ll right. Now I'm not going to uncritically assume that the defendant is telling the truth. That would be sort of a stretch. But do you think that Romania is acting in a way that sounds like just a government looking to handle crime? There's something else going on there, isn't there? Don't you feel like there's something else going on? Yeah.

Now, do you think that one way to characterize the Tate brothers' problems is bad behavior toward women? Do you think that's at the heart of it? I mean, there are some other allegations swirling around, but it seems like some kind of behavior regarding women. Not women in general, but the women who may have worked with him in his operation. Now those are the accusations. I'm not saying I know what's true, but those are the accusations. The women are accusing them of being bad men who do bad things.

All right, let's talk about Tucker Carlson. So Tucker Carlson and Fox News are going to part ways. But apparently it's only the show. I guess his contract will probably be paid out. The news is saying so. Tucker Carlson is having a terrible day where he just learned that he gets to spend as much time as he wants with his family and doing whatever he wants. And instead of working, he'll be the subject of everybody's hate. He'll just make 20 million dollars a year from staying home. So bad day for him, huh? Yeah, he must be — I'll bet he's crying himself to sleep. Probably crying himself to sleep.

But given that we know absolutely nothing about this situation, and it wouldn't surprise me if Tucker doesn't know why he was fired either, because it's all what's in people's heads, right? I mean, whatever happened there, we'll never really know. I don't think we'll ever know the real truth. But don't you think it's some kind of average of what people have in their private thoughts? You know, there's some executive who has a private thought about this or that. There's another executive who has a private thought about this or that. There's Murdoch and the Murdoch kids who have different thoughts about different things. And then some decision gets made.

So you're going to see all kinds of reasons for him getting fired, but none of them, none of them individually seem to rise to the level of "really, that's the reason." You're getting that they got rid of the show. But I'll list them all.

So the Daily Beast says, helpfully put together a list, as have other media. And they've got their own ideas. But among the many, many, many things that Tucker Carlson did, he used the c-word a lot. He used the c-word a lot. And there's something about his comments about Sidney Powell. Now it's a little unclear if the c-word was used in conjunction with a conversation about Sidney Powell or if those were just different topics.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but when you use the c-word at work, that really angers men. I'll tell you, men really get bad about that. You use that c-word in front of a group of men and nobody else, and those men will be like, "Hey, hey, don't use that word." So I'm just assuming that men complained about his use of that word.

He made disparaging remarks about management. Is there anybody who hasn't never made a disparaging remark about management? Are you kidding me? I'm doing a live stream which is almost entirely people who want to see me, and even most of you have made disparaging remarks about me. I mean, maybe not in that you might like some things too, but everybody makes disparaging remarks about everybody. What's different is that his emails may have been surfaced. Her communications may have been surfaced during that lawsuit. So maybe some of those executives saw some discouraging or disparaging remarks.

The Daily Beast also says it's something about his January 6 conspiracy coverage. Now, do you think that there was anybody at Fox News who said out loud, "The problem is his January 6 coverage"? Maybe. But this sounds like just something that the Daily Beast would make up because they want it to be true. It feels like wishful thinking, doesn't it?

Dan Dan the NPC says, "Scott, you ignorant." That's almost a sentence there. Goodbye. Thanks for joining us.

Let's see what else. Tucker is also accused — a former producer has a lawsuit that says it was a sexist environment. Now he's not being accused of any of MeToo stuff, but rather the way he talked was sexist. And that's the sort of thing that men who work with him probably complained a lot about. So I can imagine Tucker talking to the guys, and the guys are like, "Whoa, whoa, Tucker, that's a little bit sexist. Can you calm that down a little bit? Calm that down. We men don't like that at all."

Let's see what else. Oliver Darcy says it's related to ex-producers' lawsuit for his rampant sexism. And then Oliver Darcy, as he then throws this in, and anti-Semitic behavior. What would be an example of anti-Semitic behavior? Now I would understand if they said he had anti-Semitic words, like words. I can imagine somebody doing that, not necessarily Tucker, but you could imagine a person doing something that's anti-Semitism. But what exactly was his behavior? Do you think that's real? Did he start a little Holocaust of his own? Was his behavior to overtly discriminate against Jewish employees or Jewish guests? Seems like if they had a specific, we might have heard it.

