Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts apologized in a staff meeting on Wednesday for  his video last week defending Tucker Carlson and refusing to “cancel” neo-Nazi leader Nick Fuentes, saying that the video was the result of internal failures of communication and consultation that left too few people involved in its production.

Roberts and other Heritage leaders also repeatedly made reference to a plan under development for how Heritage will approach its relationship with Carlson going forward, amid strong pressure from numerous staff members to forcefully disavow the right-wing podcast host  and his activities, but provided little clarity about what that approach will entail and sidestepped the full-throated denunciation of Carlson that several Heritage staffers sought.

In opening remarks, Roberts said ultimate responsibility for the video lay with him, but that Heritage’s former chief of staff, Ryan Neuhaus, who recently resigned, was responsible for writing the script. Roberts also criticized Neuhaus for retweeting a post saying that those upset by Roberts’ video should resign.

Roberts said that he himself was willing to resign but that he also felt a “moral obligation” to stay on to clean up the “mess” he created.

Roberts said that the video was the result of a “short circuited” process which violated Heritage’s “one voice” policy, adding that he wrongly believed the script had been approved by others in Heritage’s leadership, but that he should have personally checked in with colleagues.

“Some of the substance, maybe most of the substantive points, are things that I and I think we believe, but there are a couple of pain points that I want to address specifically,” Roberts said. 

He said that the intention of the video was to address public and private pressure on Heritage to disavow Carlson as well as to denounce the antisemitic and otherwise “grotesque” stances maintained by Fuentes, the latter of which he addressed in a separate post following backlash to his video. 

But Roberts also largely pleaded ignorance about both Carlson and Fuentes’ views and content in the staff meeting. Roberts’ video remains on his X profile.

“About ‘no cancelation,’ is there a limiting principle to that? I should have said that there was, especially in light of Tucker hosting not just Fuentes, but a handful of other people,” Roberts said. “You can say you’re not going to participate in canceling someone — a personal friend, an institutional friend — while also being clear you’re not endorsing everything they’ve said. You’re not endorsing softball interviews. You’re not endorsing putting people on shows. And I should have made that clear.”

At the same time, Roberts also indicated that he had engaged privately with Carlson about objectionable content on his show in the past, including Carlson’s hosting of Holocaust revisionist Daryl Cooper.

Roberts repeatedly alluded to plans in development to clarify the relationship between Heritage and Carlson, and said that a variety of senior Heritage staff will be involved in developing those plans. He said he does not approve of much of Carlson’s recent activity, but generally withheld direct rebuke.

“I made the mistake of conflating too much the personal friendship I have with Tucker — although I want to be really clear, I don’t think that everything, or maybe even most, of what he does now is helpful or good — but conflating that with, particularly the word ‘always,’ as the institution,” Roberts said. “Even the institution can say, ‘Tucker will be a friend,’ but that’s different than saying that you endorse everything your friend does.”

Addressing revelations that Heritage had a paid partnership with Carlson, Roberts noted that the partnership ended this summer, and that Heritage had similar arrangements with various other media figures including Fox News commentator Mark Levin, who has spoken out against Carlson’s antisemitism.

Roberts said that his approach in the video and going forward was and will be driven, in some capacity, by a desire to appeal to and “drive a wedge” between Fuentes and followers of his who might be persuadable or do not share Fuentes’ bigotry.

“Fuentes … has an audience of several million people. At least some of that audience might be open to be converted. My video didn’t do that, although the intention was to open that idea — not to endorse what Fuentes was saying, but quite the opposite, to appeal to them,” Robert said. “There’s a segment of that audience who might be with us, and they really are not Nazis and antisemites, then maybe we can eventually bring them into the fold.”

Roberts offered an apology for the specific terminology he used in describing Carlson’s critics as a “venomous coalition,” saying he did not intend to invoke antisemitic tropes. 

