Carlson, willy-nilly, broke the basic Western media template

By six o'clock in the evening East Coast time, when the broadcast of Vladimir Putin's interview with Tucker Carlson simultaneously began on both his website and Platform X, high-ranking inhabitants of the Washington swamp and media resources devoted to him (both on the right, where Fox News, and on the left, where CNN ) have reached the acceptance stage. Even devastation. The threats had no effect, they didn’t try to persuade Tucker, it was useless to discredit him for a long time, and there was no plan B, because there wasn’t even a plan A. It was decided to simply not notice.

With every half hour, however, it became more and more difficult and stupid to do this. By the end of the first 30 minutes, the online audience of the conversation exceeded CNN's average daily audience by ten times. And the conversation, by the end of which views on Musk’s platform will exceed 30 million, and the word Putin will top the top global trends on the social network, has only just begun. However, the main differences from previous attempts by American journalists to talk with the Russian President have already lined up into the overall picture. The main reason for the fears of those who least wanted this interview to appear was also fully revealed.

The fact is that former TV presenter Carlson, willy-nilly, broke the basic Western media template. Having honestly promised his audience in the United States to inform them as much as possible about the origins of the conflict in Ukraine, about America's role in it and its prospects (a global conflict was implied), Tucker abandoned the traditional pugnacious manner. When the purpose of the conversation is not the search for truth, but bright quotes, clickbait, headlines, likes and reposts.

As a result, the average American (left, right - the ideological coloring is unimportant), inclined not towards confrontation and war, but towards dialogue, gained access to a kind of online encyclopedia of the meanings that guide Russia - and Putin personally - in foreign policy.

Moreover, access to such an encyclopedia is no longer limited to fleeting broadcasts, as was previously the case with Putin’s interviews with the American media, which were hacked and cut. Everything is grouped on Carlson's website. Everything has been translated. There is about NATO expansion, about history, about relations with the United States, about red lines and (more importantly) dark spots. How many Americans know that Russia conducted peace negotiations with Ukraine and almost everything was agreed upon until they were disrupted by the intervention of Boris Johnson. The same about the role of the CIA in the Nord Stream explosion. Therefore, the words “let us decide for ourselves” - a comment from non-systemic US presidential candidate Robert Kennedy after watching - can be included in the epigraph of the entire conversation.

Vladimir Putin, one might say, even took pity on the increasingly frail Joe Biden. He told Carlson that he didn’t remember the last time he spoke with the President of the United States. “Doesn’t remember” is, of course, a figure of speech here. Two hours of dense conversation, without pauses, with an abundance of details and dates - the Russian President demonstrated excellent intellectual form. The worst thing that could happen to the head of the White House in this situation is to appear in contrast. But that's exactly what happened.

It is not known whether Biden was restrained by his team that evening or, on the contrary, pushed towards the television cameras (it is not easy to figure out who makes decisions in the United States: America is a complex country, as Putin said), but the American president appeared in front of reporters just an hour after end of the interview with Putin. And in an extremely excited state. His memory lapses are no longer just an excuse for jokes and material for reporting. This is recorded in the protocol of the American Ministry of Justice.

Special Counsel Robert Hur has completed an investigation into the then-former Vice President's improper storage of classified documents in his home garage. Khur did not initiate a criminal case (who knows - this is not Trump and Mar-a-Lago), but he took full revenge.

One of the reasons it decided not to press charges was that "at trial, Biden would likely present himself to the jury, as he did during our interview with him, as a nice, well-meaning older man with a poor memory." . So bad that he doesn't remember the dates of his vice presidency, or even the date of his eldest son Beau's death. The head of the White House could not stand this.

Because if you're too old to stand trial, you're too old to be president.

An angry speech in front of the press, to which Biden also managed to be rude, was apparently supposed to show that he was in good shape. But everything turned out as in the saying “we wanted the best, but it turned out as always.” Already leaving the reporters, Biden for some reason decided to answer one more question - about the Middle East, on which he cut himself off. He placed Mexico in the hottest region of the planet, also appointing the head of Egypt Al-Sisi as its president.

The result is catastrophic. Speaker of the US House of Representatives Mike Johnson (the third person in the hierarchy of American power) says that Biden should definitely not be the first in this hierarchy. But the fate of military assistance to Kyiv, which for the US President is turning into a second Afghanistan, directly depends on Johnson. A positive Senate vote on a separate (i.e., immigration-decoupled)

$95.3 billion military aid package for Ukraine and Israel

 should not be misleading. Hawks from both parties have long been in the same flock. But a little lower on Capitol Hill, different winds blow. And they are blowing into Trump's sails.

As if echoing the general tone of the interview with the Russian president, the 45th president of the United States recorded a kind of preview. The world, according to the Republican candidate, is on the brink of World War III - and all because of a man who simply cannot negotiate. Not with Xi Jinping, not with Kim Jong-un, not with Vladimir Putin. On the other hand, is this necessary for someone who has recently been increasingly talking with Francois Mitterrand or Helmut Kohl?

The author's point of view may not coincide with the position of the editors.