Liz Cheney Heads To The Trash Heap Of History

Everyone did, that is not why the Republicans in her state are turning her out. Let's not forget there were riots in Washington DC and other cities when that peaceful transfer of power was happening from Obama to Trump. Let's not forget that the Clinton campaign tried the "faithless elector" ploy to get Republican's electors to change their votes to her. Let's not forget there were numerous challenges to slates of electors during that Electoral Vote count trying to get new slates to make Clinton the winner.

House Democrats fail to muster support to challenge Trump’s Electoral College win

A challenge by several House Democrats to Donald Trump’s election on Friday collapsed when they failed to persuade a single Democratic senator to join their protest.

The short-lived, doomed-from-the-start effort — spearheaded by Reps. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas and Barbara Lee of California — came during a joint meeting of the House and Senate to certify Trump’s Electoral College victory. Without sufficient support to challenge Trump’s victory, the Republican-led Congress moved ahead with an easy confirmation of Trump’s presidency. The only remaining step is for him to take the oath of office on Jan. 20....

....
Jackson Lee and her allies argued that widespread voter suppression in states won by Trump tarnished the results. They also pointed to research provided by a team of independent lawyers that found dozens of Republican electors were technically ineligible to serve. But their arguments failed to persuade their Senate colleagues to step forward.

Though any single member may lodge an objection, only those supported by both a House member and senator are eligible for debate. Had the effort by House Democrats gained the support of a single senator, it would have delayed the confirmation of Trump’s victory by hours, forcing the Senate to retreat to its chamber and debate the merits of each challenged electoral vote.

The attempted objections began immediately, when Rep. James McGovern (D-Mass.) protested Alabama’s electoral votes, citing Russian interference in the presidential election. His declaration drew a sharp round of booing from the Republicans in the chamber...

....Other objections came from freshman Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin and Arizona Rep. Raúl Grijalva.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/no-trump-electoral-college-challenge-233294

Yea even Raskin who sits on the Jan 6 Committee and now calls Trumps attempt to use the same process TREASON!!!!! INSURRECTION!!!! THROW HIM IN JAIL!!!!!

 

Listen to just the first 15 seconds of her Dad's defense of her in the clip above and then come back and convince me they do not hate Trump and if not why not if that is what they believe?

 

Why doesn't she just leave the party and be true to herself and her constituents? She getting her arse kicked as a Republican, don't you think it's a face the music moment?

 

If you're willing to stand up for your convictions and put America First ...............

you surely do not want Trump anywhere near our Government

Anyone can name call .......... Trump does that well

It takes a special person to Lead and create a better society for all Americans

Trump is a good promoter ........... Not so much a Leader

 

My prediction is she will lose in the high 20's and that's taking into account democrats crossing over and voting for her. If it weren't for that she would lose by 30 or more.

 

She may get a minor role on CNN or MSNBC but her political career is over.

 

Why does he have the same convictions as Cheney? And I don't defend Trump the man, can't stand him. But that is not what this is about.

 

And I hope the door slams her ass on the way out.

 

Your love for the peaceful transfer of power warms my heart. When will you call for Bennie Thompson to be impeached for attempting to overturn the 2004 election? What is he doing running the January 6 circus. Will you call for Raskin to be impeached for his attempt to overturn the 2016 election? How about attempts to overturn the 2000 election that set a precedent for Democrats throwing temper tantrums every time they lose an election?

 

Clearly there's no place for integrity in the republican party today. I mean, she's a republican, so I can't say our values align, but she was one of the last in congress who put principles above party. It's unsurprising that's not compatible with the tribal political landscape of today.

 

Funny thing is, all the reasons folks say they had a problem with Cheney for didn't seem to be enough to not elect her until she committed the cardinal sin of opposing Saint Donaldius Trumpius The First.

 

We hoped the psychotic obsession Democrats have with skin color would wane after we freed your slaves over 150 years ago. But, alas, there is no evidence anything has changed.

After 50 years of Democrats targeting black babies for extermination, we now see you pushing audits which prioritize Blacks ,,, so you can provide tax credits to limousine liberals who buy cars manufactured in Shanghai with parts made with slave labor.

Keep embracing the white daughter of a white war criminal.

 

If people support Trump and she opposes him, why is it somehow wrong if they therefore do not support her as a result of her vocal and high-profile opposition to him?

What is the problem? Actions have consequences, and going against someone that is very popular in your party without questions has consequences. She knows what she is doing, and surely a Joe Scarborough-type existence is in her future.

 

I disagree.

With her Trump hate she will always be welcome on MSNBC and CNN and I'm sure will have some books. My beliefs are not hers but I commend her for sticking to her beliefs (even though they are super convoluted)
Also, she's old and rich so who cares? I'm sure she won't be shedding any tears.

 

People can vote or not vote for someone for whatever reasons they want. Doesn't mean those reasons aren't moronic.

 

What exactly is her opposition to him ideology wise? She's voted with him more than other members of Congress.

 

This seems like an unhinged response to me pointing out that Liz has b***s and principles.

 

Are you trying to set up a strawman by arguing against a point that has not been raised?

What I said was "If people support Trump and she opposes him, why is it somehow wrong if they therefore do not support her as a result of her vocal and high-profile opposition to him?"

...If you want to comment on what I actually said, I am happy to defend my position, but I do not do the strawman thing where you act as if I am supposed to defend against the words that you falsely put into my mouth.

 

Not what the committee is about.

 

But that reason is perfectly logical and 100% predictable. This isnt specific to Trump or even Republicans. If any politician from either side of the aisle joins in with the opposition on their political witch hunt, they ARE going to be ostracized by their own party. If your support mostly comes from the other party, you are clearly not a member in good standing.

This is obvious and not moronic even slightly. The only thing moronic would be to think that a person could do so and still retain the support within their party.

 

Wrong. No. Misguided is a more apt definition.

 

With the given context, this does not appear to make any sense. What are you claiming is "wrong"?

 

I never said it was wrong.

 

That part isn't moronic. What is moronic is that they chose tribalism over integrity. Cheney voted with Trump and the Republicans 93% of the time. She obviously represented conservative interests. She was obviously a good representative of her state. It was only when she opposed a corrupt despicable man that voters suddenly chose to oust her(which hasn't officially happened yet, but almost certainly will be the case). These people chose a corrupt despicable narcissist who has never been conservative a day in his life over a woman who has been. They are under thrall. That's what's moronic.

And you can bet I'd tell you the exact same thing if we were talking about Democratic voters doing the same.

 

After looking at your reply again, I think that you meant to include a question mark after "wrong".

I think you meant "Wrong? No. Misguided is a more apt definition" The question mark makes a huge difference in that stanza.

OK. Why is it misguided? If a person vociferously opposes someone that they like a great deal, and takes part in what they see as a sham 1/6 committee against the person they support, why would it be misguided for that to make them oppose the person that is clearly siding with the enemy?

Such a decision is wholly logical and a perfectly valid reason for opposing a politician.