A staffer later pressed him on his description of Carlson’s critics as a “globalist class and their mouthpieces,” which the staffer said also seemed to be an antisemitic trope. Roberts apologized for those comments as well, and said his use of “globalist” was meant differently.

“I misread the situation and the advice that I got,” Roberts said. “I took the advice. I didn’t stop. I own that. [It] was bad, and I should have been better in that moment.”

During a Q&A with Heritage staff, Roberts faced frustration and disappointment from a series of Heritage staffers, some of whom said they had lost confidence in his leadership and argued that both the initial video and his subsequent response and belated apology had been insufficient and wrongheaded. Many said that Heritage needed to make a clear and unequivocal statement disavowing Carlson in order to move forward.

“Only after it became clear that Ryan falling on his sword would be insufficient to quell the outrage, both inside and outside of this building, did we finally see you manage the courage to utter the words, ‘I made a mistake,’” Amy Swearer, a senior legal fellow at Heritage, said. “It took you four days to say that, and even then, the mistake was couched largely in terms of, ‘Well, I’m sorry you guys just didn’t really understand the words that were coming out of my mouth, and maybe I should have spoken better, but also maybe try to listen better.’ With all due respect, Dr. Roberts, we all understood what you said in the video and in the ensuing response.”

Swearer also charged that Roberts has continued to avoid going after Carlson directly.

“We watched you seem perfectly willing to attack all of our friends and allies on the right, but say nothing about the guy who just said he dislikes nothing more than Christian Zionists,” she continued. “We watched this sort of incoherent defense for days of, ‘Well, we can’t participate in cancel culture, and anyone who attacks Tucker is participating in cancel culture, but also we’re going to attack the people who are participating in that cancel culture, and that’s not cancel culture.’”

Several staffers said that the video and the fallout from it had severely damaged Heritage’s reputation and partnerships with other institutions, that serious work would be needed throughout the organization to repair that damage and that Heritage had thus far failed to articulate any such plan or clearly disavow Carlson after nearly a week.

“It has been six days, almost a week, where we as an organization have been unable to utter the words … ‘Tucker’s an antisemite and we as Heritage do not want to associate with him,’” Daniel Flesch, a senior policy analyst at Heritage involved in its Middle East and antisemitism work, said. “We still do not have a statement about that. … We are bleeding trust, reputation, perhaps donors, who knows what else — support.”

“If the Heritage Foundation and you do not dump Tucker Carlson publicly, we are not going to repair that damage,” Hans von Spakovsky, a senior fellow at Heritage, said, adding that it would be unworkable to make a public distinction between Carlson being a personal friend of Roberts versus being a friend of Heritage as an institution.

While the majority of those who raised questions during the meeting were deeply critical of Carlson, a pair of staffers stood out as taking a different stance 

One, describing herself as a member of Gen Z, said that she and many young staffers agreed with Roberts’ video. She also claimed that charges of antisemitism against Carlson were driven by his opposition to foreign intervention.

“Gen Z has an increased unfavorable view of Israel, and it’s not because millions of Americans are antisemitic,” the staffer said. “It’s because we are Catholic and Orthodox and believe that Christian Zionism is a modern heresy. We believe it does go against church doctrine and the teachings of the early church fathers to use Christianity as a defense for a secular nation.”

Roberts responded that Heritage must be “agnostic” on theological questions of Christian Zionism. 

Derek Morgan, Heritage’s executive vice president, added that Heritage’s institutional position is that, “Israel has been a great ally of the United States” and that, “When it’s in the American interest to support the nation of Israel, we will do so.”

Another staffer, Evan Myers, raised particular concern about a request from the Heritage-aligned National Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, that young Heritage staffers be offered the opportunity to attend Shabbat dinners as a space for education.

Myers said that doing so would violate his and others’ religious beliefs and that he was concerned that attendance at such events would be used as a “litmus test.” He further suggested that those involved in the task force would leak to the media the names of those who declined to participate.

