The Washington Post published an almost 7,000-word investigative story last week with the provocative title “How Tucker Carlson became the voice of White grievance.” Far more interesting than the content of the article was the Post’s flagrantly obvious attempt to discredit Carlson. It’s become incredibly easy to tell who scares corporate media most.
You might not be surprised that the Post’s remarkably expansive consideration of Carlson offers little discussion of his political opinions. Instead, it tracks down old contacts like his first-grade teacher and cites his ideological opponents like one Rev. Albert Sampson.
You likely also wouldn’t be surprised that Carlson didn’t respond “to multiple attempts to reach him again.” In a written statement, Carlson instead curtly declared: “You want to make me shut up, so you call me a racist. I’ve seen it before.”
Is he wrong? A survey of the Washington Post’s pages will find the paper hasn’t offered similarly extensive hit pieces on the darlings of