Thursday, August 18, 2022

Tucker Carlson, Democracy Crushed Liz Cheney and She Can’t Stand It


Tucker Carlson gives his take on the resounding defeat of Republican congresswoman Liz Cheney from the state of Wyoming.

Indeed, one of the brutally obvious points that Carlson hammers home, is that Cheney was crushed by the voters of Wyoming.  Everyone outside Wyoming was a spectator on the sidelines watching to see how they felt about the insufferable war-mongering witch; but no one outside Wyoming had the ability to vote.

Ms. Cheney was rejected by her own tribe, by the system of Wyoming democracy in action, the same system she promoted during her self-absorbed time in congress.  Perhaps if Ms. Cheney had actually represented the people of Wyoming, instead of her own ego-driven aspirations of political power, she may have avoided the biggest primary defeat by an incumbent officeholder in a century.  WATCH:



🚨Hetty has finally been mentioned by the showrunner in his Season 14 NCIS LA plan🚨

 


The drought has ended. After so many long, painful months, Hetty has finally been positively mentioned by someone who works on NCIS LA.

Here's the info: (Source: https://tvline.com/2022/08/18/ncis-los-angeles-season-14-will-hetty-return-callen-wedding/ )


Might wedding bells for Callen and Anna herald the (latest) long-awaited return of NCIS: Los Angeles‘ Hetty?

Original cast member Linda Hunt’s enigmatic character last appeared on-camera in May 2021, at the close of Season 12, when Hetty fittingly ended her previous vanishing act to wish Nell and Eric well with their post-NCIS life.

Coming off of that, there was a plan to have Hunt back for Season 13, and ideally to a greater degree, but you know what they say — “Man plans, and God and COVID surges laugh.” (or just a terrible showrunner playing chicken with the writing) As a result, Hunt appeared only in last October’s premiere, where Hetty informed Kilbride that she needed to return to Syria (where she had spent much of Season 12 and apparently left things a mess).

Callen, as a result, was left to rummage around by himself for the newest,latest (completely faked) truth about his childhood — namely, whether he was but one of many youths “recruited” and mentored by Ms. Lange. But on a much happier note, Season 13 ended with Callen proposing to Anna Kolchek in front of a beach sunset, and his longtime girlfriend gleefully accepting. (shouldn't have done it without Hetty being there!!!!)

As part of TVLine’s in-depth NCIS: Los Angeles Fall Preview, showrunner R. Scott Gemmill said that shortly after Season 14 opens (on Sunday, Oct. 9), Callen (played by Chris O’Donnell) will be thinking about his and Anna’s (Bar Paly) upcoming wedding when “he realizes he has unfinished business, and wouldn’t want to get married without Hetty present.” Callen’s wish to have his adoptive mother on hand for his big day will — eventually, hopefully (don't say 'hopefully', the word you're looking for, is 'definitely'!) — precipitate a return for Hetty and the 77-year-old Hunt.

“The plan,” Gemmill says, “is to go and rescue her at some point, find out what she’s gotten herself into.

“We’re just trying to figure out schedule-wise when we can pull that off,” he added. “That was the plan last year, too, but it didn’t come to fruition. We had a bit of a [COVID variant] (sure asshole, sure) surge, but things seem to be settling down a bit. Hopefully, nothing new comes along and we can make the happen this year.” (or until he finds another made up excuse to screw everything up again because he's a massive chicken!!)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My take: This ain't any new photo, nor is it the absolute confirmation I've been awaiting all year on her return. But, I have no choice but to trust this lying asshole to deliver my most important wish. (yeah, I hate that thought too).

He needs to deliver on this. Otherwise, I will never, ever trust him again. Just bring her home, alive. That's all I'm asking for. It's not too much to deliver on!!

Please pray this prayer gets answered. I and every other Hetty fan deserves a win after this hellish year.

A Greater Nationalism

Americans were once steeped in the histories of many nations when they understood why they loved their country and embraced others who loved their countries.


