If it were some other actual journalist, sure. 

Tucker Carlson has been a propaganda mouthpiece for decades. He has been spreading white supremacist talking points for years. He's been pro-Russia for years. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/russia-ukraine-invasion-tucker-carlson-b2000386.html

>“Why is it disloyal to side with Russia but loyal to side with Ukraine? They’re both foreign countries that don’t care anything about the United States. Kind of strange. It’s all an absurd performance, but it’s all they’ve got in the end.”

This is not a man who is going over there to give Putin a fair shake to get to the bottom of things.

You're absolutely right though, he is not a traitor for an interview. He has been a traitor to decency and a traitor to the American people, long before the interview. And that is the core issue. 

Imagine thinking that Fox News is not corporate media/Tucker Carlson is not corporate media.You're not enlightened for believing in different corporate media outlets, and believing in different political leaders. 

In my experience, people who watch Fox News tend to be a lot less critical of Fox News, than people who watch other things. 

Anecdotally I know far more people who vote Democrat who are critical of Democrat politicians than I know Republicans who are critical of Republican politicians.

Sorry, this is ridiculous. Wait for the interview to drop. Watch it, then if you like, critique it. So many people are ironically saying that people who watch Tucker are brainwashed... I just have to chuckle. Please take a step back and think how honest corporate media is with you. Think about how honest your political leaders actually are with you.
No, he is not a traitor for an interview.
I have no idea how truthful this interview will be, but that is up for debate once both sides have spoken. This applies to even the most trivial arguments in life.

Where did I say Fox News wasn't corporate media? Where did I say I watch Fox news? 
Where did I every bring up 'Democrat' or 'Republican'?
This either-or type thinking is why the world has gone mad.

Sure, I'm no history buff, I'm just asking questions. I'm pretty skeptical of any news organizations or any politician these days.

But this reminded me of Norm MacDonald's joke “It says here in this history book that luckily, the good guys have won every single time. What are the odds?”

Guys, this thread has derailed into the "Tucker Carlson thread" Can we please get back to the war in Ukraine, or special military operation if that's your TC/VP POV.

I never said that you said any of these things. 

Tucker Carlson was pushing the same views as Fox News, having been one of the biggest people on the network, that's why I brought up the comparison. 
That's specifically why I said: "You're not enlightened for believing in different corporate media outlets, and believing in different political leaders." as generically as I could.

Then why aren't you skeptical of the reasons why Tucker Carlson is going there? Why is your skepticism seeming to be so one sided? This is a consistent issue that I have with these kinds of questions. They're so frequently directed one way, while pretending to be unbiased.

There are plenty of instances where the loser wrote history. For example, plenty of people believe false information about the confederacy. 

Carlson is a mouthpiece for Russia-Ukraine propaganda. It's fairly relevant.