The Tucker Carlson & Nick Fuentes Problem Is Getting Worse For Trump
PDS Published 11/25/2025
-
Tucker Carlson called Donald Trump “a total piece of shit” in the aftermath of the 2020 election.
Right, that little tidbit was reportedly revealed in new court documents filed in the legal battle between the voting technology company Smartmatic and Fox News.
And specifically, according to The Guardian, the documents contained an exchange where an unidentified individual told Carlson on November 9th of 2020 that Trump should concede the election.
With Carlson then responding by saying, “Oh I’m fully aware,” and going on to say that Trump is a “total piece of shit” before adding: “We can’t control him obviously. Got to do the responsible thing regardless of how he behaves.”
Now, of course, that alleged conversation is from several years ago at this point.
But the timing of these new documents is notable because it comes as Carlson has started more dramatically distancing himself from Trump and the Republican Party.
Right, while speaking on an episode of the Shawn Ryan Show yesterday, where he said this:
“And then the Republican party, which is almost to the point where it's just useless, and I'm going to have to oppose it ‘cause they're just… I hate them too much. But — ‘cause they're such betrayers.” 2:48:07 - 2:48:16
And, very notably, during that same interview, Carlson also refused to apologize for having Nick Fuentes on his show and defended the interview, which has, of course, gotten a ton of backlash.
With Carlson saying that he wants to hear what people think and that he believes everyone should get a chance to speak for themselves, even if he disagrees with some of their views.
Adding that he has no regrets and that there was really only one thing Fuentes said during the interview that he didn’t like:
“And I knew there would be, you know, an outcry or whatever. Probably understated it a little bit. But you know, not up to me. But my conscience is clear. One of the only parts that kind of bothered me, but now it amuses me, is there was a point in the interview where Nick Fuentes said, really out of nowhere, ‘I love Stalin!’” 2:03:00 - 2:03:22
With Carlson going on to describe how that bothered him because Stalin killed so many Christians, but then adding… uh… this:
“We armed Stalin. Too much people say, ‘Well, are you for Hitler?’ No, I'm totally opposed to Hitler, but I'm never going to accept arming Stalin.” 2:05:22 - 2:05:29
Now, notably, Carlson did eventually say that he does oppose some of Fuentes’ beliefs while still fervently defending him and the content of the interview:
“The last month I don't think a single person has ever made the case that I'm wrong, that Nick Fuentes is — the Jew hatred stuff is wrong. Period. And I said that. The white hatred, black hatred, Jew hatred, Malaysian hatred, Bedouin hatred — it's all wrong. I believe that as much as I believe anything, okay. But the rest of it, his analysis, which is actually smart and in a lot of cases true, no one's even attempted to rebut it.” 2:16:03 - 2:16:31
And beyond that, you also had Carlson claiming that the only reason he got backlash is that he himself is not an anti-semite, while also applauding Fuentes’ views on the GOP:
“I mean, if David Duke or whatever, pick an anti— I don't know… even know… there are many… I'm sure there are famous anti-Semites. I can't think of one. But David Duke is a famous anti-Semite. If David Duke interviewed Nick Fuentes, they'd be like, you know, they wouldn't say anything. Whatever, who cares? They're talking to each other. But if someone who is openly opposed and sincerely opposed to hating people on the basis of their bloodline — which I definitely am — interviews Nick Fuentes and is like, ‘Hey, Nick Fuentes, stop with the Jew hatred, but let's talk about your views on the betrayal of Republican voters by conservative institutions and the undue influence a foreign country has over our government.’ Those are entirely reasonable conversations.” 2:17:21 - 2:18:01
So those comments are just going to fuel the flames of the MAGA civil war that has been raging since the interview, while also furthering the wedge between Carlson and the Republican establishment.
Right, while some people on the far-right have applauded Carlson for the interview, many top Republican leaders have slammed him for platforming Fuentes and failing to push back on some of his views.
For example, just last week, you had House Speaker Mike Johnson saying the interview was “a mistake” and trying to distance the party from Fuentes.
Meanwhile, the very guy Carlson's been defending — Fuentes, right — is now calling Carlson "two-faced." Raging on his podcast about being described as an anti-semite: (clip: 1:47-1:54; 2:18-2:48)
So what we’re looking at is a clear and major divide within the Republican Party and broader American conservatism, but the real questions are: will it continue to get deeper? And will it actually stick in a way that impacts electoral politics?
-
The military is investigating Senator Mark Kelly less than one week after Trump suggested he and five other Democratic lawmakers should be put to death.
