Fox News host Tucker Carlson attacked the Heritage Foundation on Friday night, claiming that it “no longer represents the interests of conservatives” on the issue of big tech – a claim that was met by strong push back from the Heritage Foundation.

Carlson made the remarks in a segment about “how Google, Facebook, and Twitter work in secret to impose a left-wing political agenda on this country.” Carlson cited multiple documented examples of things that big tech companies have done that clearly work against those who are conservative.

Carlson, a few minutes later, transitioned into why he thinks Congress does not act and push back against the tech companies for their bias against conservatives.

Here are the relevant remarks from Carlson where he attacks the Heritage Foundation:

Why all the inaction on these questions? Well, a big part of the problem is that conservative nonprofits here in Washington, the ones that are supposed to be looking out for you, aren’t actually looking out for you. They’re looking out for big tech. A new report from The Campaign For Accountability obtained by this show highlights how conservative organizations in D.C. have colluded with big tech to shield left-wing monopolies from any oversight at all. It’s an amazing story and it’s happening now. … In all, the Koch network quietly spent at least $10 million defending Silicon Valley companies that work to silence conservatives. The richest companies in the world being defended by a “conservative” nonprofit as they attack conservatives. Why are they doing this? As one former Koch employee recently told this show off the record, “I know for a fact they take money from social media companies to do their bidding.” And it turns out, he was right. Google has given money to at least 22 right-leaning institutions that are also funded by the Koch network. Those institutions also include the American Conservative Union, the American Enterprise Institute, the National Review Institute, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, and the Mercatus Center, we could go on. … Here’s how it works: Big tech companies silence conservatives. Conservatives’ nonprofits try to prevent the government from doing anything about it. Makes sense. Then there’s the Heritage Foundation – maybe the biggest and best funded think tank in Washington. Half the conservatives in the city have seemed to work there at one time or another. Almost 30 years ago, I did, for example. To this day, there are a lot of nice and very well-meaning people at Heritage. But, as an organization, Heritage no longer represents the interests of conservatives – at least on the question of tech. A recent paper by Heritage entitled “Free enterprise is the best remedy for online bias concerns,” defends the special privileges that Congress has given to left-wing Silicon Valley monopolies. And if conservatives don’t like it, Heritage says, well they can just start their own Google. The paper could’ve been written by tech lobbyists. In fact, it may have been written by tech lobbyists. A trade association that represents Silicon Valley called the liability exemption that Googles enjoys, “the most important law in tech.” Well, Heritage’s paper repeats that line verbatim. Word for word. Along with many other lines that the lobbyists wrote. It’s embarrassing. But heritage isn’t embarrassed. None of the so-called “conservative nonprofits” in Washington are embarrassed. They make deals with people who hate you; they secretly sell out your interests; then they beg you to tithe like it’s the medieval church, like you owe them your money. That’s the system that we’ve had for decades. And maybe that’s why, no matter how much money you send, nothing gets more conservative. Just the opposite. You wonder how much longer the system can continue?

The Heritage Foundation responded with a statement on Saturday, saying that Carlson’s segment contained “several false, outrageous, and unfounded accusations against The Heritage Foundation.”

Rob Bluey, vice president of communications at Heritage, released the following statement in response: