A few years back, Media Research Center writer Mark Finkelstein was a defender of Tucker Carlson after the right-winger got fired from Fox News. He insisted Carlson wasn’t a terrible person on air — “However Carlson might have transgressed respectful norms, it would appear to have occurred behind the scenes” — going on to further defend this: “If [former RNC chairman Michael] Steele is shocked that there would be no immediate corporate repercussions for Tucker saying that in a private communication between two people, how about a TV host bragging—live on the air—about how he would threaten and attack someone merely doing something he didn’t approve of?” Well, that narrative has changed. Finkelstein huffed in a June 23 post:
On Tuesday’s CNN This Morning, host Audie Cornish opened a discussion of Tucker Carlson by saying: “For months, Republicans have been painting him as antisemitic.”
Cornish failed to mention Carlson’s:
- Friendly interview with avowed Holocaust denier and Hitler fan Nick Fuentes.
- Praise for Holocaust revisionist Darryl Cooper as maybe “the best and most honest popular historian in the United States.”
- Comments embracing the classic blood libel holding Jews responsible for the death of Jesus.
- Description of Jewish Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as “sweaty, rat-like, and shifty.”
There’s more antisemitic evidence on Tucker Carlson than paint in a Sherwin-Williams store—but Cornish presented the criticism as mere partisan brushwork.
[…]Cornish’s delicate framing of Republicans “painting” Carlson as antisemitic was a Tom Sawyer-worthy whitewash. The facts paint a different story.
In contrast with Cornish’s reticence, Ted Cruz, in a clip played during the segment, didn’t hesitate to decry the rise of antisemitism on the right, calling Carlson “the single most dangerous demagogue in this country.”
What’s behind Finkelstein’s flip-flop on Carlson? And why didn’t he and his fellow MRCers point this out sooner? He didn’t explain. Other MRCers have flip-flopped as well; for instance, Tim Graham wrote in a May 4 post:
In the midst of a fairly sober interview about the prosecution of attempted Trump assassin Cole Allen on CNN’s State of the Union, host Jake Tapper attempted to nudge Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. Attorney for D.C., into commenting on Tucker Carlson and Jonah Goldberg and harsh anti-Trump commentary online. Pirro wouldn’t bite.
[…]No one ardently wants to make Tucker more relevant than the elitist media right now, who are so desperate to paint the picture of a Trump coalition collapsing. It’s more worth discussing how Tucker went from the bowtied McCain moderate Republican who hosted a prissy show on PBS to pro-Trump Fox News star to whatever he is now — “Tucker Qatarlson,” says Mark Levin.
The real explanation seems to be that Carlson has distanced himself from Trump. Finkelstein groused further in a June 28 post:
File this one under Politics Make Strange Bedfellows.
Saturday’s edition of The Weekend: Primetime on MS NOW relied on Tucker Carlson to make the case that the Iran war spells the “end” of President Trump, and that the MAGA coalition is “over.”
Co-host Elise Jordan opened by noting that with President Trump and his party in control of Washington, one would think they’d be racking up political victories. Instead, she said, Trump spent the week going after his GOP allies. Jordan quoted The Atlantic describing Trump as “flailing.”
[…]The spectacle spoke volumes. MS NOW and its predecessor MSNBC, which have spent years demonizing Carlson, suddenly treated his words as authoritative proof that Trump and MAGA are collapsing. The panel highlighted GOP tensions while glossing over policy realities and their own side’s divisions.
Apparently, it’s easier for Finkelstein to jettison Carlson in order to protect Trump. Politics make strange bedfellows indeed.