The year was 1876, the centennial of the Declaration of Independence, and a young Pole, a promising author, was traveling through the United States with the most renowned Polish actress of her time, Helena Modjeska, and her husband, and a few other young people. They were trying to rid themselves of the miseries of a nation they loved, which for many years had been gobbled up by its greedy neighbors, and which, when the man died 40 years later, had still not regained its independence. 

They were going to move to California to do ranching and farming, in an idealistic commune after the fashion of Brook Farm, but reality intruded, the project fell through, Mrs. Modjeska returned to the stage (much to the delight of Americans), and the young man, Henryk Sienkiewicz, began to make a name for himself, writing his own impressions of democracy in America, to be published back home—in the land he loved so dearly, the land to which he would return, the land and its Christian faith, that would inspire all his greatest works.

I am re-reading the second novel, The Deluge, in his vast historical trilogy set during the reign of John Casimir II (r. 1648-1668), when invaders from Sweden poured in from the north and nearly wiped the kingdom out, because the Polish nobility were fractious—preferring private interests and an ignoble peace before loyalty to their prince, and even before the freedom of their commonwealth. 

Ask a Polish schoolboy what began to turn the Swedes back, and he will reply without delay, “Jasna Gora!”—that is, Bright Mountain, the site of a monastery overlooking the town of Czestochowa, and he may also recount the miracle one morning that sank the hearts of the Swedes who beheld it, as the monastery appeared to be looming above them, shining and rising farther and farther, as if to say to them that despite their thousands of soldiers and their battery of cannons, the monastery—and with it the faith, and the nation whose heart was in that faith—was impregnable.

Well, there still is a United States of America—on the map at least—and we still have a Congress and a president and 50 states. Prussia and Austria and Russia and others are not going to collude to pick us to pieces. But when the soul is gone, what is left but a shell? And even if that shell walks and talks and uses the words that real human beings who loved their land once used, without the animating faith and love the words mean nothing. They are empty counters in a political game, or things to shout at your enemies as you rave and rage about the remains of a culture.

When Sienkiewicz wrote his epic novels, he did not intend them to be read by a few literati at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow, the nearest large city to Jasna Gora. They were, like the novels of Mark Twain on this side of the ocean, published serially in what were then the land’s most popular magazines, so that all kinds of people, from children to their eldest grandparents, boys and girls, men and women, doctors and farmers, lawyers and carpenters, priests and laymen, would immerse themselves in a time in their history that was at once shameful and heroic. Shameful, because, as Sienkiewicz shows, Poland was self-defeated, overcome by the selfishness, cowardice, and treachery of her own citizens; and then heroic, because those same citizens repented of their ways, and despite all the worldly profit they might gain by taking the last step into disgrace, they never did raise their hands against the person of their anointed King, and they never did renounce their faith in Christ, their sole hope and redeemer. 

What kept Poland alive during the more than a hundred years when her neighbors tried to absorb and dissolve her? The same thing that kept her alive in the 20th century, when the Soviets and their creatures descended upon the land like a plague of locusts. It was not trust in some political system. It was a deep, abiding faith in the God who never abandons sinful man to his self-destructive devices, a faith that is the best and truest fount of patriotic love. It burned in the blood of Pope John Paul II and Lech Walesa and millions of other Poles, until the great might of the Soviet Union was consumed, like a bit of chaff in a roaring fire.

We do not have an American Sienkiewicz now, in part because we lack the readers. We are deluged by junk. Let me cite a few reviews of the first book in the trilogy, With Fire and Sword, to lend credence to what I say. “A battle piece, painted with the minuteness of a Meissonier and the breadth of a Vereshchagin,” says one reviewer, referring to the great French painter of the armies and battles of Napoleon, and the Russian painter of the terrors of war. That review came not from Slowo (The Word), the magazine that published the book, but from the Chicago Post. “A great novel,” says another reviewer. “He exhibits the sustained power and sweep of narrative of Walter Scott, and the humor of Cervantes. A greater novelist than Tolstoy.” That review came not from Czas (Time), one of the journals that would serialize his later work, set in the apostolic age, Quo Vadis?—the work that probably sealed Sienkiewicz his Nobel Prize in 1905. It came from The Philadelphia Inquirer.

