'OH, NO! SHE'S COMPETENT!' MSNBC Accidentally Endorses AG Pick Pam Bondi During Meltdown
Draggin' Over Dragons: Joe Rogan Shields Himself Against Joy Behar's Fiery Flames
'The Golden State Is eating Its Golden Geese' California Defaults on Loan: Businesses...
Rescue Party: The Dems’ Desperate Search for a Normal 2028 Presidential Candidate Begins
Daytime Dysfunction: 'The View' Continues to Give ABC's Lawyers MAJOR Headaches
Literally NO ONE Is Asking for This: CBS News Insists 'Some' Voters Are...
Heaven on Earth: Take a Glimpse Inside the Restored Notre Dame Cathedral
Unpopular Opinion: Rand Paul Warns Trump Against Using Military to Deport Illegals, Gets...
Donald Trump Nominates Former Florida AG Pam Bondi for Attorney General
Bob Casey Jr Finally Concedes to Dave McCormick in Pennsylvania Senate Race
This TOTALLY Did Not Happen! Climate Activist Says Hurricanes Convinced His Barber Climate...
LET THEM FIGHT: Cenk Uygur Calls Out Joy Behar and 'The View' and...
Daily Mail: We're All Gonna Die From Climate Change! (In 75 Years, That...
'You'll See Things Our Way': Jaguar DOUBLES DOWN on Cringe Ad With Vaguely...
Mayor of Dearborn, Michigan Will Have Netanyahu Arrested If He Enters the City

Ben Shapiro and Charles C.W. Cooke fire back at Jonathan Chait for smearing them as fans of 'Trump's racism'

We’re not sure where it’s written that Jonathan Chait has to remind us that he’s basically just a douchebag, but it seems to be a rule he’s determined to live by.

Advertisement

Yesterday, he decided to do it by accusing conservatives like Ben Shapiro and Charles C.W. Cooke of being big fans of “Trump’s racism”:

Chait concludes:

The conservatives could make a case for supporting Trump despite his racial politics. Instead they present his racial politics as a point in his favor. One day, after Trump is gone, they will make it out that they never liked the racism. But the stink will cling to them nevertheless.

Something stinks, all right.

Cooke understandably took offense to Chait’s smear:

In New York magazine, Jonathan Chait proposes that “Trump: Maybe,” my essay on the impending election, was in fact “National Review’s endorsement editorial,” “a proxy editorial,” “a final statement of the magazine’s assessment of the president,” and a “sub-rosa Trump endorsement.” It was not. This claim deserves a correction.

I understand that the idea of a person’s writing exactly what he thinks — rather than writing whatever his party needs him to write, minus only those positions that might threaten his job as a writer or his vested interest in charter schools — is an alien concept to Jonathan Chait. But that’s his problem, not mine. As National Review has made abundantly and unavoidably clear, the essays on the 2020 election that were featured in the last issue of the magazine represented the views of their authors alone. They were not editorials — and, indeed, they could not have been, given that they all had different conclusions. The magazine’s editorial on the question, which was published in the same issue and clearly marked, is here.

Advertisement

But as far as a correction was concerned, this was apparently the best Chait could muster:

Defending yourself from an absurd and malicious smear is not a “weird tantrum,” Jonathan. But being the tool behind the absurd and malicious smear is most definitely something to be ashamed of.

Advertisement

Did he, though?

Pepperidge Farm remembers:

Better hold your nose next time Chait comes around!

Last word to Cooke:

The substance of Chait’s essay, is, as usual, nothing more than an extended smear coupled with his usual penchant for misrepresentation and conspiracy theory. Which is another way of saying that . . . it’s an essay by Jonathan Chait.

Advertisement

We couldn’t’ve said it better ourselves.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement