Russell Brand champions the importance of independent media and free speech, particularly highlighting the controversial interview between Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. It critiques the establishment and legacy media’s reaction to such independent journalistic endeavors, suggesting that their outrage stems not from a concern for ethical journalism but from a fear of losing control over the narrative. Russell argues that independent figures like Carlson and Elon Musk, by providing alternative perspectives on global issues such as the conflict in Ukraine, challenge the status quo and offer the public a chance to form their own opinions based on a wider array of information. He also touches on the consequences of NATO expansion, the complexity of geopolitical situations, and the importance of questioning mainstream narratives to uncover deeper truths about global conflicts, ultimately advocating for a more informed and free-thinking public discourse.
* * *
It’s ON! The legacy media are furious about Tucker Carlson interviewing Putin. But why? And does the new power axis of Tucker and Elon Musk now dwarf all legacy media combined?
Published on YouTube, February 7, 2024
[Russell] Tucker Carlson is in Russia to interview Putin, and the Legacy Media and the establishment are outraged. Is this because Tucker is a traitor, and it’s somehow irreligious for him to have a conversation with Putin? Or is it because this conversation could give us the opportunity, along with the axis between Tucker and Elon Musk, to get an entirely different perspective on an extremely significant issue: global war?
Hello there, Awakening viewers. Thanks for joining me on our voyage to truth and freedom. Remember, if you become a member of our community, you can access additional content. For example, our exclusive access to our supporters’ interview with Tucker Carlson, as well as conversations every single day where we speak to journalists, where we do meditations, we do a whole bunch of stuff. Join us if you can because we are interested in emergent, independent media, which just might be the most powerful force on the planet right now.
Consider this: if Tucker Carlson can interview Vladimir Putin and Elon Musk can publish it on X, that means that all of us are going to gain access to a perspective on a topic that could change the trajectory of world events, that the establishment would rather we wouldn’t have.
[Tucker Carlson] Two years into a war that’s reshaping the entire world, most Americans are not informed. They have no real idea what’s happening in this region, here in Russia, or 600 miles away in Ukraine.
[Russell] Now, I’m not a Putin apologist. I’m sure living in Russia under the yoke of Putin’s tyranny could be terrible. But what seems to be pretty clear is that the Legacy Media are outraged that Tucker has dared to go to Russia to speak to Putin.
[MSNBC News] And he’s apparently been spending the last few days in Moscow for some reason. Who knows? We don’t know why he has to stay relevant somehow, so I guess we’ll learn in the coming days.
[Russell] And perhaps that’s because there’s a narrative that Putin is a madman and an expansionist, that Putin started this war without provocation, that Putin has rejected all overtures towards peace. And it seems that at least there is a viable counter-narrative that that’s not true, that NATO breached former Soviet Union territory, that Putin doesn’t want Ukraine in NATO on his doorstep. And you can say Ukraine’s an independent nation and they should be able to join NATO, but then you’re in a conversation about what is the value of NATO, how’s NATO benefiting you? I’m not saying I know the answer to these questions. I’m saying we’re entitled to have a conversation, and I would like to hear what Vladimir Putin’s got to say about NATO, about the disputed region of the Donbas, about Crimea, about what his terms for peace will be. Because we’re continually told that Putin is a lunatic, can’t be appeased, he’s a contemporary Hitler. Wouldn’t you like to see him answer some of those questions? Wouldn’t you like to see a journalist and Vladimir Putin having a conversation before you just automatically assume that everything you’re being told by CNN, and the American government, and the corporate establishment is irrefutably true?
Isn’t it interesting that Russia Today has been cleansed from the internet, whereas, apparently in Russia, Tucker is a recognizable superstar? So whatever’s going on in Russia, they’re not banning all American media. So isn’t it valuable to have a conversation while we’re on the precipice of war? And are those people that are calling Tucker Carlson a traitor, those that are most guilty of treason? Because they seem to want to cut us out of the conversation when it comes to an extremely significant global event. This is what Robert F. Kennedy Jr tweeted:
“The Legacy Media is in shambles because we’ve caught onto their lies and propaganda. Tucker Carlson has every right to interview Putin. We need more transparency instead of less. It used to be understood that journalists would interview world leaders, even those with whom we’re at war.”
[Russell] Meanwhile, Bill Kristol, former Chief of Staff, posted,
“Perhaps we need a total and complete shutdown of Tucker Carlson re-entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what’s going on.”
