Idaho | Larry Craig | News | Tucker Carlson

MSNBC Re-Airs Abrams/Carlson Clip Without Assault Story

MSNBC yesterday re-aired the Dan Abrams/ Tucker Carlson/Joe Scarborough clip yesterday, without the footage about Tucker Carlson returning to a public restroom to assault a man who had "bothered" him. I've published the original clip here once again.

Via Media Matters:

"On August 29, MSNBC twice re-aired a segment from the August 28 edition of Live with Dan Abrams, in which MSNBC host Tucker Carlson asserted, 'Having sex in a public men's room is outrageous. It's also really common. I've been bothered in men's rooms.' Carlson continued, 'I got bothered in Georgetown Park,' in Washington, D.C., 'when I was in high school.' As Media Matters for America noted, when Abrams asked how Carlson responded to being 'bothered,' Carlson said: 'I went back with someone I knew and grabbed the guy by the -- you know, and grabbed him, and ... hit him against the stall with his head, actually.' However, while both August 29 re-airings did include Carlson's claim that he had been 'bothered in men's rooms,' neither broadcast aired the portion in which Carlson claimed that he 'went back with someone' and 'hit him against the stall with his head.' Both re-airings did include a portion of the segment in which Carlson asserted, 'I'm not anti-gay in the slightest.'"

GLAAD got in on the action late yesterday calling on "Tucker Carlson, NBC News and MSNBC to apologize for remarks made on Tuesday night that appear to condone violent assault." GLSEN issued a statement condemning the remarks as well.

As you may know, yesterday Carlson changed his story dramatically in light of reaction to his remarks.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. How exactly did he "change his story dramatically"? He clarified what he meant by "bothered" -- i.e., that he was physically assaulted.

    Whether or not you believe this clarification is one thing, but its certainly not a dramatic change in his story.

    Posted by: Darb | Aug 30, 2007 10:00:34 AM


  2. Darb, he changed his story in that his clarification does not mention that he smashed the guy's head against the stall wall. He now says that he and his friend only held the guy down until a security guard came. That's a dramatic change.

    Posted by: Patrick | Aug 30, 2007 10:40:11 AM


  3. Tucker Carlson claims the man "grabbed" him.

    This is odd. It seems like an action a person unfamiliar with toilet trolls would THINK goes on, but in reality those that frequent public restrooms for sex aren't going to actually GRAB a person. That, my friends, is rape. We're not talking about men with low self-esteem going to rest stops & park bathrooms to find other like-minded individuals for some consensual sex in a very inappropriate environment.

    Is Tucker Carlson telling the truth? Did a man really GRAB him? How did he grab him? By the shoulders? By the dick? By his luxurious hair?

    I'm not sure that this story isn't just one of Tucker's fevered dreams he wakes up from in a cold sweat with a raging hard-on.

    Posted by: Big Liar | Aug 30, 2007 10:55:41 AM


  4. Just a reminder - here's Tucker's claim that he was GRABBED.

    ********************
    Tucker Carlson sent a statement to Media Matters this afternoon through an MSNBC spokeswoman, revising the story:

    "Let me be clear about an incident I referred to on MSNBC last night: In the mid-1980s, while I was a high school student, a man physically grabbed me in a men's room in Washington, DC. I yelled, pulled away from him and ran out of the room. Twenty-five minutes later, a friend of mine and I returned to the men's room. The man was still there, presumably waiting to do to someone else what he had done to me. My friend and I seized the man and held him until a security guard arrived. Several bloggers have characterized this is a sort of gay bashing. That's absurd, and an insult to anybody who has fought back against an unsolicited sexual attack. I wasn't angry with the man because he was gay. I was angry because he assaulted me."

    Posted by: Big Liar | Aug 30, 2007 10:57:43 AM


  5. Who wouldn't fight back when someone else sexually assaults them in a public restroom? That's what it is, sexual assault. If someone is standing at the urinal peeing, then some guy starts diddling himself, staring at you and showing you his stuff, that IS sexual assault. And I won't say I wouldn't smash him in the head either.
    Tucker's fault wasn't that he hit the guy against the stall wall, it's that he went BACK to look for the guy with a friend and THEN attack him back, which is assault. What he should have done was quickly zip up, walk away and go to the police or nearest authority figure (Tucker was in High School, after all) and point the guy out, resulting in arrest, or if he was in High School, expulsion.

    Posted by: jeffreychrist | Aug 30, 2007 11:04:10 AM


  6. Thanx for the post, Big Liar - now I see that Tucker did do the right thing (if he's telling the truth). And that's better than what I would have done - if some perv grabbed me in the restroom, I WOULD have smashed his head right then and there.

    Posted by: jeffreychrist | Aug 30, 2007 11:09:56 AM


  7. Patrick,

    You're right that in his restatement he gave more info about what he meant by "bothered" and less information about his reaction (i.e., "seized" the guy as opposed to "banged his head").

    It's spin, for sure, but not a "dramatic change" in my opinion.

    I honestly think the bigger culprit is Abrahms for giggling at the violence. Regardless of what happened, its not funny.

    Posted by: darb | Aug 30, 2007 12:10:06 PM


  8. It IS a dramatic change to change:

    - from "bothered" to "grabbed"
    - from "hit him against the stall with his head" to "seized the man and held him"
    - from "police" to "security guard"

    And JEFFREYCHRIST, if the mere sight of a man diddling himself while staring at you drives you to "smash him in the head" then you might want to seek some counseling for your anger and insecurity.

