All indications are she will be booted from office in the next election. But I'm sure she will land on her feet. I predict a seven figure book deal will be in the mix, and regular appearances on MSM shows when Trump is the topic.
Liz Cheney
- Thread starter Ponca Dan
- Start date
She thought Democrat voters would save her. She wasn’t smart enough to realize Democrats were using her as another useful idiot. Hopefully satan has a place reserved for her when she meets her demise.
I will paraphrase her future msm appearances. Orange man bad…..orange man followers bad…can I get my check now..rinse….repeat.
Personally hope he isn’t the guy in 2024. So yah not a die hard Trump guy.
If you don’t actively vote for trump you are a liberal FYI
Interesting post @Ponca Dan.
I wonder, why aren't you praising Liz Cheney like you do Tulsi Gabbard? To use your own words, why aren't you noting that Cheney is hated by many Republicans because "she doesn’t betray what she believes in order to advance up the ranks" of the Republican Party? Why aren't you claiming she is the exact opposite of an opportunist because she hasn't "gone with the flow, abandoned any core principles she ever had, and allowed herself to be groomed" by Trump and his supporters?
Hasn't Cheney told those who control her party to go pound sand as it relates to their loyalty and defense of Trump?
You are correct in everything you say about the woman. She refuses to betray her blood thirsty war mongering attitude that enriches herself and her defense contractor support group. She tells us to go pound sand, by God, she and her friends will tell us when, where and how long the wars they’ll make us wage and pay for will last, just STFU and do as we’re told. Perfectly philosophically consistent.
What does any of this have to do with her principled stance on January 6 and her desire to hold Trump and his minions accountable for their actions?
Again, she is doing exactly what you claim to praise Gabbard for doing. Yet, you don't extend the same praise to Cheney that you do Gabbard. Could that be because Cheney is challenging the current Republican Trump establishment, i.e. she isn't challenging the right people in your mind?
She'll be the 'token' Republican that passes around the various left-leaning news sources when they want to demonstrate that they include Republicans in their discussions and round-tables. She'll be to the Democrats at CNN and MSNBC what Tulsi Gabbard has been for FoxNews.
Clearly her 'principled stance' doesn't align with her constituents' stance and thus they are showing her the door. But I love your phrasing about having a principled stance. I bet you've never used that term in describing Manchin or Sinema when they pushed back against Dem overreach.
Let me guess: #thatsdifferent
Liz is 30 points behind in her primary polls. She should be 30 points ahead as she is the incumbent. That is more indicative of a 60-point swing in favorability. Keep in mind that her actions since Jan 6 have led directly to her having a 71% unfavorable rating by Wyoming voters. If she had a principled stance, she would find more favorability and her polling would be about the same as her challenger.
There is nothing to prove with the committee for Jan 6. What is our institution of government trying to prove with its investigation? - I don't think they even know.
Are they taking a non-partisan look at the situation? - Definitely not, as the democrats are made up of the same kind of Republicans Nanshi kicked off. You can't kick off J. Jordan and keep A. Shiff. B Thompson and J Raskin are just as bad as Shiff but less well known.
The committee is a partisan witch hunt, nothing more, and Republicans have no need to complain about anything as the entire committee is illegitimate. The ones that should be complaining are Democrats who are not going to get a thing this committee reveals to be considered because they refused to allow Republicans a seat at the table. It should be Dems that are the most upset, but they drink this cool aid up like it's an aphrodisiac. Their party has them by the balls.
And if that is what her constituents choose to do, so be it.
The fact that she is doing what is right here knowing she most likely will be voted out of office showcases her courage even more. If it was all about politics for her and being re-elected, she wouldn't be doing what she is doing. She is taking a principled stand.
Why did Manchin or Sinema oppose the policies they opposed (lol at you calling it Democratic overreach🤣🤣)? Did they do so with the belief or assumption their stance would be unpopular with their constituents?
If this committee is a “PaRtiSan WitCh HuNt”, why are so many former Trump loyalists cooperating and/or testifying???
