reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Tucker Carlson was removed from outlets for daring to discuss the war. Donahue, with the highest-rated show on MSNBC, was fired for criticizing the Iraq invasion. The speaker accuses the media of lying about Iraq, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, and supporting bailouts and money printing. They warn that the world is on the verge of World War 3, placing the blame on those responsible.

Rick Sanchez and Glenn discuss how western and Russian media frame the Ukraine war, the state of journalism, and prospects for ending the conflict. Rick Sanchez explains that in the United States, the media operates with Pentagon and State Department correspondents who are fed lines to read on air, often about “new documents proving that such and such a bad person” and then follow with praise for allies. He says many correspondents are good people but their job is to articulate the narrative dictated by those institutions, leaving little room for his pushback or for challenging the official line. He notes he was on CNN with a big show and tried to question those narratives, but was pushed off the air or fired when he did. He contrasts his experience in the U.S. with his current environment, where he has more editorial freedom, and argues that in the United States, leadership rarely covers the other side—Putin, Xi, Modi—beyond brief comebacks on comedy shows, while in Russia he can access ministers and officials and report what they say more directly. He recounts Putin’s remarks last night, noting Putin said “The US media has become in many ways what we used to do back during the Soviet era,” that they block and interfere, and that “Russia has the best intercontinental weapon in the world today, and it's called truth.” Rick emphasizes the difference in how truth and free speech are treated, pointing out RT’s 20-year anniversary of free speech in Moscow and contrasting that with U.S. media practices. Glenn asks about how the narrative has flipped over time, referencing early Davos moments with Trump and the Chinese delegation, and later Russia’s perspective in Moscow. They discuss accountability gaps in Europe and the U.S.—the lack of accountability for events like the Biden laptop story, the Afghan bounties, the Nord Stream controversy, and the claimed Ukrainian drone deals—arguing that the press often avoids tough questions and veers toward pro-Russian framing by labeling inconvenient facts as Kremlin talking points. Rick argues that the censorship culture makes it seem like presenting the Russian perspective legitimizes it, yet he insists that understanding opposing viewpoints is essential to address the conflict. Rick claims that after Joe Biden’s administration made it illegal for him to practice journalism in the U.S. (tied to Russian connections with penalties for noncompliance), he found greater editorial freedom in Russia. He asserts that in the U.S., Putin or Xi speeches are rarely covered in full, whereas in Russia, officials publicly present their evidence—such as Boris Johnson allegedly paying bribes to Zelensky’s government to prevent a peace deal in April 2022—and provide data, timelines, and formal declarations, like a stated MI6 operation against Russia’s pipelines and a separate incident involving the destruction of a Russian aircraft fleet. They discuss the Ukraine conflict as a proxy battle primarily between the United States and Russia, with Trump positioned as a potential mediator who could push for rapprochement with Russia, potentially lifting sanctions to move toward peace. Rick explains his view that Europe’s insistence on continued confrontation with Russia is a sticking point and that the war’s end would require a shift toward diplomacy and a reduction of war propaganda at home. He cites a Guardian article detailing financial incentives to prolong the war and emphasizes that Russia’s strategy—advancing while minimizing civilian casualties and flanking cities—deserves more attention in Western reporting. They touch on Trump’s stance, suggesting that his administration might seek to end the war by reestablishing relations with Russia, and stress that some discussions could extend beyond Ukraine, potentially involving Odessa and broader regional settlements. They note Merkel’s recent critical commentary about Poland and Baltic states and acknowledge shifts in Western media narratives as war dynamics evolve. The conversation closes with hopes for reduced propaganda, renewed diplomacy, and the possibility that Hungary could host a productive meeting between leaders to move toward peace.

I met Prime Minister Orban 36 years ago and saw his vision for a new Hungary. The Ukraine war stems from the US's 1994 NATO expansion project, despite promises to Gorbachev. This was a deep state project that every president after Clinton was a part of. Yesterday was historic because Trump and Putin spoke, and the new defense secretary admitted Ukraine won't join NATO. This is the basis for peace. For 30 years, America has been playing a game of risk, seeking world hegemony. Marco Rubio acknowledged a multipolar world. The US must stop attacking others and respect other countries. With mutual respect, we can achieve a golden age, investing in technology instead of war.

