Honest question: what was Jake Tapper of CNN smoking early this morning? Because if he wasn’t smoking something, then the man needs help.

What happened? Well, this all began yesterday, when the Washington Post published an op-ed by a former USDA “research economist” by the name of Andrew Crane-Droesch. The op-ed is full of a “woe is us” mentality over the Trump administration’s plans to move the Department of Agriculture.

Out of the blue, in August 2018, agriculture secretary George “Sonny” Perdue announced that my agency and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture would relocate from Washington, D.C., to some yet-to-be-determined location. He claimed that this would lower costs and bring us closer to “stakeholders.” That stated justification was a fig leaf for the administration’s true intentions. We didn’t need to sit next to a corn field to analyze agricultural policy, and Perdue knew that. He wanted researchers to quit their jobs.

Eventually, the location chosen was Kansas City, Missouri. This “research economist” ended up quitting, because moving was apparently not an option for those who couldn’t countenance living outside of the Acela corridor. Crane-Droesch ended up at the University of Pennsylvania.

Most of my colleagues have moved on. Contrary to the common talking points about cushy government jobs, we all knew that we could have gotten higher salaries in the private sector, faster advancement elsewhere in the government or more perks in academia. We loved ERS because it offered a rare degree of intellectual freedom, combined with the chance to make real impact. We got to spend a great deal of our time pursuing research questions that we defined, and the rest of the time, instead of logging service hours by sitting on committees, teaching, or grading like we would at a university, we got to advise on policies that affected people’s lives.

Translation: we got paid to do whatever we wanted with taxpayer money, and, in the immortal words of Ray Stanz:

God forbid that the brain trusts at the USDA, who never make questionable decisions, be forced to relocate near actual… agriculture! This attitude about having to move out of Washington D.C. caught the attention of the junior senator from Missouri, Josh Hawley. He was… not impressed.

“The agency has managed to hire a few sharp new researchers in Kansas City, but they’re just a drop in the bucket.” Because of course there are no smart people in Kansas City or the Midwest. You can’t make this stuff up.

— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) October 21, 2019

Well, Greg Sargent of the Washington Post was not pleased with Senator Hawley’s comments, and tweeted at him. Hawley tweeted back.

Only a smug, rich liberal elitist would say that defending your home is “phony pastoral posturing,” whatever that means. No, Greg, I don’t think living in Missouri is “punishment.” But this is the new left: utter, open contempt for the people of the heartland and all we love https://t.co/0F8e3OZttq

— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) October 21, 2019

Sargent then wrote his own op-ed about the exchange.

Enter Jake Tapper, who decided to yell “LEEEEEEEROY JENKINS” to defend Sargent’s opinion… by essentially calling Senator Hawley an anti-Semite. Wait, what???

In which ⁦@HawleyMO⁩ calls a Jewish journalist a “smug, rich liberal elitist” https://t.co/44Mh94mcnO

— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) October 22, 2019

Where in the hell did that come from, you ask? Well, in Sargent’s op-ed, he makes this comment in order to prove his non-elitist bona fide credentials:

I grew up surrounded by working class blacks and Hispanics (back then there were still working people in Manhattan) and gays at a time of their extreme marginalization. We went to Seders at my mother’s parents’ house in Queens — they were descended from Jewish immigrants — and also decorated an annual Christmas tree in keeping with my father’s Catholic upbringing. But there was no god in our house.”

The reason I bring all this up is because I’m skeptical that this type of middle-class background — like that of millions of other Americans — is the kind of less-than-elite background Hawley would regard as virtuous.”

Hawley called Sargent a “smug, rich liberal elitist” in a Twitter reply, Jake Tapper hears a dog whistle. Maybe it’s the empty space between his ears making an echo, because HOLY CRAP, talk about a head fake from left field! It’s also important to note the timeline at play: Hawley tweeted at Sargent BEFORE Sargent wrote his op-ed. How do we know? Well, because Sargent opens his column complaining about Hawley’s tweet calling him a “smug, rich liberal elitist” and then spends hundreds of words yelling “I’M NOT, YOU BIG RELIGIOUS MEANIE, I GREW UP IN POOR IN MANHATTAN!” But not once did Sargent throw the anti-Semite grenade. No, that was what Jake Tapper, a supposedly sane person, decided to read into this whole argument.

Senator Hawley and others were not impressed with Jake Tapper and his “hot take.” For crying out loud, this started as a debate over the elitism of USDA employees whining over having to leave Washington D.C., and then Hawley and Sargent arguing between themselves on Twitter!

Back to our original question: so, what on earth is Jake Tapper smoking in order to make this all about anti-Semitism, when it clearly had nothing to do with, well, ANYTHING? At least, anything except smearing a Republican senator with Tapper’s own assumptions.

Welcome Instapundit Readers!

Featured image via Pixabay, Pixabay license