Tucker Carlson, a prominent voice in conservative media, recently shared his views on the so-called deep state during a conversation with Glenn Beck. This dialogue, captured in a newly uncovered video, highlights Carlson’s concerns about the entrenched power within Washington, D.C. Commenting on the situation, he stated, “There’s a lot of power vested in federal agencies. Congress provides no oversight at all.” This harsh assessment reflects growing unease among certain segments of the population regarding the influence of intelligence agencies over elected representatives.
As he elaborated, Carlson emphasized the significant lack of accountability for these agencies, pointing out the troubling nature of Congress’s role. He stated, “The Intel committees do not oversee the Intel agencies. They’re controlled by the Intel agencies.” This stark revelation raises serious questions about the balance of power in the federal government and highlights a profound mistrust of bureaucratic institutions.
The discussion transitioned as Carlson took aim at another Fox News figure, Jennifer Griffin, whom he labeled a “liar” and a “deep state shill.” He accused her of being a biased journalist, lamenting, “Jen Griffin is a liar, but also very liberal— a true Trump hater.” This characterization underscores the deepening factionalism within media circles, revealing how personal loyalties and ideological divides shape the narratives surrounding national security and governmental transparency.
His criticism did not stop at mere allegations. Carlson shared his dissatisfaction with network politics during his time at Fox, recalling his hesitance to voice complaints about colleagues. Yet, regarding Griffin, he felt compelled to confront the issue, saying, “She doesn’t tell the truth. She misleads our viewers.” This assertion reflects a strong conviction that journalistic integrity has been compromised by personal biases and connections within the media.
Beyond personal grievances, Carlson’s commentary touches on larger themes of credibility and trust in media narratives. In describing Griffin’s influence, he noted, “You could not touch Jennifer Griffin.” This sentiment resonates with the frustrations of viewers who feel disconnected from the narratives presented by mainstream media figures. The portrayal of Griffin as untouchable highlights a perceived hierarchy within news organizations that can alienate audiences and fuel contempt for established networks.
The implications of Carlson’s remarks transcend personal disputes and delve into the credibility crisis facing traditional news sources. His emphatic language and critical tone convey a belief among some that the media may be more aligned with interests outside their viewership’s values. This sentiment has real-world consequences for how news organizations are perceived and whether they can maintain their authority in informing the public.
In sum, Carlson’s exploration of the deep state and media bias brings to light a prevailing culture of mistrust and frustration. His pointed critiques of the intelligence community’s oversight and the media’s close ties with its narratives resonate deeply with an audience that values transparency and accountability in both government and journalism. The unfolding discussion encapsulates a broader unease concerning the intersection of power, media, and the American public.
"*" indicates required fields
