A guy who understands the hypocrisy of the ruling class
Aw, it was a setup.
“Tucker Carlson Tonight” is a binary production. Here’s how it breaks down: The host, Tucker Carlson, either welcomes a guest with whom he agrees, in which case the segment is a facile lovefest, or he welcomes a guest with whom he disagrees, in which case the segment is a gutter-scraping slugfest.
A chat with Dutch historian Rutger Bregman was supposed to fall in the former basket, a nice, easy segment in which the host and guest find common ground on the hypocrisy of the world’s elites. In a display of common-sense advocacy, Bregman had appeared at the World Economic Forum in Davos and hammered all the rich people there for avoiding taxes.
So Carlson or Fox or both were confused enough to invite Bregman on as a friendly.
In a careful effort over the past two years-plus, Carlson has attempted to cast himself as the anti-elite elite, a guy who understands the hypocrisy of the ruling class because he was born into comfort in La Jolla, Calif., and Georgetown — followed, eventually, by a well-paid career on cable news.
The anti-elite guy who lives in Trump’s pocket.
But the interview didn’t go the way Carlson expected, and Fox didn’t air it. Bregman, however, did.
Bregman, you see, was brought in as a friendly voice, a fellow who would presumably play along with the host. That very status gave Bregman enough space to turn the whole conversation into a referendum on Carlson’s own hypocrisy. “The vast majority of Americans, for years and years now, according to the polls, including Fox News viewers and including Republicans, are in favor of higher taxes on the rich. . . . It’s all really mainstream but no one’s saying that at Davos just as no one’s saying that at Fox News,” Bregman said in the discussion. Folks at Davos and at Fox News, he alleged, had been “bought by the billionaire class.”
…
After some more back-and-forth, Bregman showed that he’d really, really studied the programming values of “Tucker Carlson Tonight”: “I think the issue really is one of corruption and of people being bribed and not talking about the real issues. What the Murdochs really want you to do to is scapegoat immigrants instead of talking about tax avoidance,” he said.
As Bregman continued showing a command of Fox News’s pro-elite advocacy, Carlson blew up. He called Bregman a “moron” and couldn’t figure out how this fellow had even viewed the network’s programming. “Fox doesn’t even play where you are,” said Carlson. “Well, have you heard of the Internet?” replied Bregman. “I can watch things whatever I want.”
By this point, Bregman, thousands of miles away, was sitting where Carlson usually sits — in complete command of the interview, setting the pace, putting his interlocutor on the defensive. The host was verily gasping for air. The most telling words of the interview came when Carlson said, “Wait — but, but can I just say?” That was just shortly after Bregman said Carlson was a “millionaire funded by billionaires.”
Someone had to blow the whistle on Carlson’s high-wire attempts to portray himself as a hero of the regular guy, even as he enjoys the fat paycheck of a Fox News host. So scandalized was Carlson about the situation that he could resort only to nastiness, which he commonly deploys, and profanity, which rarely makes it onto Fox News’s air. “Why don’t you go fuck yourself, you tiny brain.”
It’s coz he’s an elitist, yeah?
Ah well, what goes up must eventually come down. Sometimes with a bang.
Speaking of elites*, some good news today: a federal judge just ruled that prosecutors (including Labor Secretary Acosta) violated the Crime Victims Rights Act by concealing their nonprosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein from his victims.
The full 33-page order is on the Miami Herald story linked above. (BTW, kudos again to the Herald for its fine investigative reporting on this.) It really is worth reading some of the details of how federal prosecutors continually indulged Epstein’s objections to informing the victims, as well as their efforts to try to avoid having the agreement become public.
The judge has asked the parties to discuss and brief the question of what remedies are available. I note that the ruling cites authority for the proposition that nonprosecution agreements can be voided for noncompliance with the CVRA, which could open up Epstein and his accomplices to new charges.
*– Ok, it’s a weak segue, but the current Miscellany Room is no longer accepting comments.