Tucker Carlson is holding a speaking tour in Australia, and the events there are already producing viral moments. In one especially tense exchange, Carlson was challenged about so-called “replacement theory,” with the reporter suggesting the political commentator felt “white people” were being replaced by illegal immigrants.
ALSO SEE: Putin Calls Tucker Carlson ‘Dangerous Person’ After Their Interview
It only took a few seconds before Carlson turned the tables.
REPORTER: So you talked a little bit about immigration, and in the past, you’ve talked about how white Australians, Americans, and Europeans, are being replaced by non-white immigrants in what is often referred to as the great replacement theory.
CARLSON: Have I said whites have been replaced?
REPORTER: Well…
CARLSON: I don’t think I’ve said that.
REPORTER: Well, it’s been mentioned on your show 4,000 times, and…
CARLSON: Really, when did I say that? I’ve said whites are being replaced?
REPORTER: You have said that before. Yeah.
CARLSON: Really? I would challenge you to cite that because I’m pretty sure I haven’t said that. I said native-born Americans are being replaced, including blacks.
REPORTER: Native-born Americans?
CARLSON: Native-born Americans, Americans like black Americans, African Americans have been in the United States, in many cases, their families for over 400 years, and their concerns are every bit as real and valid and alive to me as the concerns of white people whose families have been there 400 years. I’ve never said whites are being replaced, not one time, and you can’t cite it so..
REPORTER: I believe that’s untrue…
CARLSON: We’ve just met, but when our relationship starts with a lie, it makes it tough to be friends.
REPORTER: Well, you’ve been lying about (inaudible)…
CARLSON: You actually can’t cite it because I didn’t say it.
What you just witnessed is my favorite tactic for dealing with dishonest journalists. To put it simply, never accept their premises. Remember, we are often talking about pampered trust-fund kids when it comes to modern reporters. They don’t like to work, and they see their job as making headlines, not news. In other words, they are lazy, and they will very often make an allegation based on something they’ve read on social media without ever verifying it themselves.
Has that reporter actually watched thousands of episodes of Carlson’s show to know “white” replacement has been brought up “4,000 times?” Of course, she hasn’t. In this instance, she was repeating a stereotype and one that just so happened to be false. Carlson could have gotten defensive and attempted to defend the ground she laid out. Instead, he pulled the rug out from under her, challenging her to cite where he’s ever said “white people” are being replaced. That left her stammering and unable.
At that point, he had already won the exchange in the first minute. He wasn’t done, though. After explaining his actual position, the reporter then circled back to the so-called “replacement theory,” claiming it has inspired mass shooters.
CARLSON: How about no more lying in your questions and then I’ll answer it.
REPORTER: Okay, well, umm, this is the same theory, or as you say idea, that has inspired the New York Buffalo shooting where eleven black Americans were killed, two white Americans were killed…
CARLSON: Oh, God, come on…You know what I mean…
REPORTER: It’s also inspired the worst, it’s inspired the worst, one of the worst Australian gunman of all time
CARLSON: How do they get people this stupid in the media? I guess it doesn’t pay well. Look, I’m sorry, I’ve lived among people like you for too long, and I don’t mean to call you stupid, maybe you’re just pretending to be, but I’ve never, I’m totally against violence. I’m totally against the war in Ukraine, for example, which doubtless you support, and like all dutiful liberals support more carnage. I don’t. I hate mass shootings, actually.
Nothing I’ve said, what does it mean to inspire something? My views are not bigoted against any group, they’re honest, they’re factual. That’s not hate. That’s reality, and my views derive from my deep concerns for Americans, actually.
The reporter then sarcastically asked if Carlson’s opposition to violence means he supports “gun control.” That went about as well for her as you’d expect. The entire thing was a masterclass in how to handle a dishonest reporter. Don’t accept their faulty premises, and make them explain their own logical inconsistencies. If you do that, that’s usually enough to leave their heads spinning. If they then get angry and start to lash out, as this reporter did, then all the better to further embarrass them.