Victoria Coates, vice president of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy at Heritage and a board member of the task force, said she took offense with Myers’ characterization of the request.

“This was a recommendation … That was an open offer from the task force. It was made in generosity of spirit and in the hopes of increased dialogue on this issue,” Coates said. “And Evan, I’m deeply sorry that you could not see that as a generous offer, but rather a personal attack on you. It was not.”

Roberts expressed frustration that communications between himself and members of the antisemitism task force had been shared with the press.

“It’s hard for me and for this institution to consider recommendations when we can’t do that privately,” Roberts said. “I just want to let you know as we move forward on a detailed plan … it’s got to be under the terms that we get to have the conversations privately.”

President Donald Trump said in an interview with Fox News host Mark Levin on Tuesday that at the time of the U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities in June, he believed Tehran “would have had nuclear weapons in a period of four weeks.”

Calling in to Levin’s radio show, Trump said that, “if we didn’t [strike Iran], they would probably by this time, just about this time, have a nuclear weapon and they would have used it.”

Trump said that, despite news reports questioning his assessment of the efficacy of the strikes, “it turned out that” the impacts were “even more so than I said. It was obliteration.”

“The Atomic Energy Commission said, this place is gone. [Iran] can maybe start up, but they’re not starting up there,” Trump said of the Iranian nuclear facilities targeted in the operation. The Israel Atomic Energy Commission found that the U.S. strike on the Fordow nuclear facility “destroyed the site’s critical infrastructure” and rendered it “inoperable,” though reports differ on the extent of the damage. 

The president told Levin that the U.S. Air Force pilots who conducted the strikes told him that they and their predecessors had been practicing the flight to Iranian airspace for 22 years.

Trump lauded his peacemaking abilities, saying, “I’ve settled six wars and we did the Iran night, wiped out their whole nuclear capability, which they would have used against Israel in two seconds if they had the chance.”

He called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a “war hero” and said, “I guess I am, too. … I mean, I sent those planes.”

When Fox News anchor Bret Baier scored a primetime interview with Vice President J.D. Vance for Monday evening, he likely hoped that Vance would have news to share with him. Instead, Baier was the one to break the news to Vance that President Donald Trump had brokered a ceasefire deal between Israel and Iran, which Trump announced in a post on Truth Social moments before Vance went on air. 

“That’s good news that the president was able to get that across the finish line,” Vance told Baier, noting that he was aware those conversations were happening as he left the White House to head to the Fox News studio.  

“I knew that he was working the phones as I was on the way over here, so I knew exactly what we were going to do,” Vance said on “Special Report,” after acknowledging that the statement Trump posted on Truth Social was different from a draft that Vance had viewed hours earlier. 

“And look, I love that about this presidency and this administration, because he’s always working. He doesn’t say, you know, ‘The vice president’s going to do an interview, so I’m going to stop doing anything.’ He says, you know, ‘We’re going to do the American people’s business.’” 

Trump said on Monday night that Israel and Iran had agreed to bring what he called the “12 day war” to an end, with the promise that both sides “will remain PEACEFUL and RESPECTFUL.” He did not say if there would be any binding promises on either side. 

Before Iran fired missiles at an American military base in Qatar on Monday, Iran telegraphed to the U.S. that it planned to attack in a symbolic measure. That message was delivered through an intermediary, but Vance said the U.S. would welcome direct dialogue with Iran “about how we move this thing forward.” 

Vance has advocated for a more restrained approach to U.S. intervention abroad, including with respect to Iran. But on Fox News, he telegraphed his support for Trump’s actions, which he said “obliterated the Iranian nuclear program.” 

“The president has been very clear, and I’ve always agreed with the president, that Iran can’t have a nuclear weapon,” said Vance. “You try to run the diplomatic process as much as you possibly can. When the president decided that wasn’t going to work, he took the action that he had to take. Now we’re in a new phase. That action was successful.”

