Last night, Tucker Carlson aired a rather stunning allegation in his monologue. He said he had been in contact with someone inside the US government who has let him know that the US government was intercepting his electronic communications.

My RedState colleague, Shipwreckedcrew, posted on the subject earlier today (REPORT: Whistleblower Told Tucker Carlson Biden Admin’s IC is Illegally Monitoring His Electronic Communications). This is the key part of the monologue:

It’s not just political protesters the government is spying on, yesterday, we heard from a whistleblower within the US government who reached out to warn us that the NSA, the National Security Agency, is monitoring our electronic communications and is planning to leak them in an attempt to take this show off the air.

…

Now, that’s a shocking claim and ordinarily would be skeptical of it. It’s illegal for the NSA to spy on American citizens. It’s a crime. It’s not a third-world country. Things like that should not happen in America. But unfortunately, they do happen, and in this case, they did happen. The whistleblower who is in a position to know repeated back to us information about a story that we are working on that could have only come directly from my texts and emails. There’s no other possible source for that information, period.

I’m sure many reacted the way Dan Bongino did, this is him describing hearing this allegation from Carlson (cued up for your convenience):

My reaction might have been similar had I not lived through the Trump administration. I remember the contortions that many of the virulently anti-Trump contributors went through, insisting that the US government would never, ever spy on a US presidential candidate or president-elect or president. They laughed at the idea of a “wiretap” because phones are wireless, har har har, stupid OrangeMan. In the end, though, we know that Trump’s allegations were correct. A fraudulent FISA warrant was obtained against Carter Page during the early stages of the campaign and was extended until well after President Trump was inaugurated. Because electronic surveillance covers not only the target, but the target’s contacts and the target’s contacts’ contacts, it is abundantly clear that President Trump and his inner circle were under surveillance by the security apparatus during the campaign, the presidential transition, and the first few months President Trump was in office. Just to show you that the security state doesn’t think this is a big deal, the lawyer who altered the CIA’s email acknowledging that Carter Page was a sometime source and lied about it to a FISA court will soon be practicing law again.

Unreal. Kevin Clinesmith may be able to begin practicing law again in DC by this August if a disciplinary board approves an agreement he entered with the DC Bar. https://t.co/zkyY0IE2x3

— Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) June 28, 2021

Before Trump, the Obama administration had carried out electronic and perhaps physical surveillance of James Rosen (Fox News), James Risen (New York Times), and Sharyl Attkisson (CBS).

So I believe Carlson because his story is plausible, it has happened to others, and he has nothing to gain and a lot to lose if he is lying. What has really convinced me that Carlson is correct and that a lot of other people know he’s correct is what some personalities are saying. Here is Brian Stelter’s sockpuppet, Oliver “Fuzzy Baby Tater” Darcy.

I guess the explosive claim that the NSA is spying on @TuckerCarlson so that it can leak his communications in a bid to kick him off the air — which Carlson says he CONFIRMED — is not big enough of a story for @BretBaier to kick off his show. That or Baier doesn’t believe him. 🤔

— Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) June 29, 2021

"Carlson knows enough to choose his story lines carefully: As far-fetched as the NSA snooping story may be, it’ll be hard for anyone to prove it wrong. And that’s all the breathing room he needs.” https://t.co/1n8aPuYG8m

— Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) June 29, 2021

Fox’s top host actually claimed the NSA is spying on him in an attempt to kick him off the air and Fox execs @Suzannescott & @jayawallace have not released any statement. Do they not believe him? If they do, why aren't they condemning the abuse of power? https://t.co/FtDBKY4vyO

— Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) June 29, 2021

Compare how Fox is ignoring Tucker’s claim to how the network responded years ago to the leak probe involving then-Fox reporter James Rosen. In the latter case, the network released this strong statement. https://t.co/gWYAOcK2Y3 pic.twitter.com/bfRpDJzvuR

— Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) June 29, 2021

Here we have the Tater, himself echoing a guy who has literally been wrong about just about everything for five years.

Fox News contributor says Fox News host is full of… https://t.co/twPrr1KRJp

— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) June 29, 2021

And no post on duplicity would be complete without at least one alumnus of the North American Man-Boy Lincoln Association weighing in.

Tucker's not blowing a whistle. He's a gibbering, conspiracy-whoring choad.

— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) June 29, 2021

Tucker's fauxrage over the idea the NSA is monitoring his show to take him off the air is one stop short of his dog telling him to murder people.

— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) June 29, 2021

I'm solo tonight, y'all. No adult supervision.

Plan accordingly. https://t.co/kuagqTJYih

— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) June 29, 2021

Oh, dear.

If Carlson is not telling the truth, he’s successfully done to himself what the Biden administration can’t do; that is, marginalize him. History, though, tells us that given Carlson’s high profile in making Biden and his posse look ridiculous on any number of subjects, the odds are that he is telling the truth. This is not new; this was part of Obama’s playbook. If the Intelligence Community undertook surveillance of an incoming president based on false pretenses who they knew to be hostile to them, only idiots would claim that the same Intelligence Community that is politically aligned with the current president would not break the law to try to damage a political opponent of that president…particularly if that opponent were literally the only person in the media doing damage to the current person holding the office of president.