Facing off against Trump from within MAGA, the popular journalist has been denouncing that the war against Iran is Israel's agenda, not that of the United States. "This is Israel's war, not the United States' war," he stated, while calling the possibility of dragging the country into a new military intervention in the region "repugnant and evil." Carlson's criticism caused an open break with Trump, who publicly dismissed the journalist and stated that he "is no longer part of MAGA." Carlson, who for years was one of the most influential media voices within the conservative universe and close to Trumpism, strongly questioned the military escalation against Iran. The measure broke with decades of international diplomatic policy and was celebrated by pro-Israel organizations in the United States, while generating criticism from much of the international community. This network promotes an agenda that prioritizes the security and strategic interests of Israel in the Middle East, which is reflected in the multi-million dollar military aid that Washington sends to the country each year and in the systematic diplomatic support in international organizations such as the United Nations. A significant example of this influence was the Trump administration's 2017 decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital and move the U.S. embassy there (a measure that Milei also supported). The journalist's statements come amid a growing political conflict with U.S. President Donald Trump, stemming from the war in the Middle East. The decision had immediate geopolitical consequences: it increased tensions with the Palestinian people and deepened Washington's isolation in several votes within the United Nations. Today there is no doubt that the confrontation with Iran is the influence of the Zionist lobby for years. In his public appearances, he pointed out that the conflict does not respond to the interests of American society but to the geopolitical agenda of the Israeli government. The episode not only raises questions about the use of surveillance tools against journalists, but also exposes the tensions within the U.S. political and media establishment regarding the war with Iran. The shadow of the condemnation against Assange The espionage accusation against Tucker Carlson also revived comparisons with the case of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who has been persecuted for over a decade for revealing secret documents about U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The clash reflects an increasingly visible dispute within the American conservative camp itself: on the one hand, sectors that promote an interventionist foreign policy aligned with Israel; on the other, currents linked to the "America First" discourse that reject new wars in the Middle East after decades of conflicts in the region. In this context, Carlson interprets the alleged CIA espionage as political retaliation for his stance against the war. For critical analysts, this pressure has contributed to reinforcing a foreign policy increasingly aligned with Israel's strategic priorities in the region. TUCKER CARLSON DESTROYS MILEI FOR FOCUSING ON ISRAEL'S JEWISH AGENDA INSTEAD OF ARGENTINA, WHICH IS FALLING APART 05/03/26» "Here is Milei, who is supposed to be a Catholic president of a overwhelmingly Catholic country, who was elected and was presented to the..." According to his complaint, intelligence agencies would have used his conversations with Iranian contacts—conducted before the outbreak of the conflict—to try to build a legal case against him. Different sectors of the lobby pushed in Congress for laws and resolutions aimed at toughening economic sanctions against Tehran and blocking diplomatic agreements that would limit Iran's nuclear program. Among the most mentioned organizations is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), one of the most influential lobbying groups in the U.S. Congress, which has historically promoted resolutions, sanctions, and military aid in favor of the State of Israel. According to this critical perspective, the pro-Israel lobby does not function as a single, centralized structure, but rather as a constellation of political organizations, foundations, donors, and media that influence public debate and the decisions of Congress and the White House. One of the most cited works is the book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy by John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt, which argues that there is a network of organizations, think tanks, donors, and political actors that promote a policy strongly aligned with Israel. Conservative right-wing journalist Tucker Carlson publicly denounced that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) would have accessed his private messages and is preparing an accusation to present him as a "foreign agent" due to his contacts with sources in Iran. A possible accusation that Carlson could receive. The Zionist lobby in the U.S. The "pro-Israel lobby" in U.S. foreign policy has been developed over the years by analysts. The Assange case showed to what extent the U.S. judicial and intelligence apparatus can criminalize journalistic work when it exposes strategic or military interests. According to his explanation, officials from the U.S. intelligence apparatus would have reviewed his communications with people linked to the Persian country before the start of the current military escalation. The accusation against the WikiLeaks founder was based on the Espionage Act, a World War I-era law that has been repeatedly used against leakers and journalists. For years, human rights organizations warned that the cases against Assange set a dangerous precedent for press freedom: for the first time, a journalist could be tried for publishing verified information obtained from government sources. Carlson stated that the goal would be to build a case under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), an accusation he flatly rejected: "Talking to people from other countries is literally my job as a journalist." While Carlson denounces that he could be accused of acting as a "foreign agent." In fact, several of the charges brought by the U.S. Department of Justice contemplated extremely severe penalties that, in combination, could imply decades in prison and even open the door to even more serious accusations if the interpretation of the espionage law were expanded in the context of a military conflict with the possibility of the death penalty.
