Trump Criticizes The National Review In New Truth Social Post

(Photo by ALON SKUY/AFP via Getty Images)

Nicole Silverio Media Reporter
Font Size:

Former President Donald Trump attacked the conservative editorial magazine, National Review, for opposing his third presidential candidacy in a Truth Social post on Friday.

The former president responded to a Nov. 15 piece written by the magazine’s senior editorial staff calling on the Republican Party to “reject” Trump’s potential nomination. He officially announced his third presidential bid on Tuesday at Mar-a-Lago.

“Why does anyone read The National Review? They are so negative to Conservatives and me, and are seen as being led by lightweights that couldn’t shine the shoes of Bill Buckley,” Trump wrote. “They have absolutely nothing going, it is failing fast, and my only question is, who is paying for the losses—when it loses plenty of money and serves no purpose at all. People are tired of haters—let The National Review die peacefully!”

The magazine’s editorial staff argued that there should not be a repeat of the “chaotic” Trump administration due to his “erratic nature and lack of seriousness.” It criticized the former president for consistently having staff come and go and allegedly lacking respect of the constitutional process. (RELATED: DeSantis Appears To Respond To Trump’s Attacks Ahead Of Expected Presidential Run Announcement)

“Trump had a limited understanding of our constitutional system, and at the end of the day, little respect for it. His inability to approximate the conduct that the public expects of a president undermined him from beginning to end,” the staff wrote in the piece.

The editorial team further criticized Trump for attempting to urge former Vice President Mike Pence to overturn the 2020 presidential results and for the violence that erupted at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, according to the article. They also placed blame on him for the “GOP debacle” in the 2022 midterms.

“The answer to Trump’s invitation to remain personally and politically beholden to him and his cracked obsessions for at least another two years, with all the chaos that entails and the very real possibility of another highly consequential defeat, should be a firm, unmistakable, No,” the piece read.

The National Review did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller’s request for comment.