Usually when CNBC's Jim Cramer is making headlines, it's for his outrageous antics or over-the-top statements. Not this time.
Time magazine's Justin Fox interviewed Cramer asking him questions submitted by readers which was posted on Time.com May 14. Two of those questions dealt with his March 12 appearance on Comedy Central's "The Daily Show." In his answers, Cramer accused Jon Stewart of personal attacks, being "vicious," and said that ultimately he had been had."
Fox asked Cramer if this was just a case of him taking "Daily Show" host Jon Stewart's criticism of the entire CNBC network too personally.
"Let me take that in two ways," Cramer replied calmly. "One was if you go over the tape, it was clear that he was attacking me personally. I was trying to keep it at a high level, but he was vicious and he was ad hominem in the way he attacked me. And then when I tried to defend myself, he said he was attacking the network."
According to the "Mad Money" host, Stewart was "vicious" and set out to have Cramer fired by CNBC with his tough questioning, which some claim was fueled by Stewart's disapproval of Cramer's critique of President Barack Obama.
"So, his method of argument was brilliant in the way it was meant strictly to try to get me fired," Cramer said. "I think that was his goal was to try to get me fired. Our network has done a phenomenal job, actually much better than print. I'm from print. I've been print all my life. I know what good journalism and what bad journalism is and I'm not gonna let him be the arbiter of good or bad journalism."
Cramer defended the journalistic culture of CNBC in his interview with Fox, saying it was different than a lot of places he had worked and that Stewart's attack was "gravely misplaced."
"He may claim that I don't, but I've seen and been in many places where I have been told what to say and what not to say," Cramer continued. "And CNBC is not one of them. And I can speak for many people when I say that. I think CNBC has done a remarkable job and I think that the attack on CNBC and the attack on me were gravely misplaced."
Fox challenged Cramer on the premise that Stewart's intent was trying to get him fired, but Cramer insisted that even if you gave Stewart the benefit of the doubt, he still neglected to realize the damage he did to Cramer's reputation.
"You know, let's say - if it was for ratings, OK," Cramer said. "Well, it was business, but it's still my life. I didn't expect to be prosecuted, um, and it was rather remarkable. It was rather remarkable in the sense that it was so clear that his goal was to just destroy me and I'm still walking around. I still have my show and doing a good job I think. But it was just remarkable, um, remarkably misplaced."
Cramer said that after the interview Stewart told him not to take his "Daily Show" interrogation personally. However, Cramer also said that Stewart would answer for the ambush interview.
"He would say, ‘Well, Jim don't take it personally, it was about CNBC,'" Cramer added. "You can do that kind of circular argument and I get that, but we moved on. I continue to try to do the best journalism I can. He continues to try to do whatever he's doing. But uh, if I'm waiting for an apology, I'm really stupid. But he was very vicious. One day he'll answer for it, but nothing I will be able to do will answer it for it. I mean, we all have to answer for things when we're vicious and when we try to take people down and we should because it's not fair."
Cramer admitted his "Daily Show" appearance wasn't one of his best, but that he didn't see it coming at all.
"No one wants to suffer a beat down. No one wants to be humiliated or embarrassed and I'm gonna include myself in that group," Cramer said. "[I] was shocked at [Stewart's] behavior. You know, I came on as a gentleman and I wanted to take the high road and was pretty much led to believe it would be fun. That was obviously incredibly wrong."
Cramer accused Stewart of using only certain clips to base up his judgment on Cramer, which set the context for the interview and told Fox it would have been different had Stewart actually watched his show on a regular basis.
"You know when you have things in life where you get defined by something that is really unfortunate because you don't think it's you, you tend to want to look back and blame the other person," Cramer continued. "I wish that Jon Stewart had watched my show a couple times. I think he obviously got clips. I wish he knew about my background and I wish he knew about a lot of the things that I had done because I think he would have thanked me instead of attacked me for exactly what I had been doing. No one else has stuck their neck out the way I have to be able to say things are corrupt, things are bad."
The fallout - Cramer said he believed he was being unfairly branded as one of the characters behind the entire financial crisis, when he said the opposite was true.
"I'm probably the person who has gotten the most trouble in America - in America, for saying we got to stop this madness. And yet I, because of this fellow from - from TV have been characterized as being the most clueless, most reckless and I think unfortunate, that's just an unfortunate thing. I didn't see it coming and I think ultimately sometimes you just get had."




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Huh. Suddenly Cramer's a
May 14, 2009 - 16:21 ET by balboaHuh. Suddenly Cramer's a badass? Where was all this backbone when he was on the show? Or is he simply trying to milk some more spotlight time out of this outdated story.
At last
May 14, 2009 - 16:27 ET by general companyWe agree,,,,,,,,,,Can it happen twice?
My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
We agree,,,,,,,,Can it
May 14, 2009 - 16:41 ET by motherbeltWe agree,,,,,,,,Can it happen twice?
Yes, it can.
I actually agreed with balboa twice in one day, a couple of weeks ago!
I still haven't recovered.
They might say "Wow, that sucks!" But at least they'll say "Wow!" -Duff Goldman, the Ace of Cakes
More respect to him then!
May 14, 2009 - 17:45 ET by bretzysdudeMore respect to him then!
It should be noted that I'm
May 14, 2009 - 17:46 ET by balboaIt should be noted that I'm trying to put up 20 contrary posts to balance out the two agreements. ;-)
I beleive it
May 14, 2009 - 18:09 ET by general companyBal. Not sure what would be worst,,,,,???? or better?
My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
Bal,
May 14, 2009 - 19:06 ET by IamTinmanI've agreed with you twice so far this week and I'm telling you it makes me nervous!