Does that sound like just something that was made up by CNN? Does that sound true? Remember, 100 percent of stories about famous people are not true. Now I only see this stuck in the CNN report. Like I don't even — the Daily Beast, which is no friend of Tucker's, doesn't mention anything about any anti-Semitic thing.

Do you know that when I got canceled, the ADL, somebody from the ADL came after me. They tried to make it anti-Semitic, just kind of tack onto the story a little bit. Well, you know, maybe he did something anti-Semitic too, right? Well, he said some bad things that had nothing to do with us, but we think we could maybe tag on a little bit and get a little juice from this too. So that's probably ridiculous, but it's a serious accusation. So we'll put a pin in it. But if you don't hear this from other entities, it sounds like it's just a CNN little jab.

All right. Profanity-laced remarks. Now there's another thing that men hate. Men hate it when men swear. So a lot of men were mad at Tucker at Fox News, that's for sure.

And maybe something about the advertisers wanting to stay away from Tucker's show. It did seem to be that Tucker did not have the A-level advertisers. And you know, I've always wondered how Fox News even makes money when I see the advertisements that they're on. I think to myself, how many pillows can you sell? Or you know, how much gold do people need? I don't really even understand their business model because when I look at a commercial on one of the major networks, you know it's going to be some big pharma company or something. And you say, oh, I understand that. They make money. That big pharma company is paying them a lot of money to advertise. But Fox advertisers don't look like they even have money. I don't even know where they get their money. I mean, they seem like smaller outfits. I just don't know how they — honestly, I don't know how they make money. Like literally, I don't understand how they do it. So maybe it's that.

Then RFK Jr. said it was something about not long after RFK Jr. was on the show and talking about big pharma. So RFK Jr. thinks it might be something about big pharma pushing back. What do you think of all those reasons? Which ones do you find compelling, knowing that we'll never know?

All right, it could be that the real reason is some reason that's not even in the news, right? So some say big pharma, some say lawsuits, potential lawsuits, some say RFK, some say a combination, some say it's a J6 story, the January 6 stuff, don't want to get sued basically, right? You think it was Kennedy? You think it was Dominion? You think it's J6? Some say insurance.

All right. What if I taught you — let's see if you remember this lesson. What does it mean when everybody has a different opinion of why it happened? What's that mean? What can you conclude from the fact that all the observers have a different opinion? Well, nobody knows. Nobody knows. It might also be unknowable because, like I say, it was a — I'm sure it was a group decision. You know, even though Murdoch could make the decision himself, I'm sure it was a group. You know, they consulted. But I don't think that they each knew what was in the minds of the other. Obviously they said what they wanted to say, but maybe their actual secret thoughts were for themselves, and they just made the argument that was fit for other people to hear.

So I got a feeling it was just a bunch of people who had a bunch of problems. And when the bunch of problems reached the level where it was higher than the benefit, they pulled the trigger. Yeah, it could be the Paul Ryan effect. He's on the board. And it could be that Carlson was too friendly — not friendly, but too beneficial to Trump getting elected. Because if Tucker kept going at the January 6 thing, then that would make Trump stronger.

All right. So I guess we don't know what it was exactly. But I'll tell you the spot that he's in. So the people who have been in that spot was — let's see, Bill O'Reilly was there in that 8 p.m. spot. Megyn Kelly was there, right? And now Tucker was there. Somebody else there: Glenn Beck, right? So Glenn Beck, Megyn Kelly, and O'Reilly, and now Tucker.

So if you had to come up with a name for what you would call that eight o'clock block, I would call it the kill-me block. You know, if you go there, you might as well just kill me, right? Just kill me.

So who did they have as a guest host in the kill-me slot last night? Just guess. Just imagine that you live in the simulation and everything is meant to be a joke. You don't know it, but it's like a physical joke that's being played on us. Who would they put in the kill-me spot? Brian Kilmeade. Duh. Brian Kilmeade was in the kill-me slot. I mean, come on. Come on. Total simulation. I didn't say it was funny. I just said it was a simulation messing with us. You can decide on your own if it's funny. I mean, it's not my joke. It's a simulation.

