Tags
Adam Schiff, Barry Loudermilk, Bennie Thompson, David Axelrod, Donald Trump, Harriett Hageman, J. Thomas Manger, J6 Hearings, Jonathan Turley, Liz Cheney, Nancy Pelosi, NBC cut away to golf, Rachel Maddow, Robert Reich, Ron DeSantis, Scott Perry, Stalinist show trial, Tom Rice, William Stepien, Wyoming
Just how badly are the televised January 6th Committee’s hearings going for Liz Cheney? This bad:
Golf. NBC cut off coverage of the hearings to televise golf, one of the slowest games on the planet. When you’ve lost NBC…
As I’ve previously written, when I began this series—enter “Liz Cheney” into the SMM home page search bar to find them all—I anticipated finding enough material for perhaps an article every few weeks, probably no more than one a month. I did not anticipate how easily and completely she would become a useful idiot for the Democrat/Socialist/Communist Party:
Nor did I anticipate the lunatic depth of Cheney’s self-destructive hatred for Donald Trump, though Party loyalists obviously have her number:
Axelrod was right about her credulous obsession getting her kicked out of Congress, but he should have said Cheney’s 35 minute, entirely scripted opening statement, read from a teleprompter, lacerated her. The Chairman of the Committee did no better:
Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), chair of the January 6 Committee, said Monday evening there would be no criminal referrals of former President Donald Trump or anyone else to the Department of Justice (DOJ) — and Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) promptly disagreed in public.
Perhaps Thompson is reading the polls and noting how unpopular the prime time clown show was. Or perhaps he recognizes his committee has no power to indict, and has, from its beginning, grossly violated its legislative powers? Nah. He’s not that smart. Cheney, no smarter, is madly pursuing Trump to the ends of the Earth. She had this to say during the prime time Stalinist show trial:
Tonight, I say this to my Republican colleagues who are defending the indefensible: There will come a day when Donald Trump is gone, but your dishonor will remain.
Cheney’s “colleagues” in DC and Wyoming have already disowned her, and she has a rather fanciful idea of honor. Even legal scholar Jonathan Turley, among a small cohort of honest leftists, recognizes what she, in pursuit of her great orange whale, does not:
Turley, a Fox News contributor, said on ‘Outnumbered’ that House Democrats, in their investigation into the riot, were trying to convict former President Donald Trump of being a terrible person.
Of course it’s not only House D/S/Cs. Not only has Cheney lost NBC, she’s lost Rachel Maddow too:
Yes, there was a pro-Trump rally, at which the President spoke, and we can absolutely talk about all the things the President said there. But the idea that that rally is the thing that got out of hand and that somehow resulted in the breaching of the Capitol—that rally was very far from the capital, and the people who […] did the initial breach that allowed everybody else to come in, they never went to that rally.
When you’ve lost NBC and Rachel Maddow… The lies Cheney and the rest told during their disastrous prime time opening weren’t so much as subtle or clever:
Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) lied when she claimed during a June 9 House of Representatives panel hearing that Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) sought a presidential pardon after the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol, Perry says.
‘The notion that I ever sought a Presidential pardon for myself or other Members of Congress is an absolute, shameless, and soulless lie,’ Perry said on Twitter on June 10, a day after the hearing held by the House panel investigating Jan. 6.
During the hearing, Cheney alleged that Perry ‘contacted the White House in the weeks after Jan. 6 to seek a presidential pardon.’
‘Multiple other Republican congressmen also sought presidential pardons for their roles in attempting to overturn the 2020 election,’ she added.
She provided no evidence for the claims, and did not identify any other members of Congress other than Perry, who was one of the members who voted against the certification of electoral results from Arizona and Pennsylvania.
Considering the Stalinist nature of the Committee, they would have been more than justified in seeking a blanket pardon for doing nothing at all wrong. It’s interesting, isn’t it, that Cheney and the rest keep promising to have the goods on Trump, but the goods, even in prime time, never materialize. One more particularly stupid lie:
The January 6 Panel, which is made up of beltway dung beetles, including political shape-shifters Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Liz Cheney (Rino-WY), was called out for vomitously spewing another load of bull scramble.
