I got a letter from a viewer the other day noting that in a lot of my adversarial interviews lately, once my opponents run out of arguments, they always fall back on the Israel issue. I’ve noticed it, too.
I noticed it especially in Megyn Kelly’s defense of Tucker Carlson, when she claimed that my issue with him—and recently, her—all boiled down to Israel. To be clear, Megyn is lying, and so is Tucker. They’re just lying. I started criticizing Tucker for his economic programs back in 2018. In the more recent, post–Fox News iteration, my critique centered on his trip to Russia to interview and suck up to Vladimir Putin while touting the magic of Moscow subways, and on his decision to host and effectively platform Nick Fuentes. My critique of Tucker has nothing to do with Israel; it’s about the fact that he gave a significant platform to one of America’s most prominent antisemites and largely laundered that Nazi’s views in the process.
I gave a speech at the Heritage Foundation on December 17, 2025, in which I argued at length that Tucker is not, in any meaningful sense, a traditional conservative. He has become a conspiratorial near-anarchist committed to tearing down the fundamental institutions of the United States. Go watch that speech. Israel is mentioned once in 35 minutes of material that is entirely about Tucker’s worldview and its departure from traditional conservatism.
Megyn’s claims are even more dishonest. My actual critique of her began when I asked publicly why she wouldn’t call out Candace Owens for implicating Erika Kirk in the murder of Charlie Kirk. That was it. I also challenged Candace on why she wouldn’t call out Tucker for platforming Nick Fuentes. Fuentes despised Charlie Kirk, and the enmity was mutual.
Megyn responded by claiming I was mischaracterizing what Candace had actually said—that Candace was, in her own way, defending Erika Kirk. That claim has not aged well.
