Liz Cheney, flamin' hot hypocrite
The term "Republican in Name Only" or RINO is flung around loosely, but it doesn't get more deadly accurate when the person involved is Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming.
Having gotten herself a spot on House speaker Nancy Pelosi's 9/11 commission, and declaring that she was "honored" to have gotten Pelosi's own invitation (kid you not), she decided to horn in on the very real rift between Pelosi and her own party leader, House minority leader Kevin McCarthy, over the committee personnel. That rift came when McCarthy yanked all five GOP nominations to the commission after Pelosi rejected Reps. Jim Banks and Jim Jordan as threats to the "integrity" of the commission, in an unprecedented move. McCarthy said Democrats don't get to pick and choose their Republicans for the commission.
According to Cheney, as reported by the Federalist and Daily Caller, "I agree with what Speaker Pelosi has done."
According to Oil City News, a local media outlet in Caspar, Wyoming, she also said this:
"She accepted three others," Cheney said, referring to Illinois U.S. Rep. Rodney Davis, North Dakota U.S. Rep. Kelly Armstrong and Texas U.S. Rep. Troy Nehls. "She objected to two, one of whom may well be a material witness to events that led to that day — that led to January 6th. The other ... disqualified himself by his comments in particular over the last 24 hours demonstrating that he is not taking this seriously. He is not dealing with the facts of this investigation, but rather [is viewing] it as a political platform."
"This investigation must go forward. The idea that anybody would be playing politics with an attack on the United States Capitol is despicable and is disgraceful, and I am absolutely dedicated and committed to making sure that this investigation holds those accountable who did this and ensures that it never happens again. And the American people deserve that, and that is what we are going to do."
Material witness? But couched in "may be" to avoid a slander charge? Cripes, what a smear on a colleague, and notice she offers no evidence. As for the other, "disqualified himself"? On the grounds of what she claims as "not taking this seriously" as if having a different opinion from hers was either unserious or a disqualifier? Wow. Then she goes into "despicable" and "disgraceful" and amps up her own hysteria on her fellow Republicans. Can she calm down and take a deep breath?
Pelosi's hypocrisy is legion, and it's expected. Cheney's is something else.
Last February, she announced that Pelosi had no right to determine which Republicans can sit on committees, the very issue that McCarthy is challenging her on.
According to The Federalist:
... Pelosi has "no business determining which Republicans sit on committees," adding that such a move "sets a dangerous precedent for this institution."
That makes her an obvious hypocrite, now that she's praising Pelosi for doing the exact same thing. Seems that for Cheney, it's situational, since she's fine with it when it serves her purposes.
That purpose is ultimately to discredit President Trump and emerge as the GOP party leader, leaving conservative voters with just her or else a rabid leftist to choose from. But it might be more than that. She's had a lot of conflicts with Banks and Jordan in the past, and reporters are asking whether she actually was directing Pelosi to get those two guys off.
We do know for sure that she's got a thing against Trump because Trump discredited the Bush administration, with its many endless wars and big consultant contracts in the Middle East, of which she was very much a part. To all of the bitter Bushies, that's personal.
Now she positions herself as Little Miss Principled, and Little Miss Toughie on the Jan. 6 matter, loudly claiming she only wants to learn the truth of what happened, even as everyone already knows that she's made up her mind. Her views are identical to those of the Democrats, including Rep. Adam Schiff, who has repeatedly lied in various congressional investigations, including impeachment, in the name of Getting Trump. Speaking of RINOs...
Here are her pieties, made just a couple days ago, according to the same report in Oil City News:
"I want to take a minute to talk about the appointments to the January 6th Select Committee," Cheney said on Wednesday, according to a transcript of her comments shared by her office. "The rhetoric that we have heard from the Minority Leader is disingenuous. The attack on this building on January 6th was the worst attack on this Capitol since 1814."
Cheney was referring to the British invasion of Washington during the War of 1812. The British marched into Washington on Aug. 24, 1814 and proceeded to set fire to a number of buildings, including the U.S. Capitol Building.