Right, Kelly? He’s a former Navy fighter pilot and astronaut who retired as a captain after more than two decades of service.
And last week, he appeared in a video with those five other Democrats, all of whom had previously served in the military or the intelligence community.
And in this video, you had them urging those currently serving to refuse illegal orders:
“This administration is pitting our uniform military and intelligence community against American citizens. Like us, you all swore an oath to protect and defend this constitution. Right now, the threats to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad, but from right here at home. Our laws are clear, you can refuse illegal orders. You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders. No one has to carry out orders that violate the law, or our constitution.” (0:32-0:59)
And while these lawmakers didn’t refer to a specific order that they viewed as illegal, what they’re saying is absolutely true.
Right, troops are told as part of their training that they shouldn’t follow orders that are illegal or immoral – including the intentional targeting of unarmed civilians.
And with that, Kelly is among those who have raised concerns about potential consequences for American troops involved in lethal strikes on boats in the Caribbean:
“What does this mean for their future if they find out later that they did this without legal justification? It puts them in legal jeopardy at some point.” (BYTE: 1:22-1:32)
But Trump, he didn’t just deny that troops have gotten or might get unlawful orders…
Instead, you had him accusing Kelly and the other lawmakers of “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL” – saying:
“Each one of these traitors to our Country should be ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL. Their words cannot be allowed to stand.”
And then adding in another post:
“SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”
He also reposted other attacks directed against Kelly and the other lawmakers, including one that said:
“HANG THEM GEORGE WASHINGTON WOULD !!”
And since then – even though experts have denied that their actions come even close to meeting the definition of sedition – all six of the lawmakers said that they had been subjected to death threats. []
And while Trump later denied that he himself had threatened death to the lawmakers, he still insisted that they were in “serious trouble.”
Which brings us to this week when you had Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth writing on social media that the video made by the lawmakers– who he described as the "Seditious Six” – was “despicable, reckless, and false” – adding:
“Five of the six individuals in that video do not fall under [Department of War] jurisdiction.”
However, Mark Kelly…is still subject to [The Uniform Code of Military Justice] —and he knows that.”
And with that, you had Hegseth sharing a statement from the Department of Defense saying it had “received serious allegations of misconduct” against Kelly – and announcing:
“…a thorough review of these allegations has been initiated to determine further actions, which may include recall to active duty for court-martial proceedings or administrative measures.”
And with that, as a retired naval officer, Kelly technically can be recalled to active duty and disciplined.
But, notably, retired officers are typically recalled only for crimes alleged to have been committed while they were on active duty. []
And as far as what his “crimes” might be?
You have outlets reporting that the likeliest charges might be under articles related to officer conduct or undermining “order and discipline.”
And if he were found guilty, Kelly could be knocked down to a rank lower than captain, his discharge could be changed to dishonorable, he could lose his benefits, and he could serve jail time. []
Although, that said, many experts have said it’s unlikely any charges would even stick – with one saying:
“I have no idea what they’d court-martial him for. It’s preposterous.”
And adding to that, it will be even harder to prosecute Kelly because he’s a Senator, and his statements are probably protected by the speech and debate clause that protects members of Congress from prosecution.
WIth a constitutional law professor at Georgia State University explaining:
“Having a United States senator subject to discipline at the behest of the secretary of defense and the president — that violates a core principle of legislative independence.”
”Any way you cut it, the Constitution is fundamentally structurally designed to prevent this kind of abuse from happening.”
But with all that, as far as Kelly’s response, you’ve had him saying he won’t be intimidated or silenced by bullies.
And his fellow Senator from Arizona, who also served in the Marines, put it even more bluntly, saying:
“Captain Mark Kelly has dedicated his life to serving this country with honor. And now Trump is coming after him with the same baseless garbage he throws at anyone who refuses to bend the knee” – adding:
“Fuck you and your investigation.” []
But with that, we’ll have to see where this leads, and if there’s any effort to retaliate against the other Dems who made the video with Kelly.
-
Trump is doing favors for pedophiles and predators.
And I’m not talking about the Epstein Files.
I’m talking about the data we now have suggesting the administration’s focus on immigration enforcement may actually be leading to fewer arrests for some of the most serious crimes handled by Homeland Security Investigations.
At least, that’s according to a new investigation from The New York Times, which is largely based on an internal report by HSI.
And with that, I will say, this report compares fiscal years, not calendar years, so the 2025 data includes four months when Biden was still in office.
But notably, it’s only since Trump got into office that special agents responsible for investigating child exploitation and other crimes – including drug trafficking, arms smuggling, and terrorism financing – have been asked to spend more time deporting undocumented immigrants.
