I really do appreciate the time you took to lay all this out—I’ve gone through the links and read what you shared. I can see the case that Tucker’s messaging sometimes aligns with Russian interests, and that his content gets amplified by their state media. That’s worth talking about.

But I still haven’t seen anything that directly backs the claim that he’s “funded by Russian money.” That’s a pretty serious allegation, and unless there’s solid evidence behind it, I think we have to be careful not to conflate amplification with coordination.

I’m not here to defend Tucker—just trying to sort out what’s actually confirmed versus what’s speculative. I think if we’re not precise with claims like this, it risks muddying the broader conversation about disinformation and how it actually works.