The January 6 Committee lied when it ‘suggested’ Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.) brought J6 protestors on a ‘reconnaissance’ tour of the Capitol on Jan. 5, and that the visitors were hoping to learn the layout of the Capitol in preparation for the mostly peaceful protest the following day.
The J6 Committee, chaired by Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and vice-chaired by Cheney, sent a letter to Loudermilk stating the following;
‘Based on our review of evidence in the Select Committee’s possession, we believe you have information regarding a tour you led through parts of the Capitol complex on January 5, 2021.’
It continues,
‘The foregoing information raises questions to which the Select Committee must seek answers. Public reporting and witness accounts indicate some individuals and groups engaged in efforts to gather information about the layout of the U.S. Capitol, as well as the House and Senate office buildings, in advance of January 6, 2021.’
The truth is, Loudermilk simply gave a tour to some constituents.
[Capitol Police Chief J. Thomas] Manger sent a letter to Rep. Rodney Davis, (R-Ill.), the ranking Republican on the House Administration Committee. In it, he stated there was no evidence Loudermilk led a super-secret info-gathering mission on Jan. 5. Just The News obtained a copy of the letter:
‘There is no evidence that Representative Loudermilk entered the U.S. Capitol with this group on January 5, 2021. We train our officers on being alert for people conducting surveillance or reconnaissance, and we do not consider any of the activities we observed as suspicious.’
Which put Cheney and the rest in the ironic position of trying to explain why the Capital Police, who they have been portraying as heroic victims, are somehow lying about Loudermilk. Perhaps I’m being too hard on poor Liz, who is, after all, singlehandedly saving Democracy. Perhaps the fate of another of her drooling anti-trump useful idiots holds a prescient glimmer of her electoral fate?
Tuesday night was a preview. Rep. Tom Rice is a conservative South Carolina Republican who voted with Trump 94 percent of the time. But his vote to impeach Trump after the Capitol riot ended his congressional career: he lost his primary by a 2-1 margin. The Trump-endorsed candidate won an absolute majority in a multi-candidate field, avoiding a runoff.
Oops. Roger Simon has an equally grim preview:
Liz Cheney and Jan. 6 Committee Demonstrate How Hate Makes You Stupid
Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo., for now) is an object lesson. Cheney comes from a rich conservative tradition. Her mother Lynne wrote an estimable biography of James Madison. Early in her career, Liz herself consistently voted for and advocated for conservative causes.
Then, along came Mr. Hate. [skip]
She made an alliance with people whose views she considered anathema for all of her previous life just to get Trump. It was hate taken to the nth power. [skip]
Liz Cheney, whether she knows it or not, is headed for oblivion after the Wyoming Republican primary. She has no real political friends—does she think the likes of Raskin will support her after this is over? He’s politically closer to Pol Pot. And as of this moment, it looks as if Trump will still be the GOP presidential nominee in 2024 with a good chance of victory. Everything Liz did was for naught.
I’ve said it before: the moment her usefulness to D/S/Cs ends, not one of them will return Cheney’s calls. That doesn’t mean Clinton/Obama retreads are smart enough to realize Cheney’s electoral goose is cooked:
Right. Cheney for president. How is Cheney doing in the real world of Wyoming?
Wyoming Republican House candidate Harriet Hageman is the ‘overwhelming favorite’ to oust establishment Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY), Fabrizio, Lee & Associates polling revealed this week.
Hageman leads Cheney among primary voters by 28 points. Hageman received 56 percent. Cheney only received 28 percent.
Hageman’s lead has only increased over time. In December, Hageman had only an 8-point lead over Cheney.
Last time I checked, it was 30 points.
‘Harriet Hageman is now the overwhelming favorite to remove Liz Cheney from Congress and give Wyomingites a real conservative voice in Congress who will represent them and their interests,’ the pollster stated.
The poll found Hageman is viewed favorably by a 2-to-1 margin, while Cheney was overwhelmingly disliked. Hageman’s favorability has increased eight points over the last six months. Fifty-eight percent view Hageman in a favorable light. Only 29 percent do not.
