New York Times columnist David Brooks labeled Sen. Bernie Sanders “the end of liberalism” in an opinion piece published on Friday, sparking anger from progressive journalists who identified factual errors in the article.

Slate political editor Tom Scocca went as far as to call the Brooks piece “a truly grotesque pack of lies” in a tweet on Friday, while New York Magazine writer Jonathan Chait deemed it “evidence-free.”

David Brooks’ never-Sanders column is a truly grotesque pack of lies that no honest editor would have allowed him to publish — Tom Scocca (@tomscocca) February 28, 2020

David Brooks’s almost totally evidence-free column makes a serious error. Bernie is an economic socialist but a political liberal: https://t.co/r0iLpQY1Ku pic.twitter.com/TnqCBWElPz — Jonathan Chait (@jonathanchait) February 28, 2020

Zack Beauchamp of Vox published a piece arguing Brooks’s article was “grounded in assumptions about and perceptions of Sanders that are just not backed up by evidence.”

Regarding Brooks’s claim that Sanders was a “useless” congressman and “marginal” senator, Beauchamp reminded readers that Sanders and John McCain co-sponsored a piece of legislation that expanded veterans’ access to healthcare, adding, “Sanders may talk a lot about political revolution, but as a legislator he has a surprisingly long record of quiet, pragmatic accomplishment.”

Crooked Media’s Jon Favreau, a veteran of the Obama White House, wrote on Twitter that Sanders has “passed more bipartisan amendments in a Republican Congress than any other member.”

Does someone want to let David Brooks know that Bernie’s major piece of legislation was a veterans health care bill he co-sponsored with John McCain, and that he passed more bipartisan amendments in a Republican Congress than any other member? https://t.co/PELZ7Jw20q — Jon Favreau (@jonfavs) February 28, 2020

The Atlantic writer Adam Serwer faulted Brooks for lacking any quotes from Sanders in his piece.

What’s remarkable about this Brooks column on Sanders that clumsily attempts to frame him as a threat to liberal democracy comparable to Trump, is that it contains not one word from Sanders. https://t.co/zZvfBifwS7 — Adam Serwer🍝 (@AdamSerwer) February 28, 2020

In his Vox article, Beauchamp also goes after Brooks’s accusation that Sanders’s spending programs would lead to “the greatest concentration of power in the Washington elite in American history,” arguing, “If Medicare-for-all were some kind of neo-Stalinist ploy, then Canada and much of Western Europe would be totalitarian nightmares.”

Jewish Currents editor David Klion additionally took to Twitter to express his disapproval of the op-ed, calling Brooks’s position “anti-democratic.”

David Brooks, Bret Stephens, etc have an explicitly anti-democratic position which they dress up as “liberalism,” wherein given the choice between popular socialism and popular fascism, they’ll opt for fascism, at least passively. I have my preference but I respect democracy. — David Klion (@DavidKlion) February 28, 2020

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]