.
Speaker 4 (24:08):
And now I think it's the person the person that
gets the closest is probably Laura Ingram, but I think
she she kind of suffers from the glass ceiling problems.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
Yeah, she actually cannot be.
Speaker 4 (24:21):
Yeah, I mean, but.
Speaker 1 (24:22):
I'm brad Masogy.
Speaker 3 (24:25):
I think I stand with Laura.
Speaker 4 (24:27):
Ingram rub Big specifically viewing Tucker as this thing that
was like a targeted weapon. I think it's a really
good way to look at this, and specifically now that
that weapon no longer can like actually aim correctly because
or at.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
Least may not be able to write. I mean, maybe
he'll come back and we're wrong, but I I am optimistic.
I think all say, yeah, it.
Speaker 3 (24:51):
Puts a spanner in the works of the hate machine
that that he built and the folks built, and that's
a good thing.
Speaker 4 (24:56):
But Mia, you were saying before I rudely interrupted you.
Speaker 1 (25:00):
U asshole.
Speaker 2 (25:01):
You cannot remember what what I was gonna say.
Speaker 4 (25:06):
You're talking about how how how other other hosts kind
of do the thing but not.
Speaker 2 (25:11):
The Yeah, well, I mean part of it also is
just you know, part of the power of Tucker is
just the time slot that he's in, Yeah, which is
you know that that that's the one where like all
of the people who've gotten off of work, who are
like turning on the television at night get to But yeah,
like Tuck Tucker was I think was really in the
entirety of the sort of TV and media sphere, was
(25:33):
uniquely good at that stuff. And no one else, no
one else can do it like that. And you know,
like the like if the Fox people will create someone else,
but until they fill that spot, A, there's a gap,
and B it really remains to be seen whether seeing
whether they're going to sort of pick someone who is
as embedded in like that part of the sort of
(25:53):
fascists right as Tucker is, or if they're going to
find someone who's like, i mean still really really right
and sucks but isn't like having ye on.
Speaker 1 (26:04):
Yeah, yeah, and it's I mean, I am kind of
curious slash worried about who's going to follow him into
that time slot. Folks, real old heads will know. Tucker
got his job after Bill O'Reilly, who was the Fox
News fascist of my childhood, got shit canned for sexual
harassment on an industrial scale. Uh, And so that's that's
(26:27):
why Tucker is in and Obviously as bad as Bill was,
Tucker was worse, and maybe the person who follows Tucker
will be worse than Tucker. I do have trouble imagining
what that could be, because my god, he really he went.
He went right up to the edge of putting on
a fucking swastik arm band.
Speaker 3 (26:44):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (26:44):
Yeah, I will say about the Bill o. Riley people,
people have been like, oh, like, Tucker's going to disappear
in the way Bill O'reiley did.
Speaker 1 (26:49):
I don't.
Speaker 2 (26:50):
I don't think that's I think he's going to be
a bigger like, assuming he winds up somewhere, I think
he'll still be a bigger influence than like Bill was
after he got fired.
Speaker 1 (27:01):
But yeah, I mean Bill was also a lot older, right.
Speaker 4 (27:03):
Yeah, yeah, No, I think that is that is an
accurate assessment.
Speaker 3 (27:08):
Mm hmm.
Speaker 4 (27:09):
Well excited, excited to get my new Rumble subscriptions so
we can watch Oh yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (27:18):
No, it's going to be uh glorious to see him
finally pair up with Tim Poole, the two the two
of them carrying AK forty seven, so doing field journalism
in twenty twenty four.
Speaker 3 (27:30):
Yeah, yeah, Tucker casting for those are not familiar, carried
a gun when reporting in a rock, which for many
reasons it's a fucking terrible idea, including putting f one
else doing your job changer.
Speaker 1 (27:41):
But it is really funny, it's very well. I will,
I will say that it is funny.