Rick Sanchez discusses his career trajectory, including his time at RT. He was recruited by Larry King and found RT to be surprisingly journalistically free, more so than CNN, Fox, or NBC. He wrote his entire show without pre-approval. Despite his extensive experience and awards, he finds it difficult to get hired in the U.S., possibly due to his work with RT. Sanchez recounts being contacted by a former CNN colleague, now working in the State Department, which he interpreted as a warning about his work. Subsequently, the Biden administration, via the Treasury Department, effectively shut down the U.S. company producing his RT show, threatening fines or imprisonment for Americans working with RT. This action, he believes, was politically motivated and a violation of free speech. He also shares a story about a newspaper killing a story about him after a call from someone. Sanchez and the interviewer discuss the anti-Russia sentiment in the U.S., the demonization of Russians, and the one-sided narrative presented by American media. Sanchez shares the Russian perspective on the Ukraine war, emphasizing NATO expansion and the U.S.-backed coup in Ukraine as contributing factors. They lament the lack of engagement and the dangers of not hearing different perspectives.

Tucker Carlson's recent interview with Vladimir Putin in Russia has sparked controversy. Critics argue that Carlson, who has an exclusive contract with Elon Musk, is not a true journalist and is being used by Russia. They point out that many Russian journalists have been forced into exile or jailed for reporting on the Kremlin's actions. They question why Carlson is given the opportunity to interview Putin while Russian journalists face such risks. These critics believe that Carlson and Musk are both being manipulated by Russia, whether willingly or unwillingly. Despite this, the speaker states their intention to vote for Joe Biden in 2024.

Hello everyone! We're joined by Ben Swann today to discuss a critical issue concerning free speech. Ben shared an open letter to President Trump regarding the sanctions against RT, TV Novosti, and Sputnik. These sanctions prevent American journalists from working for RT, even when the content is aimed at international audiences. This move is unprecedented, as the U.S. government has never before sanctioned a news entity in this way. We believe that this action is an oversight and are hopeful that President Trump will remove these sanctions, upholding the principles of free speech and the right to consume diverse media. It's about defending the right to a counterpoint of view and preventing our government from controlling media narratives. You can help by sharing Ben's letter on X, tagging Elon Musk to draw more attention to this important cause.

Speaker 1 described learning the news 'just about an hour or two ago' and said they 'cheered up' and felt joyful, then spoke with RT. They 'fell in love with Russia so much' and now wanna stay, applying for Russian citizenship after I had asylum for two years, before this was granted. They credited editor in chief Margarita Cemignon and Maria Butina and Margarita Simignon for guiding them to asylum, while noting they were 'under threat by the US government, by the Biden regime' and that their life was threatened. 'Congressman Matt Gates told me that I was safer to stay here in in Russia,' and they continued their work with RT. Thanks to that guidance they rebuilt my life, despite facing possible prison in the US for sanctions related to being on channel one and working for RT. They are proud to work for Russia today; the Biden administration didn't appreciate that.

Tucker Carlson, a right-wing media figure, is in Moscow to interview Vladimir Putin. Critics argue that Carlson is not a journalist and instead spreads misinformation on behalf of the Kremlin. They believe his work is biased and not aligned with the facts. Some compare his interview with Putin to watching a scandalous show. Furthermore, there is concern that the Republican Party, including Donald Trump, is doing Putin's bidding. Although some see this as Republicans supporting Putin, others believe they are actually supporting Trump, who in turn supports Putin.

Since leaving Russia, we've observed the Biden administration escalating tensions with Moscow, bringing the U.S. closer to nuclear conflict. Recently, U.S. military actions resulted in the deaths of Russian soldiers, marking an undeclared war that most Americans are unaware of. This situation is more perilous than during the Cuban missile crisis, yet there is no communication between U.S. and Russian officials, as Secretary of State Tony Blinken has severed all contact for over two years. Efforts to gain insights from Ukrainian President Zelensky have been blocked by the U.S. government, limiting American access to diverse perspectives. We returned to Moscow to interview Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov about the potential for conflict and the future of U.S.-Russia relations. Stay tuned for the upcoming interview.

