🔴 http://noblegoldinvestments.com/nation
Protect Your Retirement With A Gold IRA
Noble Gold is Who I Trust ^^^
Call Now 877-646-5347 TELL THEM LIONEL SENT YOU
Tucker Carlson did the unthinkable. He interviewed Hunter Biden without first seeking permission from the self-appointed gatekeepers of the political right. No committee meeting. No loyalty oath. No approved talking points. No request for clearance from the people who apparently believe they possess veto power over who may speak to whom.
And predictably, the alarms went off.
Laura Loomer erupted over Tucker giving Hunter a platform, treating the interview almost as though Tucker had crossed some sacred political boundary. But that reaction raises the more interesting question: since when does interviewing somebody constitute endorsing him? Journalism used to mean talking to people you distrusted, disliked or even considered reprehensible. The interviewer asks the questions. The audience evaluates the answers. That was once considered normal.
Meanwhile Candace Owens appears to be watching the entire spectacle with something approaching hysterical amusement. And why not? The supposed defenders of independent media suddenly sound remarkably interested in controlling which conversations may occur.
That is where this becomes bigger than Tucker, Hunter, Loomer or Candace.
A new political media ecosystem is forming in real time. It does not necessarily obey Republican Party rules, conservative movement rules or the dictates of established influencers. Tucker can interview Hunter Biden. Candace can question narratives other commentators consider settled. Independent audiences can listen to everybody and decide for themselves.
That prospect terrifies gatekeepers because their power depends upon controlling access, defining acceptable questions and deciding which people are beyond the boundaries of legitimate conversation.
Tucker apparently missed the memo.
Or perhaps he read it and threw it away.
Either wa