Speaker 2 (27:46):
I I genuine like part of me doesn't, but part
of me does. Hope he decides to do a thing
where he's like, I'm gonna go do field journalism in
Ukraine and just seemed so, I will.
Speaker 1 (27:57):
It's fucking marked by God, damn like happens.
Speaker 4 (28:01):
No, no, no, you know what happens. He he imbeds
with the aesof battalion. Yeah, and they all get taken
out God willing kindness. But I think one thing I
was deerfinally thinking about, like the past few years, less
less so that this this like past year specifically, but
(28:22):
for a while it was a quite frightening prospect to
think about what if Tucker was going to run for president?
And I don't think he is. He is not going
to do that in twenty twenty four. Absolutely, that's that's
that's not happening. But I mean it's still possible he
could in the future. Twenty twenty eight is likely. Uh,
if if he wants, But I think the loss of
(28:44):
this position at this point in time will probably affect
that decision because it's something he's certainly been thinking about.
Considering he's one of the most influential conservative people on
the Yeah, like on the planet.
Speaker 3 (28:57):
He determines policy or did it if he did?
Speaker 4 (29:01):
Yeah, and and and now it's interesting with him with
him leaving his job in this way, it'll be interesting
to see if how that, how that affects any kind
of potential of prospect for him for him, yeah, running
for office.
Speaker 1 (29:15):
My big question around all that, and this is kind
of unanswerable, is like, does Tucker have any appeal outside
of the right wing base? Three and a half million
cable news viewers is not evidence of the kind of
broad based appeal that can drawn independence and win an election.
And Tucker has never you know, the one the closest
thing he's been to a political candidate is when he
(29:35):
went up against John Stewart and that didn't go great
for him. No, he and he moved aft after John
Stewart kind of destroyed his crossfire career. He moved to
a situation where he was he had unprecedented control over
his show, It was almost entirely recorded and stuff out
of a studio in Maine that he set up. He
built everything he was doing around being able to totally
(29:58):
control how he was seen, what was shown, what of
his was like put out to the public. And you
simply can't do that as a presidential candidate. You have
to accept and be able to make work for you
the fact that every eye is on you and you
do not have total control over what about you is
put out and published, among other things. You're going to
(30:20):
be repeatedly questioned in situations where you can't edit the
footage or stop things from going out afterwards. And I
don't know that Tucker has what it takes to succeed
in that kind of environment.
Speaker 2 (30:33):
Yeah, enchilade, he fucking never succeeds again and we never
have to hear about him.
Speaker 3 (30:39):
Yeah, we should shout out this lady, kat Ab Gazzale,
that the person who had to watch Tucker Carlson for
years and years and years and then explain it to people.
She works at Media Matters for America, but she is
taking the biggest victory lap that anyone has ever taken
right now, and it's kind of glorious to.
Speaker 4 (30:57):
Watch doing the lord's work. Truly.
Speaker 3 (31:00):
Yeah, taking on trauma for all her stuff was quite good.
Like she she did a good job explaining how toxic
Tucker was to people who might not have been aware
of it.
Speaker 1 (31:12):
Yeah. Anyway, in conclusion, Tucker, we would love to have
you on at cool Zone totally welcome to come host
your own podcast. We'll bring you on to It could
happen here. You can do a bastard's guest appearance. He can, Yeah,
right into the jungle.
Speaker 3 (31:33):
Directly.
Speaker 1 (31:34):
Come on, come on, Tucker, We'd love to have you anyway.
I think that's I think that's a sode. It could
happen here as a production of cool Zone Media. For
more podcasts from cool Zone Media, visit our website cool
zonemedia dot com, or check us out on the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.
Speaker 4 (31:56):
You can find sources for It could Happen here, updated
monthly at cool zone meedia dot com slash sources. Thanks
for listening.
It Could Happen Here News
Host
Robert Evans
Show Links
AboutPopular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Nikki Glaser Podcast
Every week comedian and infamous roaster Nikki Glaser provides a fun, fast-paced, and brutally honest look into current pop-culture and her own personal life.