Yawn. I got plenty. But first: I stand by my view that it reflects very poorly on you that you take Schlicter seriously. That was the main point of my response to you. He’s a deceitful and pathetic troll. But since you can’t see that. I’ll pretend you asked the question. 1/
https://twitter.com/adambaldwin/status/1390096510159790080
She didn’t “attack the base.” Show me a quote from Cheney where she attacked the base. She said Trump lied about the election being stolen. That’s factually true. If some people are triggered by that, okay. But that’s not “attacking the base.”
2/
2/
Indeed, the idea that defenestrating Cheney is a sign of seriousness only makes sense at all if you believe the party is deadly serious about being a Trumpist cult. 3/
In fairness to you, that is precisely what many people want it to be. So yes, this is a sign of seriousness if you think the GOP should be defined by loyalty to Trump above all else. How else to explain the Trumpers embracing a far more liberal congresswoman to replace her? 4/
After all, Stefanik falls short of Liz Cheney in every regard save one: She is a pliable and malleable sycophant to Trump. Not his policies mind you. Cheney voted with Trump more than Stefanik. No, she’s just more of a Trump ass-kisser. 5/
Stefanik supported the unconstitutional and anti-constitutional effort to steal the election. She’s less conservative than Cheney according to Heritage Action and the ACU. She’s a hackishly and opportunistically loyal Trump shill. But, she is “serious” about it. 6/
By the way, this is the short answer to your “I got nothing” taunt. Here’s a longer response. gfile.thedispatch.com/p/liz-cheney-g… 7/7
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