Vance deflected when asked if he knew where all of Iran’s highly enriched uranium was located, amid reports that the Iranians had removed a large quantity of uranium enriched to 60% from the underground Fordow site ahead of the U.S. strikes on the compound this weekend.

“I think that’s actually not the question before us. The question before us is, Can Iran enrich the uranium to a weapons-grade level, and can they convert that fuel to a nuclear weapon?” Vance responded. “We know that they cannot build a nuclear weapon.”

He reiterated that the U.S. “destroyed” their “ability to enrich uranium,” calling it a “mission success” in Trump’s goal to stop Iran from building a nuclear weapon. Vance warned that the U.S. military stands in the way of Iran following through on its goal of building a nuclear weapon.

“If Iran is desperate to build a nuclear weapon in the future, then they’re going to have to deal with a very, very powerful American military,” said Vance.

Vance said that the U.S. military’s mission is not regime change, and that Trump’s Sunday post expressing support for regime change was a message to the Iranian people to make a choice about it, which is “between the Iranian people and the regime.” 

“What the president is saying very clearly, Bret, is, if the Iranian people want to do something about their own leadership, that’s up to the Iranian people. What the American national security interest is here is very simple: It’s to destroy the nuclear program. That’s what we’ve done, and now that the 12-day war appears to be effectively over, we have an opportunity, I think, to restart a real peace process,” said Vance.

President Donald Trump told Fox News anchor Bret Baier on Thursday evening that the United States will defend Israel if Iran retaliates following Israel’s strikes on Iranian nuclear and military targets, and that he still intends to resume nuclear negotiations with Tehran.

“Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb and we are hoping to get back to the negotiating table. We will see. There are several people in leadership that will not be coming back,” Trump said, according to Fox News. U.S. officials are still aiming to continue with nuclear talks in Oman on Sunday, Reuters reported.

Trump was aware of the strikes beforehand, and the administration informed “at least one key Middle Eastern ally” that the strikes were happening, Fox News reported, but did not participate, as previously stated by Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

The president told Fox that U.S. Central Command is on high alert for Iranian retaliatory attacks, and will take action to defend both itself and Israel if Iran retaliates. Rubio, in his initial statement on the attack, had not made explicit whether the U.S. would step in to protect Israel as it had in response to previous ballistic missile barrages targeting Israel in April and October of 2024.

He said the U.S. has also replenished Israel’s stocks of Iron Dome interceptors in recent weeks.

A Jordanian government spokesperson said in a statement that it “has not and will not allow any violation of our airspace or serve as a battleground for conflict,” a potential signal that it will also participate in efforts to intercept potential Iranian attacks, as it did last April.

For Fox News host Dana Perino, supporting Israel has been a given since the early days of her career, when she visited the Jewish state multiple times with President George W. Bush as his press secretary. Perino, who first arrived at the White House while the nation was reeling from the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, worked alongside Bush, initially as his deputy press secretary, throughout the early years of the war on terror. 

Two decades later, as co-anchor of Fox’s “America’s Newsroom,” Perino finds herself frequently drawing on those experiences, especially in the past year and a half as she’s reported on the aftermath of another crisis — Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attacks in Israel, the ensuing war in Gaza and record-breaking levels of antisemitism in the U.S.   

“Once you learn those issues, they are ingrained in you,” Perino told Jewish Insider, referring to the threats Jews face, in Israel and around the world. “Plus, if you care about doing the right thing — and an additional plus is working for a place that encourages you to do the right thing, that news comes first. To me, it was an obligation and an honor to tell the story the way it needed to be told: bluntly with really engaging guests that did not gloss over the complexities of the situation, but that [are] very honest about drawing a line between right and wrong.” 

The sentiment has increasingly caught the eye of liberal-leaning American Jews who believe that much of the mainstream media’s coverage is unfairly hostile to Israel. Weeks after Oct. 7, Fox Corp.’s CEO, Lachlan Murdoch, told shareholders at the annual meeting that the network must “stand-up” to antisemitism. 

