I Called Out Tucker's Most Dishonest Move Yet And Did A Lot Of Impressions

[clears throat] People, people, what a conflation.

What a confusion.

Erika Kirk and Candace Owens do not have disagreements.

I guess technically they do, but I would say it's a lot more than a disagreement, wouldn't you? Framing anything-- Framing the situation that's been going on between Erika Kirk and Candace Owens as a disagreement is a lie, is dishonest.

That's the game he plays.

I mean, remember? Because it is a Republican conservative virtue to respectfully have disagreements, but they don't have respectful civil disagreements.

What Candace has been doing to Erika is not civil.

It is not a matter of disagreement.

I mean, technically, a rapist and their victim have a disagreement, wouldn't you say? But this is a conflation and a confusion.

"Hey, I have disagreements with Democrats and pedophiles." Are Democrats and pedophiles the same thing? "We just have disagreements." Why doesn't Tucker get in touch with Tyler Robinson? I mean, it's just disagreements.

No. No. There's an Overton window.

There's a threshold.

There are parameters to what we consider disagreements and what we consider unethical behavior.

Objectively, morally, repugnantly wrong, morally wrong behavior on the part of Candace Owens towards a grieving widow, harassing a grieving widow, making false accusations, allegations, creating false conspiracies, peddling lies, creating a false narrative about all these close friends and family being responsible or somehow, somehow culpable in Charlie Kirk's death and murder and trying to pin it on his close friends and family and his own wife as being a part of it.

That's not a disagreement, as Tucker Carlson is so dishonestly framing it.

Don't fall for this.

It's such an e- such an obvious trick and a trap.

To say that you're close and love both Erika Kirk and Candace Owens- To love the abused and their own abuser? I mean, [chuckles] you know, it's one thing to say you love Charlie Kirk and someone he was debating on campus, but not Charlie Kirk and his murderer.

These are not the same thing.

This is not in the realm of civil discourse, political or ideological disagreements.

This is about ethics.

This is about ethical behavior that we... and unethical behavior that we don't tolerate, that we judge as morally wrong.

And so to say in that kind of sentence...

I mean, how do you think Erika Kirk feels? Do you think when she sees Tucker Carlson saying she loves Erika Kirk and Candace Owens, do you think Can- Erika says, "Yeah, and I love Tucker back"? I don't think so.

I don't think someone who's been abused and harassed by an evil, vindictive person accusing her of being responsible or somehow culpable in her husband's murder, and someone who sowed doubt in her very fabric of her marriage, someone who's created doubt and created a whole whirlwind of millions and millions and millions of mommy sleuths believing somehow that Erika Kirk is suspect, I don't think she views that as a disagreement.