Since leaving Russia, we've observed the Biden administration escalating tensions with Moscow, bringing the U.S. closer to nuclear conflict than ever before, even more so than during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The U.S. military has engaged in actions that have resulted in Russian casualties, yet most Americans remain unaware of the situation. There are no diplomatic channels currently open between the U.S. and Russia, as Secretary of State Tony Blinken has severed all communication. Efforts to interview Ukrainian President Zelensky have been blocked by the U.S. government, despite attempts to gain insight into the conflict. We returned to Moscow to interview Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to understand the current state of U.S.-Russia relations and the potential for conflict resolution. Stay tuned for that interview.

Speaker 0: In, say, Britain, they've banned CGTN, the Chinese channel, from broadcasting RT, famously. Why is it that, do you think Russia thinks it's fine? I think Sergei Lavrov this week giving a press conference allowing Western reporters, accreditation, whereas in The United States, they obviously don't ban media in The US because of the First Amendment. Certainly in Europe, obviously, there's mass banning of, journalists and journalism. What what's behind, that? And that surely does depart somewhat from manufacturing consent where they didn't wanna ban anything. They just knew that lower selling outlets would fail to engage the populace in dissident opinion? Speaker 1: Well, I think first of all that's quite normal. You look through the, say the take a more recent event, the Iraq war, not that far back. Anyone who dares to say that the Iraq War was the major crime of this century, which it certainly was, is bitterly denounced and condemned. If you look at discussion in the mainstream, you'll be hard put to find anyone who can reach the mainstream who will say the elementary truth, indisputable truth, that the Iraq war was an example of what the Nuremberg Tribunal called the supreme international crime, crime of aggression, differs from other war crimes only in that it includes all of the evil that follows. So find somebody who says President Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney were guilty of the crimes for which people were hanged at Nuremberg. Instead what you have is celebration of George Bush, the great criminal who invaded Iraq and Afghanistan and destroyed them, Celebration of him as a lovely person, it's called a goofy grandpa who plays with his grandchildren, paints pictures. Just a delightful person. Well, that's the Iraq War. It's quite striking that anyone who dares to compare the Iraq War with the Russian invasion of Ukraine is viciously denounced.

"Please explain to me the difference between Putin's invasion of Ukraine and our invasion of Iraq." "Somebody tell me what was different." "Why was ours considered okay and Russia's not?" "The only they're for the same thing, regime change." "Same thing." "We wanna change who is governing Iraq." "Putin wanted to change who is governing Ukraine." "Now don't get me wrong." "I didn't support either war." "They both suck." "But everybody you notice our national media doesn't bring that up at all, do they?" "And you notice they brought up now the Fed or the international courts have made it so Putin can't travel now because he's considered a war criminal." "Let's not forget the international courts did the same thing with Bush and Cheney after the invasion of Iraq." "Why do you think George Bush can't leave The US?"

We are in Moscow to interview Russian President Vladimir Putin. The war in Ukraine has had significant global impacts, reshaping military alliances and the world economy. However, many English-speaking countries remain unaware of these changes due to corrupt and biased media outlets. While numerous interviews have been conducted with Ukrainian President Zelensky, no Western journalist has interviewed Putin. Americans have the right to know about a war they are involved in, and we have the right to inform them. Despite attempts to suppress this interview, it can be watched for free on our website. We encourage viewers to watch and make their own judgments.

Former Fox News personality Tucker Carlson conducted an interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow. While some criticize Carlson for being a right-wing conspiracy theorist and a useful idiot for Putin, others argue that he is not a journalist and lacks credibility. They accuse him of spreading propaganda and misinformation, particularly regarding Ukraine. Carlson's interview with Putin is seen as a platform for promoting the Russian president's agenda. Critics express concern about the influence and reach of Carlson's disinformation, describing it as gobsmacking and terrifying. They believe that some Americans yearn for a leader who can suppress opposition, control the media, and act with impunity.

