Hillary Clinton’s reaction to Tucker Carlson’s February 2024 interview with Vladimir Putin was hardly one of surprise, but rather an affirmation of her preexisting views. Speaking to MSNBC, Clinton bluntly labeled Carlson a “useful idiot,” a term often associated with individuals unwittingly aiding a hostile agenda. Her remarks didn’t stop there; she took aim at Carlson’s credibility, suggesting that even Russian media outlets portrayed him as a joke, though she didn’t specify which ones.
Clinton’s criticisms extended beyond the Putin interview, delving into Carlson’s journalistic track record. She highlighted his dismissals from various positions, indicating a long-standing disdain for both the individual and his contributions to journalism.
This antipathy between Clinton and Carlson dates back years, exemplified by a memorable encounter in 2003 during a CNN broadcast of “Crossfire.” Carlson had skeptically wagered on the success of Clinton’s autobiography, only to be met with the surprising achievement of its sales targets. Clinton, in a display of humor, presented him with a shoe-shaped cake, teasingly referencing his bet and the book’s “right-wing” reception. Despite the apparent levity of the moment, it did little to thaw their ongoing animosity.
Carlson’s stance on Putin, notably his willingness to provide a platform for the Russian leader’s perspective, drew particular ire from Clinton. She accused him of becoming a mouthpiece for Putin, insinuating that his views aligned too closely with Russian propaganda. In response, Carlson remained unfazed, dismissing Clinton’s criticism with a casual shrug and a biting retort.
The exchange underscores a deep-seated rift between the two figures, fueled by ideological differences and personal animosities. While their past encounter may have momentarily diffused tensions, subsequent events have only exacerbated their mutual antipathy, suggesting that any future reconciliation is unlikely.