So let's see. We got all those possibilities. Now the speculation also is what's going to happen to Tucker. Where will he go? And everybody's got their own guesses. Now there are two lines of thinking, and they're both worthy of exploring. One says that Tucker is a singular personality. He's bigger than Fox News. And wherever he goes, if he goes independent, he could become the Joe Rogan of independent people or something like that. But even Joe Rogan depends on advertisers, doesn't he? It's going to be a little bit tough for Tucker to find advertisers because he couldn't find it for a show. So I mean, if Fox News can't get you an advertiser, it'd be hard to scrounge one up on your own. But I suppose he could. I suppose. Good.

Mike Cernovich accurately points out that Tucker is sort of a target for lawsuits. So unless you've got some big organization behind you to pay your legal bills, it's too risky to be in business the way Tucker does business. Maybe. Maybe. But you know, if you're making Joe Rogan kind of money, you can also buy Joe Rogan kind of insurance. And Joe Rogan must be able to buy insurance. I don't know if you can buy 100 million dollars worth of insurance, but maybe he can. I don't know.

So some say he's going to go to the independent route. Now others say — and I think they're not wrong — that Fox News is the star and the eight o'clock spot is the star. And you could put anybody good in there and they would have huge ratings because it's about the platform. That's not wrong. You know, I've been telling you for years that whatever you want to say to complain about Fox News, there's one thing that they do consistently well and have for years, which is their producers really produce. Yeah, see, that looks poorly produced to me, as does MSNBC. But Fox News consistently looks like the producers, the people behind the curtain, are just a higher level of operators. They just seem more effective to me. So they can put on a show. And maybe the show is the star. And they can put in interesting people. And you know, picking the right celebrity or the right personality is part of producing.

So I'm going to say that their eight o'clock hour is going to do fine. What do you think? Now it might take them a while to find their footing, but I think they're going to put in somebody who's as interesting. Yeah, maybe not on day one, but as interesting. And you're going to tune in because it's eight o'clock and the TV's on and you're just going to watch it. That's what happens. When they got rid of — not got rid of, but so in the after Glenn Beck, after O'Reilly, after Megyn Kelly, the ratings just kept going up. So why won't that happen again?

So I'm going to say that from the perspective of Fox News, probably it looks like a pretty good decision. Does that surprise you? If I'm just going to do the business decision, the things that have been listed as the potential problems for Tucker, if any subset of that is true, yeah, that's pretty good reasons. Pretty good reasons. Now, because remember, they would have confidence that they can fill that slot eventually with somebody who makes them just as much money. And they wouldn't have the problems. They wouldn't have the lawsuits. So it's not a terrible business decision. It doesn't mean that it'll work out right. All businesses at risk. So it could be the worst thing they ever did. But if you based it on their history, it was a smart business decision. Which is not to — I'm not trying to not support Tucker. I'm just saying you can see it from a business perspective. And the risk was higher than the return. We'll see.

But how will Tucker do? Do you think that he will go off and start his own thing that's bigger than his old audience? Well, I saw a reporting that says that none of the three people I mentioned did so. Megyn Kelly's doing well but doesn't have the same size audience. Glenn Beck obviously is doing great on the Blaze but probably a smaller audience. And O'Reilly has got his own thing but smaller audience.

So do you think Tucker will go on to just have a nice solid respectable podcast and you know you'll just happily go on? Maybe. Maybe. There are a number of entities that would try to get him. NewsNation, and NewsNation is where Chris Cuomo ended up. So that might make sense. They're independent. You know, they're trying to hit some kind of middle ground reporting. So I don't know. I don't know if anybody has enough money to pay him what he needs. But he could make a fortune as a podcaster, obviously. So he's got lots of options. It's a good place to be.