Wyomingites surely aren’t taking this well:
Conversely, Cheney’s favorability rating has dropped from -40 percent to -47 percent. Seventy-three percent of respondents view Cheney unfavorably. Sixty-six percent view her ‘very unfavorably.’
In other words, Cheney is toast in Wyoming.
The poll also asked respondents whom they would vote for in the August 16 primary. ‘A huge 71% majority say they will vote against her, including 66% who will definitely vote against Cheney no matter who she runs against,’ the pollster wrote. ‘With only 26% say they will definitely or probably vote for Cheney, she has hit her ceiling on the ballot.’
‘Furthermore, Hageman has successfully captured the bulk of these anti-Cheney voters by winning over undecideds and some Bouchard voters over the past six months, leaving little doubt as to who will win this race,’ the poll’s literature added.
Previous polling has also shown Hageman leading Cheney. A Club for Growth poll in May found Hageman with a 30-point lead over Cheney.
A January straw poll revealed Hageman held a commanding lead over Cheney. The poll, conducted by the Wyoming Republican State Central Committee via secret ballot, showed Hageman won 59 votes and Cheney six, a 53-point victory by Hageman.
But why would this probable landslide be in the offing? I mean besides Cheney’s manic obsession, her betrayal of Republican principles, her ouster from the House Leadership, her ouster from the Wyoming Republican Party, and her aiding and abetting D/S/C’s in violating the rules and traditions of the House? This:
Folks in Wyoming are Normal Americans. They work–hard–raise their families, take care of each other, and many work in the coal mines and oil fields. They don’t take kindly to their sole representative failing to show up in the state, and on the sole recent occasion when she did, she lit in Jackson Hole. To Wyomingites, Jackson Hole is like Austin to Texans: an island of snotty leftism in a sea of Normal Americans. Worse, Cheney charged for the privilege of being in her presence. She charged admission to the people who pay her salary. That really ticked the rest of Wyoming off. Folks in Wyoming also have to drive considerable distances for the necessities of life, to say nothing of a bit of leisure. When their representative is obsessed with a third impeachment rather than opposing Biden’s lunatic and ruinous economic policies—and all the rest—they get really, really ticked off.
Final Thoughts: In a way, I almost hope Cheney does try to run for President. It would be amusing to see her trying to debate Donald Trump or Ron DeSantis. It would be equally amusing to see her drop out early when she couldn’t earn more than 1% of the faithful’s vote. I suspect Cheney wouldn’t do that well. Sadly, she wouldn’t even have D/S/Cs to console her.
More all too soon, gentle readers, I’m sure.
Stately McDaniel Manor 
Liz to her supposed constituents:
“Please clap…”
Two points…
Point one… Liz represents 580,000 Wyoming citizens. If she’s not serving them in representing their interests then votes count. On the larger scale… she represents ONLY 580,000 Americans. A rather small percent. Not sure that your Wyoming perceptions extend past the state line to a wide degree. You can certainly hope.. and find like-minded fodder at your Breitbart source.
Point Two… Say what you want about the Jan. 6th Committee and who is on it. Are you even bothering to listen to all those Republican witnesses, especially about the pressuring illegal votes and fake electors nonsense? Of course you are… and you don’t believe a word… again, thanks to Breitbart… oh, and Trump himself.
Doug,
Point three. “Put all hope out of your mind……it drains the strength !” -Warden Barrot
“Resistance is futile.” – The Borg
Dear Doug:
My comments about Wyoming are–my comments about Wyoming. We can be sure most Americans don’t give a rip about Jan. 6 because of the abysmal viewership of their Stalinist show trial, and because NBC cut off coverage for GOLF!
There is an enormous difference between trying to convince people to adopt a particular viewpoint and accordingly take action and committing a crime. What we’re not seeing, from any witness, or from any other dispositive evidence, is evidence of an actual crime. Were such evidence to exist, our Marxist DOJ surely would have indicted Trump and many others long before now. The witnesses appearing on TV have already been interviewed long ago. If they had any real evidence, it would have long ago been put to use.
Trump has not testified, therefore, I’m not considering anything he has said in determining if the elements of any criminal statute are present. As for Brietbart, I link to them because they cover news other outlets try to hide, and cover it fully. I also link to CNN, The New York Times, the AP and other Lamestream outlets when appropriate, and I always provide links to all articles so readers can judge for themselves.
