214

While promoting the interview on X, Carlson praised Cooper as “the best and most honest popular historian in the United States.”

Article is actually kinda thin, to be honest. But the couch-fucker gets clicks, I guess.

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] DogPeePoo@lemm.ee 33 points 1 week ago

Some people are saying these two 69 each other

[-] Assman@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 week ago

the best people

[-] karika@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

It's the only explanation for the twinkle in their eyes

[-] Tylerdurdon@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

On a couch, it's a 2 1/2-way

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 1 week ago

I read it on the internet. It must be true.

While on a couch? That’s a big fantasy of JD Vance, someone allegedly said before.

[-] superkret@feddit.org 28 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The controversial statement:

“You know, Germany, look, they put themselves into a position in, Adolf Hitler’s chiefly responsible for this, but his whole regime is responsible for it, that when they went into the east in 1941, they launched a war where they were completely unprepared to deal with the millions and millions of prisoners of war, of local political prisoners, and so forth that they were going to have to handle. They went in with no plan for that and they just threw these people into camps. And millions of people ended up dead there.”

Apart from the blatant Holocaust denial, it's interesting that he completely discards the attack on Poland and puts the start of the war in 1941 when they invaded Russia.

[-] Regrettable_incident@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

Yeah, TBF

"And millions of people ended up dead there.”

is pretty disingenuous too. They ended up dead because they were systematically murdered. Plus they mostly weren't prisoners of war, it was a targeted genocide.

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 week ago

Apparently, when they were "reunifying" German lands, it was ok. Somehow, that wasn't "conquest." I was also struck by the two years of war that didn't enter the tabulations.

[-] pyre@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

dude you can't just put these two faces so close to each other; you're gonna create a punchable black hole!

[-] funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago

both these fuckers look like they don't understand why they're shitting themselves

[-] Fedizen@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

I think every piece of history written by a confederate or a nazi should have to have that perspective in the title.

[-] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 5 points 1 week ago
[-] Zachariah@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

… fuck couches together?

[-] eatthecake@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

What is a 'popular historian' and does such a person have any credibility at all?

this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2024
214 points (98.2% liked)

politics

18852 readers
2369 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS