1. Avatar

    I am here for the algorithm.

  2. Avatar

    I decided to be YouTube exclusive. No reason I can’t speculate about any hypothesis available in Wikipedia

  3. Avatar

    Hahaha nate rokfin will never be a thing. Rumble is already established.

  4. Avatar

    Side-note: … Who's the "Chad" in the default pic? … That is not Tucker (couldn't be!) .

  5. Avatar

    Brah what. Hapen to you. Ur show is not the same. Stop nagging for money.not a gd. Look

  6. Avatar

    Do more vlog in person interviews, start a directory of category interviewers, like humor, politics, culture et al. Get known…scuze my keen sense of the obvious.

  7. Avatar

    Nate, dawg, you took what I commented on the last stream the wrong way. I get it.

  8. Avatar

    Sandyhook, boston bombing and las vesgas shooting brought out the censorship on youtube. No doubt.

  9. Avatar

    As for the episcopel self-deprecation, thats just how se roll.

  10. Avatar

    This is like the Five Blind Men describing an elephant. One feels a leg and said it's like a tree… one grabs the tail and says it's like a snake… one grabs the trunk,… one grabs an ear,… one grabs a tusk… blah, blah, blah. Reasons are in the reference point of the beholder.

    The reality is that inquiring human beings can come up with plenty of reasons. Our minds are meaning machines capable of spitting out responses indefinitely.

    If you can remember the last time you went on vacation, sit down with a piece of paper and write every answer you can think of why you went where you went. Just keep asking yourself if there was any other contributory or overwhelming reason. For many people this can be a surprisingly productive exercise. Answer to the real reason why something happened it's not so much an exercise in forensics as in determining the type or ranking of values to which individuals tend to grant importance and significance. Still it's excellent clickbait number in each channel seems to offer another facet to the model.

    What's most clear is that the firing coincided with the Murdoch family's decision to settle with Dominion over the Dominion versus Fox lawsuit, rather than defend it. Former Harvard Law School Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz —whilel always making the point that he is a Democrat who votes against most things Republican and reliably Donald Trump even when defending Trump, made a point of going public with the opinion that Fox did a disservice to Americans by not finding the allegations, and that there seemed to be no representation of damages in the amount sought by Dominion.

    Tucker's millions in salary is inconsequential for a firm that can afford the size settlement which Fox handed Dominion, and it's now pretty clear that they didn't so much fire Tucker as silence him, not breaking the contract but taking him off of the air, so to speak.

    Rupert Murdoch is an old man over 90 with succession planning problems who just broke off his a judgment with a woman 2/3 his age who reportedly talked too much in a religious vein.

    Fox News and Fox Corporation were being blamed for statements the on-air talent was making publicly and privately. Seemingly the patriarch wants to clear up and simplify issues well he is still able to and hopefully before he passes away. And his offspring probably don't want him tying up the businesses in contract will not so Rupert can rule his business empire from beyond the grave.

    Why would he want a guy around under contract with Fox who has publicly indicated that he is discarding any restraint about what he says, and that he is being paid for giving his opinion.

    With the multitude of reasons being batted back and forth across the Legacy Media and the internet, if there's one question to be answered the question would be: why wouldn't Rupert Murdoch and the corporations he controls silence and unseat Tucker Carlson — a guy who seems to have had some kind of religious epiphany about speaking what he sees as the truth and not being controlled.

    Programming like that which Carlson was providing (and more important was ready to provide).is not part of a news team or a collection of pundits offering their latest insights. It's the kind of programming that would be preceded and followed by a caveat denying any endorsement by Fox of the viewpoints presented during that program.

    Reports are that individuals as disparate as Chuck Schumer, Alejandra Ocasio- Cortes and Ukraine's President Zelensky
    were reported to have called for Tucker's ouster publicly, privately or both.

    In the aftermath Tucker apparently dribbled out information that he and Fox had been in negotiation for the extension of his contract, with the new contract beginning some 18 months in the future. These are the kinds of negotiations that sometimes take place when both parties want to get all of their cards out on the table sooner rather than later; potential conflicts out on the horizon were being telescoped into the present. Tucker may have been blindsided in some checkmate move on this chess board, but it was pretty obvious that once Fox interfered with his big wildly popular scoop exposing the January 6th, 2021 surveillance video from inside the Capitol Building that if Tucker was going to give up that kind of autonomy, then the trade-off would have to carry some weighty some compensatory privileges in return.

    The guy was already sending in his program remotely from his residences in Maine and Florida. Fox on the other hand had already recently let go iff Dan Bongino after those two parties had failed to come to terms. And Fox was still looking at another big lawsuit from another voting machine company complaining about damage to its reputation after the 2020 elections — all of which seems pretty ridiculous when you look at the kind of reputational damage that has been deliberately and even maliciously inflicted on an entire spectrum of victims by the remainder of the legacy media plying its trade on cable TV over recent previous decades

    It shouldn't be long before we find out if Fox just trying to get Carlson off of its platform or if it was trying to silence and ruin him. And the Murdochs are rich enough, big enough, and irritable enough to absorb losses of 20 million dollars a year or so for a year-and-a-half to spite Tucker or bring his popularity for the point where any outfit he joins is less of a threat. Tucker was clearly beginning to push the envelope and all kinds of directions to see what kind of latitude he still commanded.

    There's an old phrase that seems to describe the situation: "If things don't get better around here you're going to have to fire me."

Leave a Comment