What I’m not seeing from you is any evidence anything I’ve asserted, through linking to Brietbart or anyone else, is false. Discounting news and evidence merely because of the source is a poor use of logic and rhetoric.
“Discounting news and evidence merely because of the source is a poor use of logic and rhetoric.”
If the source has habitually been a source of less-than-credible information.. and often quotes other questionable sources and their sources.. I have got little time to filter through critical thinking just to find some tidbit to grab onto, to devote to finger pointing, name calling, or whataboutism. Especially if the source reflects Trumpian meanderings and lies.
But.. we all know a even a broke clock is correct twice a day.
As for the Marxist DOJ (Just curious… how does the DOJ exhibit anything socialistic or communist?).. they seem awfully anxious to get their hands on the Committee’s testimony and evidence. Although maybe they just need the extra paper to wrap fish they caught.,, or make paper airplanes.
Wow. Russia Russia Russia!! Am I right? Weren’t you one of those who spent every waking hour lapping up the “Trump-Russia Collusion” narrative (among other such garbage)? You follow politicians like Adam Schiff and talking heads like Rachel Maddow, and then have the hypocrisy to accuse others of believing in “lies”? For someone who thinks himself so knowledgeable and intelligent (and yes, that attitude just drips off every word you write), your gullibility is off the scale!
Golly.. I have dripping words? Not sure I was all that “vocal” about Russia-Trump collusion but given his persona I certainly had little issue believing in the possibility… and even at that the Muller investigation left his findings on the subject up to others to discern. Then there was the Ukraine-Impeachment stuff. But that qualifies as that “among other garbage” you are citing.
As for my thinking I am so “knowledgeable and intelligent”.. I actually don’t think that at all in real life. I suppose if I were all that “intelligent” I can’t imagine why I would entertain being the only opposing voice in a totally Conservative blog. As for my gullibility.. I suppose I am at that old person age where I am worried about two things… my foot falling off the brake and hitting the gas pedal (or mistaking the gas pedal for the brake).. and falling for some scam to have something unnecessary installed on the house that will cost all the money I have… and then look perplexed.
Otherwise I feel just fine. I just pretend to know what I am doing in real life. In cyber space I simply pretend I am still alive.
“I suppose if I were all that “intelligent” I can’t imagine why I would entertain being the only opposing voice in a totally Conservative blog.”
Okay, heads up… I’m about to do something I don’t think I’ve done before. I’m gonna…. give you a compliment! That’s right, I’ll admit that it DOES take a bit of courage (if that’s the right word) to be just about the only person coming here with a contrary point of view on things. You are most definitely WRONG about some things, but I admire that you’re willing to do it. :D And yeah, I’m being serious. Oh, and as for you being at the stage in life where you’ve got bigger, more mundane things to worry about… I feel ya. I suspect you and I are close to the same age, and there are days when I alternate between feeling “I’m not doing too bad for my age!” and “Oh God, where’s my rocking chair?”
Just one more thing, about this being a “totally Conservative blog”. Actually I’ve noticed that at times Mike will call out the Right just as much as he does the Left… all depends on the issues and the facts involved at any given time. I like to think I do the same.
Actually, you may have seen me mention this before, and I know Mike knows it… but up till a very few years ago I was a life-long Democrat, and very much on “the Left”. I still don’t consider myself a Republican (though I’ve registered that way out of necessity), and most definitely NOT “right wing” on any issue I can think of. But you also couldn’t pay me enough to go back to the Dem party. I used to think that if this country ever went down the path toward fascism it would be the Right taking us there. But now it’s clear that it’s the Left doing everything they can to get us there.
