Kalshi deletes post claiming Tucker Carlson had 87% odds of federal charges, while its own market stood near 7%

Deleted post diverged from market pricing

Kalshi removed an X post that put the probability of Tucker Carlson facing federal criminal charges this year at 87 percent, despite historical market figures showing substantially lower odds, according to PunchUp, a Substack affiliated with The Daily Beast, as reported by news24.gigglelo.com.

Published on Friday, the post paired a photograph of the former Fox News host with a graph depicting an apparent abrupt increase in the probability. PunchUp’s review found that the odds had stayed around 8 percent for months, reached approximately 27 percent in March and stood at just 7 percent by Monday.

According to that review, Kalshi’s market on whether Carlson would face a federal criminal charge this year had remained unchanged since around March. The platform has not publicly explained the removal or the discrepancy between its promotional claim and the historical figures.

Context and unanswered questions

The March increase followed Carlson’s assertion that the CIA was preparing to refer him to the Justice Department concerning his communications with Iranian contacts. Carlson, a prominent critic of the president who has strongly opposed Trump’s war with Iran, denied wrongdoing.

PunchUp reported that the post disappeared after it alerted Carlson on Friday. Neither Carlson nor Kalshi responded to requests for comment.

Donald Trump Jr. became a Kalshi adviser in January 2025 and received equity valued at approximately $300,000 at the time. His investment firm, 1789 Capital, has also committed roughly $500 million to competing platform Polymarket.

What it means for prediction markets

• The 87 percent figure circulated on X was sharply at odds with the market history reviewed by PunchUp. A platform’s promotional post and its underlying contract pricing are distinct sources of information.
• The reported March peak of approximately 27 percent and Monday reading of 7 percent do not support the post’s portrayal of an abrupt surge to 87 percent.
• Without a public explanation from Kalshi, the cause of the discrepancy remains unresolved. The episode highlights accuracy questions surrounding promotional claims as prediction markets become more prominent in political and media coverage.