A public rift between conservative media titan Tucker Carlson and President Donald Trump has erupted, spotlighting a rare fracture within the MAGA movement over foreign policy, particularly regarding Israel and Iran. Once a vocal Trump ally, Carlson has turned sharply critical, accusing the president of being “complicit” in Israel’s recent attacks on Iran, a stance that clashes with Trump’s unwavering support for Israel. This feud underscores a deepening ideological divide within the Republican base—between isolationists wary of endless wars and hawks aligned with traditional pro-Israel sentiment—potentially reshaping political dynamics ahead of the 2026 midterms. .
Origins of the Feud
The relationship between Carlson and Trump has historically been symbiotic, with Carlson’s Fox News platform amplifying Trump’s agenda from 2016 to 2023, even after private texts revealed Carlson’s disdain for Trump post-2020 election. Their alliance rekindled in 2023 with a pre-recorded interview on X during the first Republican debate, showcasing mutual interests against Fox News. Carlson’s move to independent platforms like Tucker on X and the Tucker Carlson Network, alongside Trump’s second term beginning January 20, 2025, sustained their partnership—until recent Middle East developments intervened.
Carlson’s opposition to U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts, notably Iran, has long been a cornerstone of his populist rhetoric, contrasting with Trump’s first-term “maximum pressure” campaign against Tehran, including the 2020 Soleimani strike. Trump’s current push for a diplomatic deal with Iran, voiced in March 2025 calls to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, aimed to avoid military escalation. However, Israel’s strikes on Iran—acknowledged by Trump on June 13, 2025, via Truth Social as part of a plan to force a nuclear deal—triggered Carlson’s backlash.
Latest Developments
The feud escalated on June 13, 2025, when Carlson released a newsletter titled “This Could Be the Final Newsletter Before All-Out War,” blasting Trump for supporting Israel’s actions. Carlson argued that U.S. funding and weapons to Israel, which Trump boasted about on Truth Social as “the best and most lethal military equipment,” made America complicit in the strikes. He claimed Washington aided Israel’s planning, contradicting Trump’s “America First” pledge, and warned of a looming war that could split the MAGA coalition. Posts on X reflected this sentiment, with some suggesting Trump’s stance risked losing swing-state voters opposed to new conflicts.
Trump hits back at Tucker Carlson for accusing him of abandoning ‘America First’ by supporting Israel: ‘I decide’ https://t.co/AYYQTWQZft pic.twitter.com/3FA529LJWi
— New York Post (@nypost) June 15, 2025
Trump responded swiftly on June 14, 2025, with a Truth Social post slapping back at Carlson, asserting, “I’m the one that decides that,” defending his Israel policy as strategic and dismissing Carlson’s critique. He emphasized his administration’s role in averting war, aligning with Special Envoy Steve Witkoff’s May 2025 peace efforts, which Carlson had previously praised. The exchange drew public attention, with Carlson’s allies like Jack Posobiec warning on X that a strike on Iran could cost Republicans the midterms, while others, like Charlie Kirk, noted foreign policy as the right’s biggest divide.
The tension traces back to May 2025, when Witkoff’s criticism of “neocon” war advocates, including radio host Mark Levin, sparked Carlson’s defense. Levin, a Trump ally, accused Witkoff of anti-Semitism, escalating the dispute. Carlson’s June 10 interview with Dave Smith further criticized Levin’s hawkish stance, urging Trump to reject regime-change advocates, a position echoed by Vice President J.D. Vance and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. Trump’s June 13 admission of prior knowledge about the Israel strikes fueled Carlson’s narrative of betrayal, deepening the rift.
A Test of Principles
This feud highlights a healthy debate within conservatism about America’s global role. Carlson’s isolationism resonates with voters tired of overseas entanglements, reflecting a 2024 shift where 55% of Republicans opposed new wars, per May 2025 polls. His critique of Trump’s Israel stance aligns with a pragmatic skepticism of foreign aid—$3.8 billion annually to Israel—seen as diverting resources from domestic priorities like border security and infrastructure, key GOP issues.
Yet, Trump’s pro-Israel position taps into a longstanding conservative base, with 65% of evangelicals supporting the alliance, a critical voting bloc. His defense of the strikes as a diplomatic lever to force Iran’s compliance fits a realist approach, avoiding the neoconservative overreach Carlson decries. The feud risks alienating swing voters in states like Pennsylvania and Michigan, where 40% oppose Middle East involvement, but Trump’s 52% approval among Republicans (June 2025) suggests his base remains intact.
Implications for 2026
With Republicans defending a 220-215 House majority and 20 Senate seats, this rift could weaken party unity. Carlson’s influence—his Tucker Carlson Network draws 2 million daily viewers—could sway grassroots opinion, especially if he amplifies anti-war sentiment in toss-up districts. Trump’s retort reinforces his control over the GOP, but alienating Carlson’s audience might depress turnout among younger conservatives (18–29, 25% MAGA-leaning).
Democrats, leading by 7 points in generic ballots, may exploit this division, framing Republicans as fractured on foreign policy. The DNC’s recent turmoil, including David Hogg’s exit, leaves them vulnerable, but a unified GOP message is crucial. The feud’s resolution—whether through reconciliation or escalation—will shape campaign narratives, with Trump likely prioritizing his 2028 legacy over short-term discord.
What’s next?
The current feud between Tucker Carlson and Donald Trump, ignited by Israel’s Iran strikes and peaking with Carlson’s June 13 newsletter and Trump’s June 14 rebuttal, exposes a fault line in the MAGA movement over war and alliances. It’s a clash of principled isolationism against pragmatic support for Israel, testing conservative cohesion. As the 2026 midterms approach, this drama could either galvanize or fracture the GOP base, with Trump’s leadership and Carlson’s platform holding the balance. The outcome will hinge on whether they mend fences or let ideology drive a deeper split.