"It was an attack on our Constitution. We supported what would have been the very best option, which was a bipartisan independent commission. The Minority Leader opposed that, he lobbied against it in the Senate, and the Senate blocked it. The American people deserve to know what happened, the people who did this must be held accountable. There must be an investigation that is nonpartisan, that is sober, that is serious, that gets to the facts wherever they may lead. And at every opportunity, the Minority Leader has attempted to prevent the American people from understanding what happened — to block this investigation."
Other than Getting Trump, her claims against her own colleagues and the Republican leadership itself seem pretty personality-based.
To start, her praise for Pelosi, a political snake whose quest for leftist power is no secret, is pretty reciprocal.
Here's what Pelosi had to say about Cheney in May when she lost her Republican leadership position based on her inability to get along with others:
"Congresswoman Liz Cheney is a leader of great courage, patriotism and integrity. Today, House Republicans declared that those values are unwelcome in the Republican party.
"The Republican denial of the truth presented by Congresswoman Cheney is reflected in their denial of the need to seek the truth in a January 6th commission and to repair the damage of January 6th with a security supplemental immediately.
"For the sake of our democracy, reasonable Republicans across the country must take back their party."
And Liz returned the sentiment in her sudden agreement with Pelosi against all those principles, making it a love fest between two old gals sending each other compliments.
It gets worse. She has a history of personal conflicts with both Banks and Jordan, the very two who were suddenly disqualified from the commission in an unprecedented move.
When Cheney announced that she "agrees with Speaker Pelosi," she was responding to a question from a reporter actually asking her if she was the one who got Banks and Jordan off the committee — and notice that she didn't answer the question.
Here's evidence of Cheney's inability to get along with Jordan, from People magazine, citing an upcoming book:
When hundreds of angry Trump supporters attacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 after being incited by the president, Rep. Liz Cheney was inside with other members of congress, including Rep. Jim Jordan.
Jordan — who had supported Trump's false claims that the 2020 election was stolen — offered to help Cheney out of the aisle.
She wasn't having it, according to a new book.
"That f---ing guy Jim Jordan. That son of a b----," Cheney told Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Mark Milley on the phone, detailing the siege, according to I Alone Can Fix It, by Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker.
"While these maniacs are going through the place, I'm standing in the aisle and he said, 'We need to get the ladies away from the aisle. Let me help you,' " recalled Cheney, then the House of Representatives' No. 3 Republican, per the book. "I smacked his hand away and told him, 'Get away from me. You f---ing did this.' "
Wow. Jordan was trying to be a gentleman in a harried situation, and Cheney responded like a cornered rat. That's hate.
Here's her history with Banks, as I wrote about in my earlier piece about her inability to get along with others:
And she got downright petty with Rep. Jim Banks, chair of the House Republican Study Committee, calling him a "neo-Marxist."
This is a Republican leader. And she's calling one of her members, over a point of disagreement, a "neo-Marxist" as if he were some Democratic campaign opponent? Things like this get people's attention. Her job requires diplomacy, tact, and maybe nudging if someone is wrong, and above all, supporting the members. She seems to think her leadership position of her conference committee means she should get rid of Republicans and turn the GOP into some other party. Maybe she'd be happier as a Democrat, though I imagine she'd be mean there, too.
That's no leader. That's someone in bed politically with Democrats because she can't get along with other people. She also fought ferociously with Republican leaders Steve Scalise and McCarthy, as I noted in the above piece, but never on such petty terms as she has with Banks and Jordan.
So not only is she a hypocrite, who plays Miss Principled one minute and then sides with the unprincipled maneuvers of Nancy Pelosi in the next, but she's also someone who has a thing against Jordan and Banks and can't even hold it in.
She's too subjective, too feeling-hurt, too, dare I say it, hysterical. She's not a person of principle at all; she's someone whose political battles are all personal.
This isn't the person you want in a position of any power, not only as a RINO, but because of the evidence she can't be objective. She's a personalizer and quite crazy about it, a stereotype of a hysterical woman. Now she's siding with the political opposition to get her revenge. Principled? Not in the least. It's all personal, and, shockingly, principles go out the window and she joins the other side when she sees her chance for political backbiting.
Time to kick her out of the Republican Party.
Image: Twitter screen shot.
To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.