Lanny Davis Challenges TNR Editor to ‘Fact Chack’

Last week The New Republic‘s Senior Editor Isaac Chotiner expressed his extreme distaste about a story on Lanny Davis, a crisis counselor and former special counsel to Bill Clinton by Washingtonian‘s Editor-at-Large Carol Joynt. On Twitter Chotiner chided Joynt for writing such a puff piece on Davis.

Joynt took Chotiner’s commentary in stride and didn’t really fight back. Chotiner told FishbowlDC: “The reason I reacted to that piece is because Davis is a figure who has represented terrible dictators.”

We sought out Davis to see what he thought. Did he think Joynt went too easy on him? Would he tell us even he did?

Much to our surprise, Davis fired back against Chotiner. Only he has a funny way of writing in that he doesn’t carefully proof his copy. At one point in a long tirade against Chotiner, he uses the phrase “fact-chaecking” or “fact chacking” whichever you prefer. He also presents an interesting challenge to Chotiner — namely to admit he has his facts wrong.

Have a look.

Courtesy of Lanny Davis:

“Isaac Chotiner cannot site a single fact that supports her being harder on me with the truth,” Davis told FishbowlDC in an email. “He obviously hasn’t read my book about the ‘swarm of bees’ of writers who write with emotion and and slime others regardless of the facts.  Rather, he cites false and distorted assertions about me because he hasn’t done his home work [sic] and/or he doesn’t care to do so to get the facts.

“So I thought Carol was accurate and didn’t repeat distortions of facts tha tI [sic] have read Chotiner loves to repeat without fact chacking,[sic].  I have challenged him to do the fact-chaecking [sic] and modify his false or misleading accusations, and he has never done so.  Instead he criticizes others who won’t repeat his falsehoods and distortions.

“So I again challenge him publicly to do fact checking about his criticisms of me and to admit that he has his facts wrong or is misleading in omitting the positive facts to convey a biased negative and misleading view.”