And with that, just looking at February through April – all time Trump was in office – another Times analysis found that HSI investigators worked 33 percent fewer hours on child exploitation cases compared to their average in previous years.
With that being based on data obtained through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. []
And notably, even though many agents are reportedly continuing to work those cases in their personal time, it seemingly hasn’t been enough to make up the difference. []
With the internal report showing that the number of indictments for child exploitation crimes fell 28 percent.
And on top of that, agents have reportedly identified or rescued roughly 300 fewer child victims, which is a 17 percent drop. []
Drug arrests have also dropped by around 11 percent.
With agents also opening 15 percent fewer investigations into narcotics crimes.
And the number of weapons seized falling by a whopping 73 percent – from more than 40, 000 to just over 11,000. []
And these numbers are especially notable because the White House claims cracking down on drug smuggling is a major priority.
And it’s argued that it’s proving that commitment by killing dozens of people in the Caribbean without publicly providing evidence that they’re smuggling drugs – not that evidence would necessarily make it legal.
Not to mention experts say this strategy won’t stop the flow of drugs coming into the US anyways.
And as further reason to doubt its claims, other federal agencies outside of Homeland Security Investigations have also reportedly diverted resources to the immigration crackdown.
Including the Drug Enforcement Administration as well as the FBI and ATF. []
And with that, this internal report does show that the number of people arrested by homeland security special agents for civil immigration offenses has absolutely skyrocketed – going from roughly 5,000 to almost 95,000. []
Also, notably, overall criminal arrests went up 41 percent, with the Times reporting that this increase is at least partly driven by investigations often related to immigration – including human smuggling and trafficking.
Although, notably, roughly 12,000 of the arrests – a whole quarter of them – were not categorized by crime type, so it’s not entirely clear what’s behind it. []
And a White House spokesperson reportedly declined to explain what kinds of arrests were behind most of the overall increase.[]
Also, despite there being more arrests, the number of people indicted stayed roughly the same.
Agents aren’t opening as many cases considered “significant” — like ones into international criminal groups.
And despite the jump in human trafficking arrests, agents reported assisting 20 percent fewer victims. []
Now, with all that, you’ve had a DHS spokesperson claiming:
“Child exploitation, human trafficking, terrorism, financial scams and smuggling all have a nexus to illegal immigration” – and repeating what’s often been said by this administration, saying:
“We are prioritizing the worst of the worst and aliens with final removal orders.”
But again, data tells a different story, because many immigrants being arrested don’t have criminal records in the U.S.
In fact, according to the Times, less than 40 percent of people detained by ICE have a criminal conviction.
And only around 8 percent of those arrested had been convicted of a violent crime, with a slightly bigger percentage only having a traffic conviction. []
So yeah, that’s where we’re at right now, and we’ll see where we go from here.
But in the meantime, I’d love to get your thoughts and reactions to these numbers in the comments down below.
-
Exactly 14 months and two weeks after he announced to the American people …
[Clip, 01:29 - 01:31] Caption: “I have concepts of a plan.”
… Donald Trump was finally ready to unveil an actual healthcare plan yesterday, and then everything just blew up.
Right, because for context, on New Year’s day, the enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies will expire, causing 22 million Americans’ health insurance premiums to shoot through the roof unless Republicans do something.
So apparently the White House has been crafting a plan to avert the crisis, because yesterday Trump was expected to unveil it. [B roll, 00:22]
And get ready, because you’re not gonna believe this — the plan was reportedly to extend the ACA subsidies for two years. [Same B roll]
Which, when people heard that, they were shocked.
I mean, Trump spent months ranting in all caps on Truth Social about how these subsidies would give a trillion dollars to illegal aliens and create “transgender for everybody!”
But it’s crucial to note, he’s not just conceding to Democrats here.
Because reportedly his plan would cut off anyone making 700% of the federal poverty level from being eligible, [Quote, find “700 percent”]
As well as eliminate zero-premium plans, making everybody pay at least something. [Same quote]
Then, people who choose a lower-premium plan could redirect some federal aid into a health savings account. [Quote, find “savings”]
And finally, there would be new and broader restrictions on care for transgender folks and undocumented immigrants.
All of that reportedly was the plan, but then, just as quickly as it arrived, it ran out the door with its hat and coat.
In fact, for CNN’s Jessica Dean, the time between her announcing the two events was exactly 38 seconds. [Lead B roll 00:05 into clip]
[Clip, 00:00 - 00:04] Caption: “We’re learning President Trump is planning to unveil a new healthcare proposal.”
[Clip] Caption: “A few moments later.”
[Clip, 00:42 - 00:54] Caption: “But, I’m sorry, this has actually been, sorry Zack, we’re getting breaking news while talking to you. I have learned that the White House has postponed its expected unveiling of this new healthcare proposal.”
So that left people wondering, what happened? Why the abrupt, last-minute reversal?
And the answer seems pretty clear: Republicans freaked out.
Well, Republicans and healthcare lobbyists — let’s not forget about those lovely folks.
Because reportedly many lawmakers on Capitol Hill had no idea this was coming; right, they learned about it the same way everyone else did: through the press and social media. [Image]
So according to The Wall Street Journal, Speaker Mike Johnson called the White House and warned that most House Republicans don’t have an appetite for extending the subsidies. [Quote, find “appetite”]
With sources telling the outlet that many objections stem from the absence of more stringent restrictions on abortion coverage in Trump’s plan. [Quote same link, find “red line”]
As well as the whole “extending the subsidies” part, which for mainstream Republicans is tantamount to heresy.
Right, they’ve been waging a moral crusade against “Obamacare,” as they call it, for the past 15 years; hell, we just had the longest government shutdown in U.S. history over this.
So you had Thomas Massie reacting on X with: “Oh boy, more 4D chess? A vote to extend Obamacare… that’s the Republican solution to health care?” [Post]
As well as several unnamed GOP lawmakers telling MS NOW [Em ess now], formerly known as MSNBC, stuff like:
“I wasn’t expecting the proposal to be Obamacare-lite.” [Quote]
“is definitely not the DOGE thing to do.” [Quote same link]
And “Fix health care for working Americans or don’t talk to me about subsidies.” [Quote same link]
But there’s only a month left to figure something out, and lawmakers will spend much of that time on break for the holidays.
So basically when they get back from Thanksgiving, they’ll be faced with a choice, and it’s a tough one.
Either extend the enhanced subsidies, and for the first time ever put the Republican seal of approval on an expansion of Obama’s evil communist totalitarian deathcare conspiracy,
Or let the subsidies expire, and watch as premiums explode for 22 million people heading into an election year.
Which is why the lawmakers open to Trump’s plan seem to be more of the moderate ones in competitive districts, though you also have conservative Republican Tim Burchett saying:
“We’ve got to quit pointing fingers, we’ve got to start doing something with this thing. At least Trump’s proposal does something. … It keeps people from losing their insurance and it verifies that it’s not a bunch of frauds.” [Quote]
Now as for the Democrats’ response to all this, a few of the ones who voted to end the shutdown earlier this month expressed a willingness to compromise with Trump on a deal.
But the overwhelming majority rejected the plan as it was reported, insisting on a straightforward extension of the subsidies without any new restrictions.
And if Trump throws in an anti-abortion bone to appease his further-right Republicans, that’ll likely kill off much of whatever Democratic support he’s hoping to court.
Now of course, Trump could try to bypass Democratic opposition in the Senate by using a process called budget reconciliation to pass the bill, which only requires 50 votes instead of 60. [Quote, find “simple majority”]
Or the GOP could try to attach a healthcare measure to a must-pass funding bill and force it through that way. [Same quote]
Either way, Senate leader John Thune promised Democrats a mid-December vote on extending the subsidies in exchange for ending the shutdown.
Thing is though, Mike Johnson never promised anything, and last time I checked, the U.S. Congress is made up of … let’s see here, the Senate, and uh … ah! The House! Two chambers!
Meanwhile, White House officials tell MS NOW — God, that’s such a stupid name — that Trump’s postponed announcement of his plan will take place soon. [Quote, find “take place soon”]
With them saying, “until President Trump makes an announcement himself, any reporting about the Administration’s healthcare positions is mere speculation.” [Quote same link]
But they did acknowledge that the initial plan is now being actively reworked. [Quote same link, find “reworked”]
[Clip, 01:27 - 01:31] Caption: [Moderator:] “So just a yes or no, you still do not have a plan?” [Donald Trump:] “I have concepts of a plan.”
Just go to Zocdoc and download the Zocdoc app for FREE. Then find and book a top-rated doctor today!
-
Are we finally going to see an end to the War in Ukraine?
That’s what headlines like: “Ukraine reportedly agrees to US-brokered peace proposal” and “Ukraine agrees to ‘core terms’ of peace deal” make it seem like.
But there’s one big asterisk to all this: Ukraine has agreed to the “framework of a potential peace deal…”
So a far cry from an actual peace deal.
If this sounds familiar, it’s because just over a week ago the US had gotten Russia to agree to a peace deal… except it was considered a complete concession to Russian demands.
At the time, Ukraine made it clear that it wasn’t going to agree to that and would even go forward alone if it had to. [broll]
Since then the country has been rocked by a major corruption scandal, which possibly forced Zelensky to reconsider a peace deal.
This recent round of talks seems to have started early this week with American negotiators speaking to Russian ones.
Then yesterday they talked with the Ukrainians who apparently agreed to the “core” of this reportedly new peace plan.
This unnamed official said that the “small details” will still need to be worked out.
Whitehouse Spokesperson Karoline Leavitt essentially confirmed all of this on X, writing:
“Over the past week, the United States has made tremendous progress towards a peace deal by bringing both Ukraine and Russia to the table.
There are a few delicate, but not insurmountable, details that must be sorted out and will require further talks between Ukraine, Russia, and the United States.” []
And Zelensky himself wrote:
“Today our delegation returned from Geneva after negotiations with the American side and European partners. Now the list of necessary steps to end the war can become doable.”
“There is still work for all of us to do together to finalize the document, and we must do everything with dignity. We appreciate that most of the world is ready to help us and that the American side is approaching this constructively.” []
One big question is why Trump decided to even negotiate another deal with Ukraine.
Well, it partially could be because a lot of the Republican party flipped out.
For example, Representative Don Bacon wrote:
“The initial peace proposal pushed by Witkoff was a surrender document for Ukraine that would have left it at the mercy of Russia for decades to come. With Rubio back, & w/ Ukrainian & European input we are seeing a better plan. We must stand on side of freedom & rule of law.” []
While Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick added that the deal was “nothing more than Russia’s absurd wish list that should be dismissed and shredded for the garbage that it is.”
In total reportedly dozens of Republican lawmakers have come out vocally against it.
From here the US will likely take the plan to Russia, which has only KIND OF commented on the development.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reiterated that Russia hoped any plan would include the basic things Trump and Putin agreed to in Alaska,
All of which reportedly were reflected in the extremely pro-Russian 28-point-plan.
If that means the new deal doesn’t come with major capitulations from Ukraine then it’s unlikely that.
We might have an update for that tomorrow because American and Russian negotiators are talking to each other right now in Abu Dhabi.
Although knowing my luck it will be announced RIGHT after this show goes out.
Use code “PHIL” for $20 OFF your first SeatGeek order & returning buyers use code “DEFRANCO” for $10 off AND your chance at weekly $500 prizes! SeatGeek
-
As far as the final thing is today,
I actually shot a full podcast in good faith with YouTuber Mister B.
I love him so much. The first time I had to bring him back on.
Well, I highly recommend you watch the whole thing. About an hour.
I got a link in the description and I got a thing for you at the end.
One of the things that we talked about
I really wanted to share was, you know, in the conversation
a presidential scandals and conspiracy theories.
I want to talk about how even founding fathers were conspiracy theorists.
How true is it that that Sam Adams was like spreading,
spreading conspiracy theories and disinformation intentionally hmhmm?
It wasn't just him. Paul Revere did as well.
Yeah, Ben Franklin is the king of misinformation.
Like he was spreading fake news all the time.
Yeah, like that's what I always tell people.
The era we're living in now is that's not new.
Like, I think the difference now is, more and more people are just
believing it. Whereas I think,
yeah, we got to think critically about the information we consume.
But yeah, that's they were very persuasive with their I mean, most of the time
they just exaggerated like Boston Massacre is a great example of that.
How, we you probably have in your head the, the famous image of it,
it was
Paul Revere was a big reason why that image,
spread across the colonies.
Because he was, he owned a printing press and Ben Franklin as well.
Like, he was just, somebody who was able to, communicate well, and then.
Yeah, often exaggerated.
Yeah. It just it kind of makes me
think of like, does that mean, like,
if if times were different, like, they'd have Twitter accounts that are like
George's or like at George's a clown and it's like, defeat the monarchy.
And then it makes it makes me wonder about, oh, the future from here.
Are we going to have history books that are like it all started because this.
Account.
Was started on Twitter that spread misinformation.
And it it was the spark that was needed to, to do some new crazy thing.
That, my friends, is where this video is going to end.
But again, there is much more.
Just a click away and watch a full podcast with Mr. Beat.
It's a it's a great watch and listen. And or if you miss yesterday's
Bob DeFranco show I got you covered right here. It's a lot.
We really dove into there.
And of course I also got links in the description for you.
But hey, no matter what you do, let me just say thank you for watching.
I love yo faces and I'll see you right back here tomorrow.