You and others like AC keep digging your holes with a bullsh!t narrative…
For serious lol…
by all means…
carry on
I wouldn't be shocked to see President Biden offer her a position on his Cabinet or in his administration, something dealing with national security. I don't know if she would accept such a position, but I could easily see the offer being made after the courage she has shown in regards to January 6.
She also may run for President in '24. Lot of rumors that she is considering it and she hasn't ruled it out.
Simple. The Committee is attempting to determined what occurred on January 6 and the role (if any) a sitting President played in fermenting an insurrection upon our government.
btw, I think you doth protest too much with your posts and rants about the Committee and the investigation. Clearly, what is occurring has you worried. As it should anyone who wants to continue to defend Trump at all costs.
7 figures? We ain't talking about a collection of short stories Danny. $10 mln easily. That and she gets to whitewash the family name.
Popular == Principled in your world? I kinda thought principled was applied to taking unpopular stands. Silly me.
Republicans don't have a seat at the table? Are you referring to the witness table? I seem to recall about 90% of testimony coming from Republicans. No seat at the table - nuh, who knew.
Can't wait for the excuses about "out of context" video clips. The next month will be entertaining. The smell of fear and regret is wafting off the MAGA crowd...
good lord are we at five years of this? do you think you will finally be right?
Nope. Ain’t coming from the MAGA crowd. Maybe you should look into a good feminine hygiene spray.
who do you think reads this gotcha as anywhere close to addressing what he said? Typical liberal.
He would've had to watch the hearings to know this.
Plus, I'm sure he thinks all those Republicans testifying aren't "real" Republicans. How dare they betray his Fuhrer!🙄
As you so often do you are operating under a self-imposed misperception. I don’t give a shiny red pinto bean about Liz Cheney’s principled stand to oust Trump. I recognize like most Americans the Jan 6 Committee is a third-world-like concoction, and as such I have paid very little attention to it. What tickles me pink is Cheney’s “principled” stand will almost certainly cost the security state apparatus a loud and influential voice in the halls of Congress. Nothing could make me happier! I encourage the woman to continue with her principled stand right up to the day the voters in her state show her the exit.
Exactly. You don't agree with what and who Cheney is taking her principled stance against and therefore, you can't give Cheney any credit for it. However, when Gabbard challenges those you want her to challenge, you praise her as being independent and courageous.🤣🤣 My point exactly.
It has nothing to do with the stance and everything to do with the political ideology you want to see protected. An ideology you try so hard on here to act like you don't hold, with all your little silly games.
btw, you are wrong about how most Americans feel about the January 6 hearings. But again, that doesn't matter to you because you have to oppose the hearings and the Committee. You can't do otherwise and every liberal on this board knows this about you.
Just like Gabbard, right?
Oh wait, Cheney is actually running and is willing to be voted out. Unlike Gabbard, who tucked tail and ran from her voters.
Exactly. I don't agree with what Liz Cheney has in store for our country, so I will not praise her for her principled stand. Perhaps it eluded you, but I agreed she took a principled stand. But I'm not going to praise everybody just for taking one. Castro, for example, took a principled stand, but there are no circumstances from his life in which I would praise him for it. Yes, it has everything to do with the philiosophy of the the person taking the stand. IMO Cheney hates Tump in large part because he threatened her war making proclivities. I will be glad to see her out of power.
She voted with him more than many MAGA republicans. Your opinion is ludicrous and you know it Dan
cmon man lol
Liz Cheney voted for war, more war and more war, and then she didn't think it was enough so she wanted even more war. I don't give a flying figleaf if she voted with Trump more than many MAGA zealots. I'm antiwar, not a MAGA enthusiast. You know that, CDS, or at least you ought to know that by now.
Neither do I agree with everything Cheney has in store for our country. Again, she isn't a liberal and I disagree with her policy positions on many issues. I would never vote for her for President.
However, none of that stops me from praising her for her principled stand regarding January 6. As you stated, you believe she has taken a principled stand. But you can't bring yourself to praise her for this. And we all know why Dan. You explained it rather well in your previous post. She is taking a principled stand against the wrong people and against the wrong issue in your opinion. That is why you refuse to praise her.