It was then that even some staunchly liberal Jews found refuge in Fox’s coverage, which by the end of October 2023 had debuted a newsletter — and running section on its website — called “Antisemitism Exposed.” 

Fox has also garnered attention for its Middle East coverage, with Tel Aviv-based chief foreign correspondent Trey Yingst leading the network’s coverage of the Israel-Hamas war. Yingst, who was the first reporter from a major American network on the scene on Oct. 7, 2023, following Hamas’ terrorist attack in southern Israel, detailed his firsthand account of the attacks and experience on the ground in Gaza in “Black Saturday,” his book published last fall.

Even as Fox has long been the leading news source for conservatives, ratings data from liberal-leaning major metropolitan areas show a spike in viewership that surpasses its rivals and has remained consistent since October 2023. (There is no publicly available data on the religious affiliation of the cable news viewing audience.) 

According to Nielsen Ratings, between Oct. 8, 2023, and April 14, 2025, Fox News Channel viewership increased among its target demographic of 25-54 year-olds by 46% in L.A., 42% in New York, and 62% in Philadelphia. Comparatively, in those same cities, CNN viewership increased by 1%, 8% and 19%, respectively. MSNBC viewership declined by 8% in New York over the same period. 

Fox News commentator and “The Five” co-host Jessica Tarlov, who is Jewish and one of the network’s liberal commentators, told JI she frequently hears from like-minded Jewish friends and peers in New York City that they’re increasingly watching Fox.  

“A bunch of friends who are all Democratic voters, not part of the cohort who even switched over to voting for Trump on the issue of Israel in the 2024 election — I hear quite regularly people say they are making a choice to consume content that reflects the world they see — which is that there was a massive terrorist attack against the Israeli people and that’s the most important component of this and Hamas is the one that is regularly breaking these ceasefires,” Tarlov said. 

“They are feeling underrepresented, and sometimes completely unrepresented, in some of the left-leaning coverage [at other networks]. They have found a home at Fox and are enjoying the rest of the coverage that we do on top of that.” 

Reporting on college campus protests was “a huge lightning-bolt issue” on the topic of antisemitism, Tarlov said. But as university protests fizzle out in 2025 and other global and domestic events are taking attention away from the war in Gaza, Fox News has remained focused on the issue.  

Earlier this month, its subscription service, Fox Nation, premiered “Rebound: A Year of Triumph and Tragedy at Yeshiva University Basketball,” a documentary that tells the story of YU’s basketball team’s challenges and successes in the wake of Oct. 7. 

Perino said she’s made it a personal and professional goal to “never forget every day that there are hostages being held [in Gaza]. The story is not over.” 

And it appears that more Jewish viewers are taking note of it these days — including in Israel, where an IDF soldier who accompanied Fox’s leadership on a visit to the Jerusalem bureau last year asked for a message to be delivered to “The Five” co-hosts in New York. “We love you all very much,” the soldier said in a video message. “Thanks for supporting Israel. This is a blessing from the IDF. Please come and visit us anytime. It is safe here. And when you come, you’re always welcome to each and every home.”

Pete Hegseth, the veteran and Fox News personality turned President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to be secretary of defense, testified at his Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday that his Christian faith dictates his commitment to supporting Israel and that he wants to see the U.S. ally kill “every last member of Hamas.”

The hearing provided few more specific details, however, on how the likely next secretary of defense plans to approach the ongoing conflicts in the Middle East, which have seen U.S. troops under fire from and engaged in active strikes on Iranian proxies, or the prospect of more direct conflict between the U.S. and Iran.

After Hegseth was interrupted by several protesters affiliated with the radical group Code Pink, who called him a misogynist and a Christian Zionist while he delivered his opening statement before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) asked Hegseth to share where he stands on the Jewish state.

