The Iowa Family Leadership Summit is happening now and through the weekend, and one of the highlights has been former Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s interviews in a town hall setting with many of the GOP presidential candidates for 2024.

Maybe simply calling them interviews is incorrect, especially with the performances by some of the candidates in their sit downs (Mike Pence and Asa Hutchinson); they have been more savage takedowns by Carlson. It would be fair to say that the commentator has helped—with his pinpoint aim of questions and follow-up questions—to end one, possibly two, Republican presidential campaigns already today. And Friday isn’t over yet.

Another candidate who spoke with Tucker was Senator Tim Scott (R-SC). Let’s look in on what the two men talked about.

Tucker asks Sen. Scott about what he would do as president about the millions of illegals who are already in the country. His answer is the laundry list of solutions you’ll here from every Republican candidate. But oddly, as Scott begins to answer the question, he stands up and paces the stage, like it’s one of his rallies (which it isn’t; it’s an interview/town hall):

Tucker Carlson holds Tim Scott's feet to the fire on deporting illegals who are already here as well as cracking down on Mexico for killing far more Americans (hundreds of thousands via fentanyl) than Russia (zero). Absolute master class interviewing on display. 🔥 pic.twitter.com/hTih17MxRj

— Scott Morefield (@SKMorefield) July 14, 2023

This video provides a great example of Tucker switching gears in an instant—something that you’re not going to see from most network anchors or debate moderators. It comes about three minutes into the video above, during what you have to guess is Scott’s stump speech on fixing immigration. Stopping Scott in mid-sentence (in a polite way, mind you), Tucker asks him about why, if Mexico has allowed fentanyl to kill thousand of Americans, it isn’t, unlike Russia, considered our enemy:

TUCKER: "The total body count from Russia in the United States is right around zero… I know people personally who have been killed by Mexico. The government of Mexico allows fentanyl to be made in its country… why is Mexico less of a threat than Russia?" @DailyCaller pic.twitter.com/YpVQqF1qO4

— Dylan Housman (@Dylan_Housman) July 14, 2023

Carlson asks him:

All measures are relative. Russia’s bad. Putin’s evil. Got it. I don’t know anyone who’s been killed by Russia. I know people personally who have been killed by Mexico. The government of Mexico allows fentanyl to come over our border. The Mexican government is party to the murder of hundreds of thousands of Americans. Why is Mexico less of a threat than Russia?

Scott has a pretty good reply for this. He says he’s sponsored legislation (which he would sign as president) that would penalize the violent cartels that are running the system pouring the lethal drugs across our southern border. He also answers in the affirmative, when the host presses him on if he would also want to penalize the Mexican government for its inaction.

Tucker then focuses in on the one of most current stories involving Russia and the Biden Administration, and asks Sen. Scott about Biden approving sending cluster bombs to Ukraine:

Tucker presses Tim Scott on whether or not he supports sending cluster bombs to Ukraine. pic.twitter.com/3EAoNjbU5M

— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) July 14, 2023

Scott falls down here. He tries to filibuster and hedge, saying that under his administration, they wouldn’t have to send Ukraine cluster bombs. Tucker won’t let him get away with a non answer like that, pressing him on whether he thought it was right for Biden to do it. Scott refused to say that was incorrect. It would have been an easy lay up, along with saying what he said in his filibuster: that he would make sure the defense budget was sufficient enough to cover supplying the war needs.

Then there was this, with Tucker digging in on a granular level with Sen. Scott about the Ukraine and Russia war, making a comparison to Afghanistan while demanding to know when the U.S. will consider that a goal has been reached there:

Tucker grills Tim Scott on Ukraine conflict: "Why not force a peace? They are a client state of the United States. Without American backing, there's kind of no Ukraine. We're literally paying the salaries of their bureaucrats." pic.twitter.com/HbuwQztK9j

— TheBlaze (@theblaze) July 14, 2023

In his answer (about one minute into the clip), Scott lays out what victory in Ukraine would look like. Again, he chooses to stand up and mill about, before giving his answer:

The objective for Zelensky and Ukraine to achieve victory by maintaining as much of their territory as they possibly can.

Then, seeing the resources that we’ve deployed—along with our Western alliances—achieving the peace that, I think, comes when these two folks sit down and have a conversation that allows them to determine where those lines will be drawn for the next 100 years.

What’s the verdict on this candidate’s interview with one of the sharpest interviewers we have? Not a complete failure of an appearance here by Scott, but something of a mixed bag. Time will tell if he did enough to satisfy Iowa conservative voters—and conservatives across the nation. Also, whoever told him to walk around the stage like it’s a speech needs a talking to. Just sit there and answer the questions. Why is that so hard for a candidate to do?