[Russell] What seems more extreme there? What we’re asking you today is, are we literally at the tipping point of independent media, wherein the figures of Tucker Carlson and Elon Musk, we have an axis that could literally disrupt the entire establishment? Tucker Carlson can have a conversation with a world leader with a competing narrative, and Elon Musk can publish it through X. That means that all of us will gain access; we’ll be able to watch with our own eyes and listen with our own ears to what Putin’s saying. I’m not saying it’s not possible that Putin is a liar, a lunatic, an expansionist, a former KGB operative that’s possibly had a hand in countless murders, that Russia have their own agenda. But if we can hear Putin literally saying, “I would accept a peace deal if Ukraine don’t join NATO, if we keep Crimea, and if there’s a degree of autonomy in Donbas,” we, the population of the Western world that are currently funding, through our tax dollars and pounds, the perpetuation of this war, might be able to go, “Hm, what is the value of NATO? Wait a minute, are the military-industrial complex benefiting from this war? What state is Ukrainian democracy in anyway? Do we want conscription in the UK and Sweden, and in Australia, which is currently being discussed, by the way, presumably to provide human fodder for these wars?”
What this conversation represents is nothing less than the establishment being confronted with the new power of independent media to oppose their narrative, to oppose their agenda. Whatever you think of Tucker, whatever you think of Putin, whatever you think of Elon Musk, and even whatever you think about Russia, the panic that the Legacy Media and establishment are going into now suggest that they’ve got something more than our well-being in mind. Let’s have a look.
The word “reset”: a massive shakeup in Kiev coming as Putin is trying to court the MAGA GOP in the United States.
[Russell] That’s heavy editorialization already. “Putin is trying to court one of the MAGA leaders.” Tucker Carlson is not a MAGA leader. Anyone who watches or listens to Tucker Carlson will know that he’s sort of sometimes quite circumspect on Trump. “I like Trump here; I’ve got questions about Trump there.” MAGA is a very particular aspect of American political life, “Make America Great Again,” and it seems that there’s a Legacy Media attempt to frame it as extreme rather than populist, to frame it as sort of violent and somehow unacceptable rather than a kind of response to the failure of neoliberalism. You don’t get MAGA without Barack Obama waving away the debts generated by the financial crisis, for example. That’s not about Barack Obama’s race; that’s about Barack Obama’s affinity with globalist financial interests.
This is brilliant framing designed to stop us even questioning the legitimacy of Tucker going to Russia to have a conversation with Putin.
“In fact, one of the leaders of the MAGA GOP is in Moscow tonight. It’s the man you see here…”
[Russell] “the man you see here,” criminalizing it as if Tucker Carlson’s being observed from a hedge for being there. There he is, look, at a public event!
“…with the MAGA leader Donald Trump. Tucker Carlson, possibly there in Moscow to interview Putin.”
[Russell] How dare a journalist speak to a political leader? Everyone knows the job of journalists is to tell everyone that Ivermectin is a horse paste.
“Definitely, there as a Putin-supporting celebrity.”
[Russell] He’s not a Putin-supporting celebrity. Putin is a leader on the world stage. I’m sure you could scrutinize Putin’s record in power and go, “Oh my God, this looks a bit corrupt, the way that a new oligarchy was formed when state institutions were carved up and distributed, all of their former communist assets were privatized.” There’s loads of things you could ask about. I’m sure there’s weird assassinations and murders. But like Trump himself said, “Do you think we don’t have people killed?
[Interviewer] Putin’s a killer.
[Donald Trump] There’re a lot of killers. A lot of killers. Why you think our country’s so innocent? You think our country’s so innocent?”
[Russell] What it is, is the assumption that Russia doesn’t have their own right to a perspective, that Putin doesn’t have his right to the institutions of a nation. If what Putin’s doing is wrong in Russia, what America’s doing all over the Middle East is wrong. That’s the conversation they’re not capable of having. I tell you who is capable of having that conversation: Tucker Carlson. Who would ask questions like that to Vladimir Putin? Tucker Carlson. This isn’t about whether you personally like someone, although I do personally like Tucker Carlson, as a matter of fact. This is about what the function of media is.
“Just listen to how Russian state media is breathlessly celebrating his visit.”
