Blog No. 289. Liz Cheney, Elise Stefanik and the Republican Death Wish

During the latter part of the Trump administration, RINOcracy.com published a series of blogs titled “Trump New Lows Tracker.” The series has not yet been succeeded by a “Republican New Lows Tracker,” but that is hardly for lack of material. Indeed, Republican behavior leading up to the January 6 insurrection, on that day, and in following weeks, provided numerous new lows. The imminent action to remove Liz Cheney from her position in the House Leadership is only the latest, and certainly won’t be the last, Republican new low. Nevertheless, it certainly qualifies, and it captures the essence of the Republicans’ downward spiral.

In the eyes of House Republicans, Cheney’s fundamental sin is that she has refused to swallow Trump’s delusional Big Lie: that he actually won the November election. Worse still, she has insisted on publicly explaining her refusal in clear and compelling terms. For readers who have managed to avoid following this controversy, a good starting place is Cheney’ op-ed in the Washington Post. Cheney’s full piece is quoted in an appendix to this blog, and while it should be read in full, the opening paragraph will give you the idea:

In public statements again this week, former president Donald Trump has repeated his claims that the 2020 election was a fraud and was stolen. His message: I am still the rightful president, and President Biden is illegitimate. Trump repeats these words now with full knowledge that exactly this type of language provoked violence on Jan. 6. And, as the Justice Department and multiple federal judges have suggested, there is good reason to believe that Trump’s language can provoke violence again. Trump is seeking to unravel critical elements of our constitutional structure that make democracy work — confidence in the result of elections and the rule of law. No other American president has ever done this.

Not surprisingly, Trump has made clear his own views of Cheney. One might almost hear Henry II muttering, “Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?” He has now enthusiastically endorsed Cheney’s successor-in-waiting, Rep. Elise Stefanik. Stefanik has a political history as, of all things, a moderate. She is not only less conservative than Cheney, but her voting record was far less supportive of Trump than was Cheney’s. The powerful conservative group, Club for Growth, opposes her candidacy. Nevertheless, for some inexplicable reason, Stefanik became a vocal defender of Trump and, in the Party of Trump, that is the coin of the realm.

Reflecting on Stefanik, the perceptive Peggy Noonan observed:

In a move the men who run the House GOP take to be sophisticated, they hope to replace Ms. Cheney with a woman, New York Rep. Elise Stefanik. It will haunt the rest of her career if she allows the boys to swap her for a woman who stood where she stands at a cost and for principle. A former member of Congress said this week: “When you’re replaying ‘All About Eve,’ you don’t want to play the part of Eve. You want to be Bette Davis. ” You don’t want to be the conniving understudy who takes out the star. Whoever replaces Ms. Cheney will be elevated by a conference that booted a woman for telling the truth but has expressed little criticism for, say, Rep. Matt Gaetz, reportedly being investigated by federal agents to determine whether he had sex with a minor (he’s denied it). Odd, isn’t it?

Cheney’s removal is, of course, supported by a depressing internal logic. In speaking out, Cheney was expressing truths that House Republicans could not process and could scarcely bear to hear. It was reported that even members who agreed with her wished that she would just keep quiet. House members are tethered to their base and their base is tethered to Trump. Period. An observer from the other chamber, Senator Lindsey Graham, no doubt spoke for House Republicans when he put it succinctly:

I would just say to my Republican colleagues, can we move forward without President Trump? The answer is no. I’ve always liked Liz Cheney, but she’s made a determination that the Republican Party can’t grow with President Trump. I’ve determined we can’t grow without him.

Given the gulf between Cheney and House Republicans in political philosophy and courage, her position in the House leadership may have become untenable.

Nevertheless, Cheney’s defenestration has received push-back from pillars on the right. A Wall Street Journal editorial observed that Cheney “may be ousted because she is daring to tell the truth to GOP voters—and at personal political risk,” and concluded “Purging Liz Cheney for honesty would diminish the party.” The National Review put it’s finger on the problem:

Of course, at the end of the day, the problem isn’t that Cheney is making controversial statements; the problem is that Republicans consider her obviously true statements to be controversial.

In a recent tweet that sent the move to ditch her into overdrive, Cheney wrote in response to a Trump statement calling his election defeat THE BIG LIE: “The 2020 presidential election was not stolen. Anyone who claims it was is spreading THE BIG LIE, turning their back on the rule of law, and poisoning our democratic system.” This should not be considered provocative.

The Review also emphasized that replacing Cheney with Stefanik could not be justified on grounds of policy differences:

But unlike Cheney, Stefanik stood with Trump by peddling his mendacious claims and voting against certification of President Biden’s Electoral College victory.

It’s a sad commentary on the state of the House GOP that this has now become a condition of advancement.