I would guess that his cancellation, if you want to call it that, feels a lot like mine did, which is everybody else thinks it's worse than it is for you. And you're thinking, oh well, it's a good thing I spent my career up to this point building a bunch of skills. Because if you have a bunch of skills, as Tucker does, he's got a ton of options. He has so many options. I hope nobody's feeling sorry for him. Is anybody feeling sorry for Tucker? I mean, I wish things didn't happen that were bad for anybody. But no, he's doing great. I would guess he's having a good week. If I had to guess, this following week will be more fun and interesting and stimulating for Tucker than the week before. Because he was just sort of going to work and grinding out the same show after show, which had to be a lot of work. And now he's on vacation. He's getting paid the same. The entire world has opened up to him. I don't know. Looks pretty good for him.

Let's talk about AOC talked about deplatforming works and it is important. So AOC is very happy about Tucker being deplatformed. Okay.

Also some people think it's the war in Ukraine because Tucker was anti-war in Ukraine. Some say it's about the presidential election because you want to remove players from the field. I think it's all of those things. I think it's all of those things. It's the whole bag of things. That's why we'll never hear there was one thing. And if you do hear that it was one thing, I wouldn't believe it. It's all the things.

How about Don Lemon? So Don Lemon — now I don't know if this is true, but I'd like to think it's true. Every once in a while you like to think that people do smart things. If CNN was getting ready to fire Don Lemon and then the unexpected news about Tucker Carlson hit, wouldn't the smartest thing for them to do is immediately fire Don Lemon so that his news is tagged on to Tucker's news but it's behind it? Because Tucker is going to get more attention. I think that's what they did. If they didn't do that intentionally, I'll be very disappointed because it would be one of the smartest media things I'd ever seen. I mean, really, really smart. You know, they like to announce bad news on a Friday before a three-day weekend. But this was even better. You know, assuming that they were ready to go, you know, they'd already made it, were almost a decision to fire him. That was just such good timing.

And what was Don Lemon fired for? Well, his diva-like behavior. Do you think his diva-like behavior was bothering the men? The men? Do you think the men were saying that Don Lemon, he's acting so diva-like? I don't know. Based on the reporting, there are a lot of women in the reporting who seemed angry at him. And he was being called misogynist. So Tucker is misogynist? Tucker Carlson was accused of being a misogynist. And now Don Lemon, gay man, is being accused of being a misogynist. Have you seen the pattern yet? Do you know this pattern? Yeah. Working with women is really dangerous. Working with women is going to put you in jail and get you fired. That's where we are basically.

If you're working with women and there are a bunch of them, the odds that one of them will sue you or call you a misogynist is nearly 100 percent. It's nearly 100 percent. So it seems to me that the obvious future of all men in public life is to eventually be sued and fired in disgrace. Because if you took a hundred of any type of person — so this has nothing to do with being women, right? If this sounds anti-woman, just you can remove the woman from the story and replace any demographic. There's a hundred of whatever: Albanians, 100 binaries, 100 cisgender white men, 100 anything. If there are a hundred of them, you're going to have some bad ones. Do you agree? It doesn't matter who it is. A hundred human beings, you're gonna have some bad ones. And if those bad ones have this easy way to take out the men they work with, it's going to happen over time.

So you're seeing the complete inability of men and women to work together for long. Now I'm not going to give men a pass. If you put men in any environment and you wait long enough, they're going to do some bad stuff because, you know, man, I can say that because I am one. We do bad stuff if you wait long enough. So men and women working together just doesn't work. I hate to say it, but in 2023, men and women working together absolutely is too dangerous because some of the women are going to complain. And then that would have to be taken seriously. And probably it is serious. It probably is based on something real.

So let me ask you this. Do you remember when the MeToo movement was everywhere and people were getting MeToo'd all over the place? Did you notice it stopped? What's up with that? How did it stop? Did the guys stop? Big guys? I doubt it. Did the women stop complaining? I actually don't know that. I don't know the answer. But didn't we get one or two MeToo stories per day? And the closest we've come is — wasn't there some NBC executive who admitted he had a consensual affair with somebody at work and then he quit? But even that wasn't scandalous. It wasn't even scandalous. It just seemed like there was an affair and that was against the rules. And that's about the whole story.

Yeah, so that's how I'm going. Somebody says all right. So it might be a little bit racist too, the Don Lemon stuff. Not that Don Lemon was fired because their management was racist. I'm not sayin