[Russell] Even when I watch Russian media and Russian news, I think, “That is not a country you want to have a war with. If there’s any way around it, if there’s any way around it.” If that’s their news, imagine what their army is like. “Hello, welcome to news. I kill you.”
“Independent journalist Tucker Carlson has flown to Russia from the US…”
[Russell] Sit up straight, here is news. “I kill you.”
Via Turkey to Vnukovo Airport. He saw Spartacus ballet at the Bolshoi Theater.
[Russell] “Ballet, but only about Spartacus, about radical slave leader who turn against army…”
“…had lunch in a nice restaurant, went for a ride around town, rode the subway, he charged his smartphone via USB port and connected to a fast and free Wi-Fi internet.”
[Russell] Needless to say, a bit of propaganda there. I’m not saying Russia doesn’t have their own propaganda, of course, they do. But the declaration of the Legacy Media that propaganda is a one-way street, that state imperatives is a one-way street, their globalist agenda is a one-way street. Remember, Tucker is being reported on in Russia, Russia Today, which includes people like Slavoj Žižek, the philosopher, Chris Hedges, like, it’s surprising, former New York Times journalist had all their Russia Today stuff just scrapped. What we’re saying is, is that the Legacy Media and the establishment isn’t interested in protecting you, it’s interested in controlling you. Once you have that analytic, then everything kind of makes sense, doesn’t it?
“Look at them talking about him like a celebrity, everything he does on camera, breathlessly repeated. Now, it is unclear if an interview between Putin and Carlson will take place, but if it does, it gives Putin a chance to sit down with a big supporter.”
[Russell] Also, what’s wrong with that? Again, the assumption that we’re not capable of watching Tucker Carlson speak to Putin and go, “Okay, right, well maybe Putin’s got his own agenda.” You can incorporate that into your understanding. That’s a world leader in charge of a massive country with incredible history, with his own agenda, and nuclear weapons, and literature. What I resent is the assumption that all information should be given to me pre-chewed with a predetermined outcome already offered to us.
Why they are terrified is because we might watch this and go, “Hey, I’m not sure it’s worth perpetuating this war and funding this war and having this bill for billions of dollars go through, the majority of which, by the way, is going to Ukraine, not going to the border. A small amount’s going to the border.” We might be able to decide for ourselves that we want to take our own nations in a different direction, that our own media is unreliable, that our own political class is in need of radical revision.
Here is Tucker Carlson when he was still on Fox, which, if you ask me, he was booted off of because he was anti-war. That’s just my opinion. Talking about Vladimir Putin, listen to this and see if it makes sense to you.
[Tucker Carlson] “It might be worth asking yourself, since it is getting pretty serious, what is this really about? Why do I hate Putin so much? Has Putin ever called me a racist? Has he threatened to get me fired for disagreeing with him?”
[Russell] How is that different than when Muhammad Ali said, “I ain’t got no beef with the Viet Cong.”
[Muhammad Ali] How can I shoot them poor people? Just take me to jail.”
[Russell] When he said, “I don’t want to be conscripted into the US Army to go fight other brown people around the world on behalf of an American agenda.” Do you think America’s really changed since then? Oh, that was America of the 1960s when it was governed by the military-industrial complex. That was a very different America. Since then, why, everything’s changed. Since Wolfowitz and Cheney and Barack Obama and Raytheon and Lockheed Martin and reneging on a deal with Gorbachev to not impede on Russian territory or former Soviet territory and getting involved in the coup in Ukraine in 2014, and the Ukrainian Biolabs, and Victoria Nuland admitting that successive administrations have had involvement in Ukraine and supporting the Azov Battalion that are literally Nazis.
There are questions to be asked. There are questions. I don’t purport to have the answers. How could I? ‘Cause I look at the same media as you. Thankfully, independent media, I mean now. But the idea that having someone like Tucker Carlson have a conversation with Vladimir Putin is treason is bullshit. What it is, is an opportunity to get a perspective that is going to be detrimental to their agenda. And that’s why they’re flapping and panicking.
[Tucker Carlson] “Does he eat dogs?” These are fair questions.
[Russell] It’s not a fair question to ask if he eats dogs; there’s no reason to ask that,
[Tucker Carlson] …and the answer to all of them is no. Vladimir Putin didn’t do any of that.