    Posted by: Gregg | Aug 30, 2007 1:38:25 PM


  9. Let's not forget that for the original version (which I saw unedited on a TV in the Cleveland airport), with Carlson saying that he was bothered, not grabbed, and that he smashed the guy's head against the wall, not held him down-- Dan Abrams and Joe Scarborough laughed. Neither of them asked if this were an overreaction- they thought it was pretty fucking funny.
    As sleazy as toilet trolls are, how exactly is this funny without the clarification that Carlson was physically (rather than just visually or verbally) assulted? I'd punch a guy who grabbed me in the toilet, but that's not the story that Carlson told.

    So I'm not surprised that Scarborough would laugh at the idea of a queer getting his head bashed, but I didn't realize Abrams was like that.

    Posted by: shesthemimi | Aug 30, 2007 1:59:07 PM


  10. I also meant to point out that Carlson needed to bring a friend with him before he started bashing heads. Of course little cunts like him only act tough in a group.

    Posted by: shesthemimi | Aug 30, 2007 2:12:24 PM


  11. Amazing. Guys who read towleroad feel compelled to physically assault men who publically jack off at the next urinal just like Tucker C.! What's the matter with - imagine THIS - looking away, or backing away, saying 'not interested,' or (old standby,) "take off, dude." The idea that this ANGERS guys so much kills me. Like someone hitting on you is such a big deal. Think of what women deal with! Also Tucker's story sounds like bullshit. Abrahms and Scarborough giggling hysterically is pretty emabarassing too.
    Couldn't just leave it at villifying Craig and Vitter and Foley
    and Haggert and Hastert and Rove for not just being an OUT
    Republican...

    Posted by: knowles | Aug 30, 2007 2:23:10 PM


  12. Knowles...could you explain to me why, whenever someone doesn't accept gay men randomly harrassing someone, some gay guys say "well what do you think women go through"...

    let me say it out loud YOU ARE NOT A WOMAN...i know deep down it might not jive with the vision of yourself as the diva that you are...but you are not...and neither is any other gay man....

    I don't know too many women who say they've experienced some dude whacking off next to her in a urinal...i wonder why.

    The point is men and women react different to similar situations...because well, men are men and women are women. if gay men want to remove the stereotype of the "female identified man", then you need to stop with these ridiculous claims.

    I gay whackin' off next to me deserves a good "ol' fashioned" beatdown. next.

    Posted by: dezi | Aug 30, 2007 3:51:49 PM


  13. why isn't anyone calling Tucker on the statement that he can't take his kids to the bathroom in the park without encountering this. This is the worse statement, he repeats the myth of homosexual pedators. Ask him which playground this occurs in and ask if he has done the decent thing and reported it to the police. Check police reports to see if he has made a complaint, also simply check police report for any playground near his home to see if his claim that this occurs is backed-upd by any objective evidence whatsoever.

    Posted by: PuddyKatz | Aug 30, 2007 4:47:07 PM


  14. wow.. i was gonna make a comment about abrams, who i always assumed was gay, chuckling along to the bashing story, but now i'm totally freaked out that commentors here seem to think that beating is the proper "manly" response to a sexual overture... holy fucking shit !! you guys need some serious self-reflection and/or counseling.

    Posted by: el polacko | Aug 30, 2007 5:37:20 PM


  15. Carlson didn't change his story dramatically. Try not being such a blatant partisan.

    Posted by: Jordan | Aug 30, 2007 5:38:32 PM


  16. Huffington Report has listed NBC/Universal and CNBC email addresses to register comments and complaints. Towleroad should too. Tucker Carlson should be removed from the air.

    Posted by: Acor255 | Aug 30, 2007 5:42:20 PM


  17. Jordan: Well we could debate the meaning of the word "dramatically". Let's say instead that he changed it sufficiently to raise serious doubts as to whether he is telling the truth.
    If he were testifying in a court of law and gave these two differing accounts his credibilty on the stand would be damaged and damaged, I would say, considerably.
    So, we are left then, with calls for objective evidence, police reports and the such. Sufficient reason to doubt I would say.

    Posted by: PuddyKatz | Aug 30, 2007 9:27:20 PM


  18. EL POLACO,
    yeah, it's ridiculous to think that beating someone up for expressing an attraction to one is ok. if this were acceptable, a number of straight women and not a few gay men would have received a "good ol' fashioned beatdown." thank goodness that most of us are not as demented as "DEZI."

    Posted by: nic | Aug 31, 2007 4:01:50 AM


  19. Poor Tucker. There he is, wienie in hand, and someone tries to "wag the dog"--against Tucker's will, of course. Just goes to show how desperate some people are for sex that they would make a pass at the Dweeb of Dweebs, Tucker Carlson, in a public restroom. The funniest bit is that Tucky had to think about it for awhile, get mad, get a friend and go back to salvage his wounded, straight-male pride by beating up the perpetrator. If Tucker was so offended, why didn't he TCB at the moment it happened? Tucker's like all those "straight" hip-hop homophobes who get all blathered about gay men. What they don't understand is that they are all a bunch of skeezes who no self-respecting gay man would touch with a ten-foot pole.

    Posted by: jamal49 | Aug 31, 2007 5:41:03 AM


  20. Nic

    i hardly think leering at some dude's cock while he's taking a piss in a urinal is "expressing an attraction" to someone...LOL...I suppose it would be ok to look over the top of a stall while you're taking a shit and say "hey, you're cute" ....well if you think that is the same thing as waiting for the guy to leave the urinal and meeting him outside to say something then I guess I really can't convince you. I guess some gays just don't have standards (and by some I mean you). tsk tsk.

    Posted by: Dezi | Sep 1, 2007 8:55:01 PM


  21. DEZI,
    i do have standards. hence, no further comment.

    Posted by: nic | Sep 1, 2007 9:35:11 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «News: Leona Helmsley, Earthquakes, Gay TV, Larry Craig« «