“I’m not really sure why that is a bad thing,” Cotton said. “I’m a Christian, I’m a Zionist. Zionism is that the Jewish people deserve a homeland in the ancient holy land where they lived since the dawn of history. Do you consider yourself a Christian Zionist?”

“I am a Christian and I robustly support the State of Israel and its existential defense and the way America comes alongside them as their great ally,” Hegseth replied.

Cotton went on to ask if Hegseth supports Israel in its war to eliminate Hamas. Hegseth replied: “I do. I support Israel in destroying and killing every last member of Hamas.”

"I support Israel in destroying and killing every last member of Hamas.”

Watch more of @SenTomCotton's exchange with @PeteHegseth below and read our full story from @marcrod97 and @emilyfjacobs on his confirmation hearing to be secretary of defense here: https://t.co/b9cuVW4v4R pic.twitter.com/k8EHicax6j

— Jewish Insider (@J_Insider) January 15, 2025

Hegseth also said earlier in the hearing that, in order to properly counter China, the U.S. military will need to focus on “reorienting away from entanglement in the Middle East and reorienting the behemoth that is the Pentagon toward new priorities, specifically the Indo-Pacific.”

He said the Biden administration has failed to sufficiently execute on that goal, which successive administrations said was their priority. “We’re going to start by ensuring the institution understands that, as far as threats abroad, the CCP is front and center, and obviously defending our homeland as well,” Hegseth continued.

Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL), as the hearing was ongoing, expressed confidence to reporters that Hegseth would be confirmed.

“He’s doing a great job,” Scott said. “He’s going to be confirmed as the next secretary of defense and he’s going to do a great job.”

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA), once the most prominent Hegseth skeptic on the GOP side, said after the hearing that she was satisfied with his responses and plans to support him. Ernst’s announcement will likely help lock in the support of other Senate Republicans as well.

Hegseth had to navigate choppy political waters under questioning from Democrats on the panel, being pressed on allegations of alcohol abuse, sexual misconduct, financial mismanagement and general inexperience and lack of qualifications for the job. Democrats also challenged him on past comments opposing women in military service; his opposition to diversity programs; his support for pardons for convicted war criminals such as Clint Lorrance, a former Army lieutenant convicted of killing two Afghan civilians; and his claims that the Biden administration had politicized the military.

Several Republicans dedicated their questioning to pushing back on these accusations, leaving the hearing overall light on the specifics of Hegseth’s plans for the Department of Defense or strategic approach to the various conflicts the U.S. faces around the globe.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), who focused her questioning on Hegseth’s past comments opposing women taking combat roles in the military, told reporters afterward that she was frustrated she had not been able to ask Hegseth about issues like Iran, Russia and China and other global threats, noting that he had not met privately with rank-and-file Senate Democrats.

Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-MS) suggested in his opening statement that one of Hegseth’s strengths is his skill as a “top-shelf communicator,” and that Hegseth would be focused on “strategic-level priorities” while he should have “exceptional subordinates who will run the day-to-day affairs” of directing the U.S. military.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), who focused his questioning on Hegseth’s qualifications and allegations of financial mismanagement at veterans’ charities he ran, told reporters, “I think he would be a good communicator, I support his service as spokesperson for the Pentagon, but not as the manager for 3.4 million Americans putting their lives on the line, who deserve someone who will make life-and-death decisions with the kind of experience and expertise that is necessary to protect our nation.”

Blumenthal also alleged that the FBI background check into Hegseth was insufficiently rigorous.

Hegseth also expressed strong opposition during the hearing to counter-extremism programs implemented during the Biden administration, driven by concerns about potential white supremacist and neo-Nazi radicalization and recruitment in military ranks.

The nominee described concerns about right-wing extremism in the armed forces as “a made-up boogeyman,” and accused “leftist leadership” of extremism.

The Anti-Defamation League had supported those programs — which Republicans have said over-played the nature of the threat and sowed division among service members.

