From what I could tell, Putin was telling the truth.
From the promises broken about nato not expanding, to the minsk agreements.
The Minsk agreements were a series of international agreements which sought to end the Donbas war fought between armed Russian separatist groups and Armed Forces of Ukraine, with Russian regular forces playing a central part.
To the continued fighting/hostility towards Donbas – and the need to protect the people.
To people behind the scenes controlling the west. Even thought the USA is a Republic, it acts more like a Corporatocracy, with the deep state (whom might also be influenced by such groups as the illuminati, wef, members of the Bohemian Grove, Bilderberg Group, skull & bones, etc.)
With politicians changing views once a lobbyist makes their case (and gifts/donations).
Talk about pipelines, to a shifting world (brics being an example).
Most of what Putin said was reported in the news a long time ago, but was buried as it did not fit the agenda/narrative of the west.
As a non-american/non-russian, based on facts and disinformation and omitting of facts by others, if asked whom do I believe was more truthful and what lead to the conflict and why there has been no peace yet, between biden and putin points, I would have to easily say I agree more so with putin.
If asked who loves his nation, his people, his heritage, his culture more, who serves his nation in the nation’s best interest… putin.
And then seeing the biden embarrassment afterwards, and biden saying he won’t be criminally charged (since one: no prosecutor wants to be clintoned, two: no jury will be wanting to convict a dementia patient). And the wh hoping people will be too distracted by biden than to be talking about the points brought up by putin, did not work as they had planned.
Yes, you could tell putin was well prepared for what he wanted to talk about, and was ready for carlson.
While I too agree that carlson had to tone down the type of questions he was gonna ask, the fact that he did travel to moscow and was able to interject without putin getting visible upset (as putin knew such things were gonna happen from western media personal), you have to give carlson credit for. Any other western media interviewer would have constantly interrupted, trying to get under the skin of the person they were interviewing, and pushing their talking points into the interview. To make themselves and their own views the reason for the interview, and not that of the person being interviewed. Carlson allowed putin to have his say, his point of view heard, to be known for everyone to see.
Did putin use carlson? Yes.
Did carlson use putin? Yes.
Both got something out of it, and we got alot out of it we would never have been able to get to see/hear otherwise.
Open dialogue and getting to know the other sides views is part of the process of making peace, and long standing peace.
.