If she was doing this against a Democratic former President or any Democrat for that matter, you would be praising her, while noting your policy disagreements with her. And that is why you praise Gabbard. She challenges Democratic leaders, the correct people to challenge in your opinion (even though you also disagree with Gabbard on numerous policy positions).
How so? Provide some evidence to back this claim up.
FiveThirtyEight found that Cheney supported Trump's position in 92.9% of her votes in the House. She supported Trump more consistently than even Mark Meadows did during his time in the House. She was a loyal Trumpist at one point, and even fought with Rand Paul over who was the bigger supporter of Trump in 2019. She voted for Trump in 2020. Why would she have done all this if Trump was somehow threatening her war making proclivities?
Cheney broke with Trump over his lies about the 2020 election and his attack upon the rule of law.
Again, Cheney supported Trump's position in 92.9% of her votes in the House. She was a big Trump supporter at one time. She voted for Trump in 2020. All while you assert she was voting for war, more war, and more war. Clearly, she didn't see Trump standing in her way of accomplishing her goals.
You just can't deny the facts Dan because you want something to be true.
Then let's see you praise Cheney for her principled stand against Trump and January 6.
Challenge the MAGA narrative regarding Cheney. Go ahead.
By all means praise her as much as you want. I don't praise war profiteers. I know it is impossible for you to understand, but I'm not a Trump supporter, never have been and never will be. But I'm not a rabid anti-Trumper like you who will go to any length to destroy him, lie, cheat, impeach on worthless charges, whatever it takes, just get him out of there. I despise Liz Cheney, I despise her father, I despise anyone who seeks to profit from war. I will cheer when she is unceremoniousy dumped by the people of Wyoming. In the meantime if she wants to persist in her prinicpled stand on the Jan 6 Committee I say she should go for it. And you should praise her to the skies.
No one is expecting you to praise her for her stances on war or foreign policy. This has absolutely nothing to do with what we are discussing.
You've stated she is taking a principled stance but you refuse to praise her for this stance because you don't like who she is standing against or what she is standing against. She is acting, on this issue, just as you claim Gabbard acts. The key difference though is who and what Cheney is standing against.
"lie, cheat, impeach on worthless charges"
🤣🤣
"I'm not a Trump supporter but watch me defend Trump against you anti-Trumpers!!"
🤣🤣
Why you play your silly games, I'll never know.
btw Dan, I don't think you are as big a Trump supporter as others on this board. You clearly have things you disagree with Trump on and every now and then, you will mention those disagreements. But when push comes to shove, you are a Trump supporter and will always defend him against anything that you believe may benefit Democrats and/or hurt Trump. Same goes with Republican policies in general.
It used to bother me when you said things like that. But I've come to realize that you believe to your core that any criticism of anyone who attacks Trump is a Trump supporter. As regards Republican policies in general you have a point in that I think they are generally less short term destructive of our society than Democrat policies. But I still think Republican policies in general suck donkey balls. It has taken me awhile but I now know that you have a very specialzied world view. There is your point of view, which you regard as reasonable and generally mild (and which simulataneously mirrors the Clinton/establishment Democrat talking points), and then there is everybody else, almost all of whom are unreasonable minions of right-wing ideology. I accept that is your world view and there is nothing that will alter it. So I've basically quit trying. I'll continue to vocalize my opinions and you continue to vocalize yours.
Last edited:
This isn't what I believe at all.
I told you what I know about you. And it is all based on your posts. Your games don't work on me anymore Dan.
I know. You believe more than just this too but at least you are finally admitting this much. That's a start!
The point you continually miss is your belief I'm playing games. I'm not playing games. I'm just writing things I believe to be true. You either agree or disagree. I don't particularly care, I'm just saying things I believe in the hopes someone will use some small part as a stepping stone in their own political development. When you and I converse I'm speaking to that anonymous reader more than to you. You're the conduit by which I make my case.
If by right you mean enjoying the rampant hypocrisy, then yeah I will be right again. And again. And again.