“I’ll actually always remember watching that clip. I was standing in Ukraine 48 hours before the war began there…”
[Russell] “Doing exactly what I was supposed to be doing, being in Ukraine, not asking why all other media outlets have been shut down, and why all of the political parties have been shut down. I was in Ukraine, not asking why Gonzalo Lira, an American journalist, was in jail. I was in Ukraine believing that there’s just good and bad, and that’s it. Ignoring the quote by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn because he’s Russian, “The line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being.” Because we ain’t got time for that, ’cause we’re offering you propaganda, while accusing other people of being propagandists. That’s literal irony.”
“Well, Carlson then stood by Putin consistently all the way through, and that is why he can go to Moscow now without any fear of being summarily imprisoned.”
[Russell] People shouldn’t fear being summarily imprisoned anyway. Again, remember Gonzalo Lira, an American journalist, died in a Ukrainian jail. No one talked about that. Why? Because he was saying, “I’m not sure about Ukrainian democracy.” Of course, Ukrainian people shouldn’t be killed; that’s ridiculous. And of course, this is a war crime, the invasion of Russia into Ukraine. And of course, we can’t really talk about that, because if we started using that metric, we’d have to acknowledge all of the war crimes the United States has committed over the last 50 years because all of their invasions have been criminal. Many of them have not involved the consultation of Congress. They’re all criminal wars. Hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy.
“He’s a hero, this was Putin’s mouthpiece in the United States.”
[Russell] They’re using the same narrative that they used for Trump, huh? This is Putin’s mouthpiece. Oh, Ben P., I suppose…
“…he’s somebody who had turned a blind eye to the atrocities committed by Putin because they were happening far away. Once vibrant towns turned to ruins, mass graves with dozens of bodies in the Kiev suburbs.”
[Russell] Yeah, so should we look for a diplomatic, immediate solution to this war, or should we continue to fund it? When you look at the mass graves, when you look at the death, do you think that Russia is going to be defeated in a military confrontation by Ukraine at any point? Do you think that there’s not going to be a, well, we’ve got a nuclear arsenal? Why are we talking about conscription of troops in the United Kingdom, in Australia, and Sweden? Because they recognized that this conflict can continue to escalate.
“A theater full of innocent women and children sheltering, bombed, despite the giant word “children” written on the roof. More than 200,000 Ukrainian soldiers killed or injured.”
[Russell] Also absent from this narrativization is the fact there was a peace deal on the table, apparently ready to be signed by both sides, and then Boris Johnson, Prime Minister of our country, the UK, went to Kiev and dissuaded Zelensky from signing it. We’ve seen Jens Stoltenberg, the head of NATO, say that Putin said, “If Ukraine joins NATO, that’s war.
“To promise no more NATO enlargement,” that was a precondition for not invading Ukraine. Of course, we didn’t sign that; the opposite happened.”
[Russell] Presumably, that means if Ukraine doesn’t join NATO, that’s not war. So, have you personally got strong views on Ukraine joining NATO? I don’t think Ukraine should be invaded. I don’t think Ukrainian people should be attacked. I don’t think Ukrainian people should be conscripted and killed. But I would like to see what Russia, and in particular Vladimir Putin, have got to say, and then I’ll determine for myself, perhaps based on a conversation with you lot, whether or not we trust Putin.
Putin said he’s not got an interest in invading other NATO countries, like we’re continually told he’s going to. “Oh, he invaded Ukraine, and next will be Finland, Sweden.” We’ve been told to think of this as a kind of Hitler part two. But in fact, what this is, it seems to me, a globalist attempt to continue to perpetuate a very profitable war and extracting complex information that we’re entitled to hear. I.e., Tucker Carlson should interview Putin.
“And tonight, Putin is trying to seize on the fact that Zelensky’s military appears to be in turmoil, capitalizing on a moment of intense American political dysfunction.”
[Russell] Here’s presidential candidate Bobby Kennedy offering some elucidation on his opinion that yes, Tucker Carlson has every right to interview Putin, and that Putin and the Russian people have every right to their own trajectory. Again, I don’t think Ukraine should be bombed. I don’t think there should be a war between Ukraine and Russia, but I would like to understand why it’s happening and how it would be most expediently stopped immediately.
[B. Kennedy] “You know, Putin every day says, “I want to settle the war. Let’s negotiate.” And Zelensky has said, “We’re not going to negotiate.” But in ’92, the Wall came down in the Soviet Union. Gorbachev said, “I’m going to allow you to reunify Germany, but I want your commitment after that you will not move NATO one inch to the East.” And we solemnly swore we wouldn’t do it.”