Responding to the criticism of Hegseth for being unfaithful to his wife and abusing alcohol, Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) accused his Democratic colleagues of hypocrisy, pointing out that senators on both sides of the aisle had been drunk at evening votes at the Capitol and had cheated on their wives. 

“I think it’s so hypocritical of senators, especially on the other side, to be talking about his qualifications, and yet your qualifications aren’t any better,” Mullin said. “You guys make sure you make a big show and point out the hypocrisy because a man’s made a mistake, and you want to sit there and say that he’s not qualified. Give me a joke. It is so ridiculous that you guys hold yourself as this higher standard. You forget you got a big plank in your eye.”

Former Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN), who chairs the Republican Jewish Coalition, was one of two witnesses who introduced Hegseth at the hearing, alongside incoming National Security Advisor Rep. Mike Waltz (R-FL).

Tucker Carlson, the former Fox News host and right-wing media personality, suggested on Monday that the U.S. had lost its “moral authority” because it has refused to call for a cease-fire in the war between Israel and Hamas.

“If you see a nation with awesome power abetting war for its own sake, you have a leadership that has no moral authority, that is illegitimate,” Carlson said at the World Governments Summit in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, where he was participating in a discussion on the future of “storytelling.”

The answer came in response to a question asking him to assess why the U.S. had vetoed a U.N. resolution calling for an immediate cease-fire in Gaza.  

“It’s something that I try to express, and I’m often called a traitor for saying that. It’s the opposite,” Carlson added to applause. “I say that because I believe in the United States. I think it has been a morally superior country, and if we allow our leaders to use our power to spread destruction for its own sake, that is shameful.”

Carlson used a family-related analogy to illustrate his point. “The United States is for this moment the most powerful country in the history of the world,” he told the crowd, “so if you were to frame this in terms we’re all familiar with, which are the most basic terms, the terms of the family, the United States would be Dad, it would be the father, and the father’s sacred obligation is to protect his family and to restore peace within his walls.”

“If I come home and two of my kids are fighting, what’s the first thing I do, even before I assess why they’re fighting, before I gather the facts and know what’s happening? ‘Stop the fighting,’” he continued. “So if I come home and I have two kids fighting and I say ‘Go, go, beat the crap out of him!,’ I’m evil, because I’ve violated the most basic duty of fatherhood, which is to bring peace.”

He clarified that his comments, which did not mention Hamas, were not in reference to “any specific region of conflict,” but said he was “deeply offended by” U.S. conduct abroad. 

He concluded that he was “very distressed and concerned that we are entering an era where this awesome force for good is instead being used for evil.”

His new comments underscore the extent to which Carlson is leaning into his role as one of the leading figures promoting a neo-isolationist message that is now gaining traction even among some of the most hawkish Republicans in Congress. Only 18 Republican senators — less than half of the GOP caucus — voted for legislation that would advance military aid to Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan over the weekend.

Elsewhere in the discussion on Monday, Carlson, who recently stirred controversy for interviewing President Vladimir Putin of Russia, reiterated his claim that the U.S. had provoked Russia into its war with Ukraine and said that his first visit to Moscow had been “radicalizing.”

Calling Putin “impressive” and “very capable,” Carlson, who was dismissed from Fox News last spring and now runs a media platform whose interviews run largely on X, formerly Twitter, also said that Moscow was “so much cleaner and safer and prettier, aesthetically,” than “any city in” the U.S. — an observation he described as “radicalizing, very shocking and very disturbing.” 

In another sign of how Carlson, 54, has embraced conspiratorial thinking as he cultivates an audience on the populist right, the longtime conservative  media commentator repeated a claim that the U.S. government had for years “prevented” him from arranging a sit-down with Putin by “spying on” his text messages and “leaking them to The New York Times,” which he said had “spooked the Russian government into canceling the interview.”

“My country’s intel services were working against me illegally,” he alleged, “and that enraged me.”