Ok.. I should venture a “thanks” for the.. admiration for my courage for being in here… yet I know it’s in reference to the challenge of me differing with the majority and putting up with it. On the other hand… I didn’t start following Mike for some David vs. Goliath challenge. I follow a few Conservative-dominated blogs and I do it more from a curiosity of keeping tabs of opposing thoughts.. and engaging in an attempt to determine the “why” folks may think/feel the way they do. I’m an armchair humanist and educated behavoralist which means nothing to anyone else but me in that I find human endeavor interesting. The second reason I am in here is that for all the contrarian views I have.. Mike doesn’t kick me outta here. That doesn’t mean to suggest either of us in our own way haven’t entertained “These people are nuts.. why am I still here?” or in Mike’s case “This guy’s an idiot. I should just boot him outta here.”
I also will click on peoples’ gravatars to see if they have a blog from which I can understand where they are coming from in greater detail.
I was a Republican all my life… until election day 2020. I went Independent. The old Republicanism is gone… and Trump is a repulsive incompetent as a human being much less capable of anything remotely like being president.
The country is in bad shape.. and it’s centered deep into our American psyche into the uncompromising political divide.. and social upheaval of norms and traditions. We’ve drifted to some political moral turpitude. More violence to come, no question. Way too many Americans are looking to assign blame, get revenge, and massaging their trigger fingers… rather than try solving the problems.
Dear Doug:
My solution is everyone obeys the Constitution and the law, and all politicians take care of America and Americans. Any other solution leads to chaos and destruction, as we’re seeing in unmistakable terms these days.
And who judges that standard? Who determines if anyone is disobeying.. or even obeying, the Constitution? I tend to accept our judicial system, as defined in that Constitution, as the final arbiter… and my vote. You prefer Breitbart? Tucker?
Dear Doug:
Are you really suggesting Americans aren’t capable of determining whether they’re breaking the law? Do we not have a criminal and civil justice system? Are not laws a person of average intelligence cannot understand void for vagueness–unconstitutional?
Well, if you watched the BLM/Antifa riots, and many people’s REACTIONS to those riots, yeah… you have to wonder what THEY think about our laws.
I suppose in the end it’s simply a battle-of-the-news-sources. If you get yours from FOX or Breitbart and I opt for NYT, WaPo, CNN, MSNBC.. I suppose the impasse can last forever.
WaPo did their factchecking on the BLM riots…. check it here if interested.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/06/22/who-caused-violence-protests-its-not-antifa/
They seem to confirm that Antifa is not that organized in spite of what Trumpian Conservative like to deflect to. In fact… they report some 14,000 people were arrested with hundreds being convicted. So what Mike tends to deflect to regarding his equivalency in using the Summer riots as some judicial whataboutism compared to the J6 insurrection.. seems a bit off the mark.
I’m sure Tucker and Hannity would say otherwise.
Well.. you made my point. The justice system determines if laws are being broken and from that guilt is assigned.. or not. For example.. I know absolutely, positively for sure Trump has broken laws. But in the end.. it’s only my opinion.. not fact until it’s adjudicated thru a court of law. That principle I’ve defended and you’ve defended. So just because you “think” someone is breaking the law.. or not adhering to Constitutional precepts, doesn’t make them guilty of same. It certainly can still sway your vote though… your feelings and opinions alone. It did for me regarding Trump.. when I used my completely gut feel to cast my vote against him.
Thank gawd we don’t convict people on how we perceive their guilt or innocence might be.,
Oh.. forgot to include… you said, “You are most definitely WRONG about some things,”
Some things? I must be slipping.
Dear jello333:
What you said.
Dear Doug:
Vague accusations are easy. Show me where anything I’ve written, or anything to which I’ve linked is false.
We both know that’s impossible given truth and facts are determined by political bias. Conservatives like yourself were joyous with the “I told you so!” idea that NBC didn’t cover the last Committee broadcast because a golf event was more interesting to the public. But on the other end.. FOX, The Trump Propaganda Network, ended up covering the Committee broadcast on the 16th…. likely under pressure of whomever their audience is. Tucker and Hannity were not happy campers that day.
No one wins this, Mike. The country loses.
Dear Doug:
I live in the reality where there is such a thing as objective truth and falsifiable facts. I noted NBC’s choice only to make an objective point: even D/S/Cs most ardent propagandists know most Americans could not care less about the show trial. No joy or “I told you so” is involved.
The country loses when half–insert the proportion you prefer–refuses to acknowledge the Constitution and refuses to obey the law.