[Russell] Someone should have written that down, really should know. Pretty important commitment that was made between Reagan and Gorbachev there, and one that appears to have been reneged upon due to the agenda of actually Western expansionism and imperialism.
Why is it that you can have China surrounded by US military bases, and then when China does something, get it negatively impacts a war ship in the South China Sea, China are the aggressors? We have to, I think, train ourselves to have a broader perspective, not be called traitors for doing that.
[B. Kennedy] Well, then in ’97, we’re going to move NATO a thousand miles to the East and take 15 countries into it and surround the Soviet Union. We then overthrow the government in 2014, their elected government, and put in a Western-sympathetic government. Russia then has to go into Crimea because they have a port at Sevastopol, which is their only warm-water port.
[Russell] Do you hear how complex that is and reasoned and geopolitical and geographical and cultural? It’s not, “Putin is a baddy, and he’s a bad madman, and he’s got numerous doubles, plus he has cancer, and he dribbles, and is insane.” That is propaganda. What we’re listening to there is a set of reasons that led to the escalation of this conflict.
Whenever you hear the critiques of Russia and Putin, it sounds like propaganda. When you hear the counter-narrative, for which everyone from Tucker to us to The Grayzone are called Putin apologists for recounting, it’s like, “Well, isn’t the 2014 coup relevant? Isn’t the expansion of NATO relevant? Isn’t the disputed region of the Donbas relevant?” These things are legitimate questions that you will see Putin respond to when Tucker does that interview, and that’s what terrifies them. What terrifies them is hundreds of millions of people watching that and going, “Huh, do I want my children or my family conscripted into the military to fight that war? Do I want my tax dollars endlessly spent on that conflict, knowing what I know about Afghanistan, that it cost $2 trillion, and well, how did we benefit? It ended in a botched evacuation and disaster.”
Once we have that information, they no longer have power over us. Isn’t it more likely that’s their concern, rather than, “What is the other reason? Oh well, this is bad for him going over there to speak to Putin, he’s a baddy.” What’s the other reason?
[B. Kennedy] And they know the new government that we just installed is going to invite the US Navy into their port. So then the Russians go in, they only send 40,000 people. It’s a nation of 44 million people; they clearly do not intend to conquer Ukraine, but they want us back at the negotiating table. The Russians just want to guarantee that Ukraine won’t join NATO. Zelensky signs the treaty, Putin’s people sign the treaty, and Putin starts withdrawing the Russian troops in good faith. And what happens? Joe Biden sends Boris Johnson, the British prime minister, over to Ukraine in April and forces him to tear up the treaty. And since then, 450,000 kids have died.
[Russell] So, that is why the Tucker Carlson-Putin interview matters. That is why Tucker Carlson’s relationship with Elon Musk is important. You might find a hundred things you disagree with Tucker Carlson or Elon Musk or indeed Vladimir Putin on, but what you do have the right to is their perspective. And the reason that the Legacy Media and the establishment are flapping and panicking and trying to shut this down isn’t to protect you but because they want to control you.
When you hear Bobby Kennedy explain an alternative history of this escalating conflict, as well as pointing out some of the obvious consequences for Ukrainian people, for Russian people, potentially for your family, coming up for your tax dollars, already, doesn’t it seem like hearing directly from Vladimir Putin might be valuable? Doesn’t it seem like a peaceful solution might be favorable? Doesn’t it seem like we might be at the very point where independent media could topple the chokehold that the Legacy Media and their establishment affiliates have over the mind of our populations? And isn’t that what terrifies them, and isn’t that what they’re trying to shut down?
Whether it’s Joe Rogan, horse paste stuff, about me, or stuff about Tucker, why don’t you decide for yourselves if you’re allowed to continue to watch this kind of content? Because right now, there are censorship laws being passed all around the world with the aim, apparently, of protecting you further, or is it controlling you further? But that’s just what I think. Why don’t you let me know what you think in the comments and chat? Remember, we stream every day, we make additional content for our community. You can get access right away to our exclusive conversation with Tucker by clicking the link in the description. That’s what you can watch right now, actually, if you want to. You’re free to do that. More important than any of that, if you can, please stay free.
* * *