Russia is consistently portrayed as acting against American interests, particularly with its alliance with China and its invasion of Ukraine. This action, while wrong, was driven by Russia's concern over Ukraine potentially joining NATO and becoming a satellite of the United States with American weapons. The speaker argues that Ukraine's government isn't fully sovereign, alleging it was installed by a CIA coup. They highlight that during peace talks in Istanbul, a potential agreement was disrupted by the US, leading to further devastation and loss of life in Ukraine. The speaker questions why the U.S. is at war with Russia.

Journalists have a duty to inform the public, especially about the war in Ukraine, which Americans are funding. We interviewed Vladimir Putin; it's our job to present diverse perspectives, even if controversial. The war's impact is devastating, reshaping global alliances and the economy. Many question the Western media's narrative, citing potential bias and censorship. Accusations of propaganda against Tucker Carlson are dismissed; Zelensky's appearances are presented as comparable examples of promotion rather than unbiased reporting. The public deserves access to information to decide for themselves. We believe in freedom of speech and the right to hear all sides, despite government attempts at suppression. This interview is crucial because Americans are funding the war and should understand the reasons behind it, including potential NATO expansion and the dubious nature of Ukraine's democracy.

Since leaving Russia, we've observed the Biden administration's actions pushing the U.S. closer to nuclear conflict with Russia, particularly after the recent missile strikes that killed Russian soldiers. This undeclared war, largely unknown to Americans, has escalated tensions to levels surpassing those during the Cuban missile crisis. Surprisingly, there are no backchannel communications between the U.S. and Russia, as Secretary of State Tony Blinken has severed all contact for over two years. Efforts to gain insight from Ukrainian President Zelensky have been blocked by the U.S. government, which has restricted his ability to speak with us. Recently, we interviewed Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to discuss the potential for conflict and the future of U.S.-Russia relations. Stay tuned for that interview.

Rick Sanchez discusses his career journey, including his time at RT. Larry King convinced him to consider working for RT, assuring him of editorial control. Sanchez, who had left television news after being fired by CNN and starting a healthcare company, missed storytelling and decided to join RT five years prior to the interview. He emphasizes the editorial freedom he experienced at RT, contrasting it with the restrictions he faced at CNN, Fox, and NBC, where certain guests and topics were off-limits. Sanchez notes that RT was not available in the United States after the Ukraine war began. He says the Biden administration, through the Treasury Department, effectively banned Americans from working for or contracting with RT, citing concerns about Russian interference in US elections. Sanchez recounts a phone call from a former CNN colleague, now working in the State Department, which he interpreted as a warning. He also describes how a major US newspaper killed a story about his experience after a call from an unknown source to the managing editor. He believes the US government is trying to control who Americans can work for, watch, or receive news from.

Big Tucker, a journalist, discusses his experiences interviewing various individuals, including Putin. He criticizes mainstream media outlets like CNN and Fox, claiming they no longer interest the youth. Tucker believes politicians prioritize foreign affairs over domestic issues. He mentions facing opposition and legal threats for his work. Speaker 1 interrupts, confused about being in the studio and shares a personal anecdote about a Russian man. The video ends with a comparison between Vladimir Putin and Joe Biden.

I met Prime Minister Orban 36 years ago and saw in him vision, energy, and foresight. The Ukraine war resulted from the US's idea to expand NATO eastward, ignoring promises made to Russia. Yesterday was historic; Trump and Putin spoke, and the defense secretary admitted Ukraine won't join NATO, forming a basis for peace. For 30 years, America played a "game of risk," seeking world hegemony, but Rubio now acknowledges a multipolar world. Europe is befuddled as the US reverses course. I told European leaders this project wouldn't work; Russia sees it as life or death. ExpressVPN shields your online activity. We need rational conversations in foreign policy, not attacks based on motive. The problem is the arrogance of power.

The speaker explains that they were determined to do the interview with Vladimir Putin because they were prevented from doing so by their own government. They express shock and anger at the US government's spying and interference. The speaker clarifies that their views are constantly evolving based on evidence and that their main view is to tell the truth. They deny being pro-Trump or anti-Biden and state that their goal was to gather information about Putin and the current state of affairs. They also discuss the state of media bias and the importance of free speech.