I could go on, but the point seems clear enough. Americans were steeped in the histories of many nations. Great art and literature meant much to them. They saw themselves as the inheritors of western Christendom and its Jewish and Greco-Roman cultural foundations. Because they loved their country, they embraced others who loved their countries. Because they were interested in the glory of America, not unmixed with sin and shame, they wanted to hear about other countries, and what they had suffered, and how they had emerged victorious. 

But what audience could Sienkiewicz’s works now command, when so few people read good books, and when people sneer at their own forefathers and bring their statues down, because the men were men and not angels, and no one has any historical sense? What readership, when no one engages in the most terrifying of ventures, which is not to send robots into outer space but to turn the eye inward upon the conscience, that dreadful frontier, where our deeds are made to testify to the truth and not to what we want to believe about them?

Yet Sienkiewicz has much to teach us. If America—the reality, not the shell or the simulacrum—is to live on, it must be as Poland lived on during his life, and that is by an uncompromising devotion to what is and has been best in her, inseparable from her faith in God who made the world. For God, as Lech Walesa valiantly affirmed—Walesa the electrician who was inspired by Sienkiewicz, and who quoted him when he received his own Nobel Prize in 1983—is greater than any king or any occupying army, or, as we might say here and now, greater than mass entertainment and its tawdry lies, greater than Congress and its treacherous ineptitude, greater than the swamp of self-seeking and corruption and power-mongering that sits on the Potomac, greater than all the money and the madness in the world. 

For to the Lord, all the nations and their deluge, as the prophet says, are but a drop in the bucket.



X22, And we Know, and more- August 18

 



Before I get to tonight's news, I have some sad news to report on first:

A Disqus pal of mine, and probably some of yours as well, Ribbey, owner of Ribbey's Roadhouse, passed away today from heart failure, something she's had for a few years.

She was a great friend to me, and the site she made was a great place to hang out at. The tribute post is here: https://ribbeysroadhouse.blogspot.com/2022/08/ribbey-has-left-roadhouse.html

I'll miss her.


US World War One wreck found by divers off Cornwall

 

Mesmerising footage of the wreck of a US warship that sank during World War One has been released.

Divers have explored the remains of USS Jacob Jones for the first time, 105 years after it went down off the Cornish coast.

A total of 66 servicemen were lost after the vessel was torpedoed by a German submarine, on 6 December 1917.

Plymouth diver Dom Robinson, who was part of Team Darkstar, said the find was "every diver's dream".

The USS Jacob Jones, was found more than 100m under the water on 11 August with some of its features still intact.

The ship's torpedo tubes, bell and boilers are clearly visible in the footage.

Mr Robinson said the team, which spent more than a year planning the trip, were in talks with the US embassy about what happens next.

"The discovery of the USS Jacob Jones and the remains of those who lost their lives onboard more than a century ago is truly at the heart of the American Battle Monuments Commission's charge to honour the memories of our missing and to keep their legacies alive," a spokeswoman for the American Battle Monuments Commission said.

"Even after more than 100 years, we never forget the sacrifices that were made in the name of freedom."  


https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-england-cornwall-62597453    




‘Civil War’ Porn ~ VDH

Those who warn most of some mythical civil war are those most likely to incite one.


As Joe Biden’s polls stagnate and the midterms approach, we are now serially treated to yet another progressive melodrama about the dangers of a supposed impending radical right-wing violent takeover. 

This time the alleged threat is a Neanderthal desire for a “civil war.”  

The FBI raid on Donald Trump’s Florida home, the dubious rationale for such a historic swoop, and the popular pushback at the FBI and Department of Justice from roughly half the country have further fueled these giddy “civil war” conjectures. 

Recently “presidential historian” Michael Beschloss speculated about the parameters of such an envisioned civil war.

Beschloss is an ironic source. Just days earlier, he had tweeted references to the executions of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, who passed U.S. nuclear secrets to the Soviet Union in the 1950s, in connection with the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago.  