The disarray among Republicans should not merely be a moment of schadenfreude for Democrats, but should be a lesson for 2022. If the Republican Party is determined to remain the Party of Trump and, along with that, the Party of the Big Lie, Democrats should welcome a contest fought on those grounds. Every GOP candidate in 2022 should be forced to answer two questions: ”Do you recognize Donald Trump as the leader of your Party?” and “Do you agree with Donald Trump that he was re-elected and that he, and not Joe Biden, is the legitimate President?” Answers in either the affirmative or the negative will be helpful. Affirmative answers will alienate Independents and many Republicans; negative answers will bring down the wrath of Trump on the candidate and cost that candidate support from the Trump base. Win-win.

Arizona Republicans Bamboozled. No reference to current Republican New Lows would be complete without mention of the bizarre antics on display in Arizona. Arizona Republicans have commissioned an “audit” of ballots from Maricopa County conducted by a private firm, Cyber Ninjas, that has no election experience and is headed by a notorious conspiracy theorist, Doug Logan. One aspect of the audit is a search for ballots with traces of bamboo, indicating that they had been shipped in from China. Donald Trump is reportedly following the progress of the audit with intense interest. You can’t make this stuff up, but there has to be a Netflix movie here.

Appendix

​The GOP is at a turning point. History is watching us.

​Liz Cheney, Washington Post, May 5, 2021​

​In public statements again this week, former president Donald Trump has repeated his claims that the 2020 election was a fraud and was stolen. His message: I am still the rightful president, and President Biden is illegitimate. Trump repeats these words now with full knowledge that exactly this type of language provoked violence on Jan. 6. And, as the Justice Department and multiple federal judges have suggested, there is good reason to believe that Trump’s language can provoke violence again. Trump is seeking to unravel critical elements of our constitutional structure that make democracy work — confidence in the result of elections and the rule of law. No other American president has ever done this.

The Republican Party is at a turning point, and Republicans must decide whether we are going to choose truth and fidelity to the Constitution. In the immediate wake of the violence of Jan. 6, almost all of us knew the gravity and the cause of what had just happened — we had witnessed it firsthand.

House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy (Calif.) left no doubt in his public remarks. On the floor of the House on Jan. 13, McCarthy said: “The president bears responsibility for Wednesday’s attack on Congress by mob rioters. He should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding.” Now, McCarthy has changed his story.

I am a conservative Republican, and the most conservative of conservative values is reverence for the rule of law. Each of us swears an oath before God to uphold our Constitution. The electoral college has spoken. More than 60 state and federal courts, including multiple Trump-appointed judges, have rejected the former president’s arguments, and refused to overturn election results. That is the rule of law; that is our constitutional system for resolving claims of election fraud.

The question before us now is whether we will join Trump’s crusade to delegitimize and undo the legal outcome of the 2020 election, with all the consequences that might have. I have worked overseas in nations where changes in leadership come only with violence, where democracy takes hold only until the next violent upheaval. America is exceptional because our constitutional system guards against that. At the heart of our republic is a commitment to the peaceful transfer of power among political rivals in accordance with law. President Ronald Reagan described this as our American “miracle.”

While embracing or ignoring Trump’s statements might seem attractive to some for fundraising and political purposes, that approach will do profound long-term damage to our party and our country. Trump has never expressed remorse or regret for the attack of Jan. 6 and now suggests that our elections, and our legal and constitutional system, cannot be trusted to do the will of the people. This is immensely harmful, especially as we now compete on the world stage against Communist China and its claims that democracy is a failed system.

For Republicans, the path forward is clear.

First, support the ongoing Justice Department criminal investigations of the Jan. 6 attack. Those investigations must be comprehensive and objective; neither the White House nor any member of Congress should interfere.

Second, we must support a parallel bipartisan review by a commission with subpoena power to seek and find facts; it will describe for all Americans what happened. This is critical to defeat the misinformation and nonsense circulating in the press and on social media. No currently serving member of Congress — with an eye to the upcoming election cycle — should participate. We should appoint former officials, members of the judiciary and other prominent Americans who can be objective, just as we did after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The commission should be focused on the Jan. 6 attacks. The Black Lives Matter and antifa violence of last summer was illegal and reprehensible, but it is a different problem with a different solution.

Finally, we Republicans need to stand for genuinely conservative principles, and steer away from the dangerous and anti-democratic Trump cult of personality. In our hearts, we are devoted to the American miracle. We believe in the rule of law, in limited government, in a strong national defense, and in prosperity and opportunity brought by low taxes and fiscally conservative policies.

There is much at stake now, including the ridiculous wokeness of our political rivals, the irrational policies at the border and runaway spending that threatens a return to the catastrophic inflation of the 1970s. Reagan formed a broad coalition from across the political spectrum to return America to sanity, and we need to do the same now. We know how. But this will not happen if Republicans choose to abandon the rule of law and join Trump’s crusade to undermine the foundation of our democracy and reverse the legal outcome of the last election.

History is watching. Our children are watching. We must be brave enough to defend the basic principles that underpin and protect our freedom and our democratic process. I am committed to doing that, no matter what the short-term political consequences might be.