 |
Patriotism, Crime and The Need for Overwhelming Victory
Liz Cheney joins Kamala Harris in Wisconsin. Jack Smith argues that Trump’s crimes are not protected by presidential immunity. The felon prepares to reject the results of another election.
 |
For anyone who cares about self-governance—that is, the right of voters in a democracy to decide for themselves who they want to represent them—there’s only one candidate to choose for president this year. Only one candidate is committed to ensuring this fundamental right, while the other is committed to taking it away and seizing that power for himself.
This is at the heart of former GOP Rep. Liz Cheney’s decision to endorse Kamala Harris despite her significant policy differences with the Democratic nominee for president. Yesterday, Cheney took her decision to the next level by joining the vice president at a campaign event near the Little White School House in Ripon, Wisconsin, known as the birthplace of the Republican Party in 1854. That joint event is a vivid example of Harris’ belief that she can expand support among Independents and Trump-reluctant Republicans.
Back in August 2020, Cheney said this about then-vice-presidential nominee Kamala Harris: She has “a more liberal voting record than Bernie Sanders & Elizabeth Warren. Her radical leftist views—raising taxes, banning gun sales, taxpayer $ for abortion & illegal immigrant health care, eliminating private health insurance—would be devastating for America.”
Fast forward four years. Last month that same person said this while endorsing the current vice president: “Those of us who believe in the defense of our democracy, in the defense of our Constitution, and the survival of our republic have a duty in this election cycle to come together to put those things above politics.”
It’s remarkable to me how many Democrats can’t look past their differences and still effortlessly condemn Cheney. As if the urgency of this moment does not require strange bedfellows. As if the duty to defend democracy and the Constitution against a depraved and degraded man who will toss it all away to seize power and pursue fascist rule does not demand both pragmatic and larger thinking.
Yes, I’m still angry with her and furious with her father for many reasons—particularly their fervor for the Iraq war and waterboarding—but count me grateful that they both have stood up in this moment against the danger of Trump returning to the White House. And we know that Liz Cheney, who was the third-ranking Republican in the House and lost her seat in a primary after refusing to support Trump, did not just disappear. She has remained a steadfast opponent of Trump and is now an advocate for Kamala Harris.
“I am a Ronald Reagan Republican,” Cheney said yesterday, adding, “I have never voted for a Democrat. But this year, I am proudly casting my vote for Vice President Kamala Harris.”
After the crowd chanted “Thank you, Liz,” she said, “Vice President Harris is standing in the breech at a critical moment in our nation’s history. She’s working to unite reasonable people from all across the political spectrum.”
She then detailed Trump’s attacks on our democracy and beseeched Republicans, “I ask you to meet this moment—to reject the depraved cruelty of Donald Trump and to help elect Kamala Harris president.”
After Cheney introduced the Democratic nominee, VP Harris summarized what’s at stake: “Who will obey their oath? Who will abide by the oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States?”
The crowd cheered: “Kamala, Kamala, Kamala.”
“Donald Trump lost the 2020 election. He refused to accept the will of the people,” she continued. “I believe anyone who recklessly tramples our values, as Donald Trump has…Anyone who has called on the termination of the Constitution of the United States, as Donald Trump has, must never stand again behind the seal of the president of the United States. Never again. Never again.”
Liz Cheney stood right behind her left shoulder, applauding.
This decision should not be complicated, surely not for anyone who looks squarely at the newly released, 165-page filing from Special Counsel Jack Smith that provides new details about the violations of Trump on Jan. 6 and seeks to make the case that the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling does not cover Trump’s unofficial acts. Among the unsealed evidence:
His rejection of the will of the people: “It doesn’t matter if you won or lost the election,” Trump allegedly told family members and others on Marine One following the election. “You still have to fight like hell.”
His indifference toward his VP’s life: Just minutes after tweeting that “Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done,” Trump was told by an aide that Pence was being taken to a secure location for his safety. Trump’s callous response: “So what?”
His refusal to face facts: Trump was repeatedly given evidence confirming that he had failed to win the necessary votes to hold onto the White House. He was told by one of his election lawyers that his claims of fraud would fail to hold up in court. Trump’s reply: “The details don’t matter.”
Here’s how Jack Smith encapsulated Trump’s actions: “When the defendant lost the 2020 presidential election, he resorted to crimes to try to stay in office. With private co-conspirators, the defendant launched a series of increasingly desperate plans to overturn the legitimate election results in seven states that he had lost—Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin (the ‘targeted states’).”
Wonder if he’ll try again? I’d say you can bet on it.
In Ripon yesterday, Kamala Harris said Trump violated his oath—“and he would do it again.” It doesn’t take much imagination to grasp the truth of that.
Not when he tells Evangelical Christians that if they vote for him now, they won’t have to vote again. Not when he says, as he did in August, “Our primary focus is not to get out the vote, it is to make sure they don’t cheat.” Not when he pledges to use his office to jail political opponents “for a long time.”
Three days before the 2020 election, as Jack Smith’s new filing notes, one of his closest advisers told supporters that Trump was going to declare victory whatever happened on Election Day. That adviser is surely Steve Bannon.
The safety of his vice president? “So what?" There’s no real fraud? “The details don’t matter.” He lost the election? “You still have to fight like hell.”
This is not simply a summary of what happened in 2020. This is a summary of what this depraved and callous man still thinks. Only his overwhelming defeat can successfully stem the inevitable flood of lies already planned to deny the ascension of Kamala Harris to the Oval Office.
The voting has begun. We have one month until Nov. 5. We all have work to do. How about sharing this with a fence-sitting Independent or Republican you know?