However since MB and others have had the same soul searing experience, I'm beginning to think it may be you!
IaT... LOL... Just
May 14, 2009 - 22:46 ET by bigtimerIaT...
LOL...
Just caught this and and chucklin' here...beware...boa is tricky that way....
...aren't ya boa?
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
I would like to see Stewart take on a Conservative...
May 14, 2009 - 16:26 ET by jawebster1talk show host and then we will see how far his bullying tactics will take him. I never watch his show, but if he debated Laura Ingraham, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin or Billy Cunningham, I'd watch and enjoy. Shoot, I'd watch even if he debated one of our guys on PPV where you have to pay to watch and I am very tight with my money! Jim Webster
I would pay
May 14, 2009 - 16:31 ET by general companyTo see Levin or Wilkow, no nonesense with those two.
My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
I've been saying this for a year now
May 14, 2009 - 17:58 ET by JnobleI'd literally pay money to see Jon Stewart one on one with Mark Levin. No sympathetic studio audience to hide behind, no writers to show him what to say off a teleprompter. Mark would wipe the floor with ol' Jon on any political topic in seconds and show everyone just how much of an uninformed asshole he really is. Jon would be reduced to his usual stuttering:"uhh....umm...uhhhh....ummm..." before he took it down to name calling and personal attacks and ran away red-faced.
Funny thing is, Stewart
May 14, 2009 - 18:00 ET by balboaFunny thing is, Stewart would probably agree with you.
from what I've heard
May 14, 2009 - 18:00 ET by Jnoble..Mark has offered to debate Jon recently, but (big suprise) he wasn't taken up on it.
I can live with Cramer
May 14, 2009 - 16:40 ET by Kingfish17Cramer is a Northeast/New England Democrat. Sure, he voted for Obama. But I think he's been disapointed, and he's gone on some rants about the road to socialism and nationalization of the financial industry. I would think he views Obama as too far to the left, but he prefers Democrats so he's sticking to him and hoping for the best. Cramer, to me, represents what Democrats used to be like 20-40 years ago. If all Dems thought like Cramer and not like Obama, we'd be much better off. We wouldn't have to worry about the free-market capitalist system surviving a simultaneous Democrat President and Congress.
I've watched CNBC for the 20 years that it has been on the air. For a station owned by NBC, it still is amazingly balanced, even though the trend of late has been to put more hair brained leftists who know nothing of the markets or economics on some of their shows. Ever since the Santeli outburst earlier this year, a lot of new faces have popped up on CNBC. These new faces are almost all to the left and their knowledge of finance and economics is abysmal. This is a golden opportunity for FOX Business, (which I find a little too dumbed down and populist to be of interest, but I'm hoping they get better).
"I've sentenced boys younger then you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it, but I felt I owed it to them." Judge Smails
Agree, KF17
May 14, 2009 - 18:35 ET by Captain KirockI used to watch CNBC and it was fairly well balanced until earlier this year. Since they added Huffy and "Howlin' Mad" Howard Dean, I haven't been able to stomach it.
I used to enjoy Cramer's show but no more. I lost all respect for him after he curled up into the fetal postion on Stewart's show. I really dislike Stewart and find him spectacularly unfunny. I was looking forward to Cramer standing up to Stewart and the mindlessly zombies in his audience but Cramer did nothing. I've seen cockroaches lying on their backs put up a better defense than Cramer did that night.
Oh puhleeeze Cramer, cry me
May 14, 2009 - 18:32 ET by bigtimerOh puhleeeze Cramer, cry me a river....
You knew what den you were walking into....don't expect us to think for one second you didn't know what you were doing....
Problem with Cramer is he's still big-time miffed about Santelli and his legacy with the Tea Party phenomena....
Simple as that....
I can see him snibbling and moaning...whining it shouda' been me I tell ya....
Too much fun at times Cramer is.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Actually the version aired
May 14, 2009 - 19:47 ET by ApacheActually the version aired on the comedy central website was different than the one aired on TV. All the parts where the audience clapped for Cramer were removed on the TV version. It was done Michael Moore style. These people need to require unedited copies of these interviews before they throw themselves to the wolves. Same with these other hack interviewers such as Couric.
What is Stewart without his ugly audience?
May 14, 2009 - 20:51 ET by carolina09Without the teleprompter, his writers, his editing crew, and particularly the audience (that always sound like some frat mob cranked up on crystal meth), he's just another wispy metrosexual. I can't abide those silly, effeminate face-pulling. He's totally a created phenom.
But Cramer is on the same side as Leibowitz politically, he's just so hurt to discover that leftists can be so mean to one of their own. It's like Hillary supporters who were shocked at the viciousness of the Obama-cultists.
Cramer
May 14, 2009 - 20:49 ET by kdizzydazeStewart was only going after you in an effort to protect Obambi from your potentially damaging rants regarding wealth destruction due to Obambi's "plans". Nothing more. And if you had any balls, you would've called Jon to the carpet about his BS blind protection on the show and not several weeks later.
Replace the POTUS with the TOTUS - we'd probably get better results
Gee, Cramer, it's all well
May 14, 2009 - 21:50 ET by fitzfongGee, Cramer, it's all well and good bitching about the Jon Stewart "interview" two months after the fact. You had the chance to sort that ignorant, obnoxious little s*** out in front of his braindead drones, and you punted. That makes you a coward.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." -Winston Churchill
Geesh, I saw thaat show,
May 14, 2009 - 22:38 ET by LumenNationGeesh, I saw thaat show, and he basically agreed with every accusation that John Stewart made. And it's not like Cramer's some novice on the street that was ambushed by O"Really or something. He's a pro, he'son TV every day, he knows how to handle himself.
NOBODY to blame but himself.