That was a lunatic insinuation that Trump might justly suffer the same lethal fate due to supposedly mishandling of “nuclear secrets.” Unhinged former CIA Director Michael Hayden picked up on Beschloss death-penalty prompt, adding that it “sounds about right.”                                                                                                       

Hayden had gained recent notoriety for comparing Trump’s continuance of the Obama Administration’s border detention facilities to Hitler’s death camps. And he had assured the public that Hunter Biden’s lost and incriminating laptop was likely “Russian disinformation”. 

So, like the earlier “Russian collusion” hoax, and the January 6 “insurrection,” the supposed right-wing inspired civil war is the latest shrill warning from the Left about how “democracy dies in darkness” and the impending end of progressive control of Congress in a few months. 

On cue, Hollywood now joins the civil war bandwagon. It has issued a few bad, grade-C movies. They focus on deranged white “insurrectionists” who seek to take over the United States in hopes of driving out or killing off various “marginalized” peoples. 

Pentagon grandees promise to learn about “white rage” in the military and to root it out. But never do they offer any hard data to suggest white males express any greater degree of racial or ethnic chauvinism than any other demographic.

When we do hear of an insurrectionary plan—to kidnap the Michigan governor—we discover a concocted mess. Twelve FBI informants outnumbered the supposed four “conspirators.” And two of them were acquitted by a jury and the other two so far found not guilty due to a mistrial.

The buffoonish January 6 riot at the Capitol is often cited as proof of the insurrectionary right-wing movement. But the one-day riotous embarrassment never turned up any armed revolutionaries or plots to overthrow the government.

What it did do was give the Left an excuse to weaponize the nation’s capital with barbed wire and thousands of federal troops, in the greatest militarization of Washington D.C. since the Civil War.

In contrast, Antifa and BLM rioters were no one-day buffoons. They systematically organized a series of destructive and deadly riots across the country for over four months in summer 2020. The lethal toll of their work was over 35 dead, $2 billion in property losses, and hundreds of police officers injured. 

Such violent protestors torched the ironic St. John’s Episcopal church and attempted to fight their way into the White House grounds. Their violent agenda prompted the Secret Service to evacuate the president of the United States to a secure bunker. 

The New York Times gleefully applauded the rioting near the White House grounds with the snarky headline “Trump Shrinks Back.”  

As far as secession talk, it mostly now comes from the Left, not the Right. Indeed, a parlor game has sprung up among elites in venues such as The Nation and The New Republic imaging secession from the United States. Blue-staters brag secession would free them from the burden of the red-state conservative population.

Over the last five years, it was the Left who talked openly of tearing apart the American system of governance—from packing the Supreme Court and junking the Electoral College to ending the ancient filibuster and nullifying immigration law. 

Time essayist Molly Ball in early 2021 gushed about a brilliant “conspiracy” of wealthy tech lords, Democratic Party activists, and Biden operators. 

Ball bragged how they had systematically poured hundreds of millions of dark money into changing voting laws, and absorbing the role of government registrars in key precincts.

What was revolutionary were new progressive precedents of impeaching a president twice, trying him as a private citizen, barring minority congressional representatives from House committee memberships, and tearing up the state of the union address on national television.

In contrast, decrying the weaponization of a once-professional FBI, and the scandals among its wayward Washington hierarchy is not insurrectionary. Nor is being appalled at the FBI raiding a former president’s and possible presidential candidate’s home, when historically disputes over presidential papers were the business of lawyers not armed agents. 

Historic overreach is insurrectionary, not objecting to it. And those who warn most of some mythical civil war are those most likely to incite one.



Deranged Russia Hoaxer Peter Strzok Is Back With One Of The Most Unhinged Trump Conspiracy Theories Yet



After spending years instigating and advancing the debunked conspiracy theory that former President Donald Trump colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election, disgraced former FBI agent Peter Strzok is once again pushing the same, garbage narrative.

In a tweet referencing a Truth Social post by Trump, in which the former president announced that the FBI took several of his passports during the bureau’s raid on his Mar-a-Lago home, Strzok baselessly claimed that one of the documents is a “Russian passport” that is “kept in a vault at Yasenevo and only swapped out at third country meets.”

“Please oh please keep asking how you can turn down the temperature in the country,” the tweet reads. “And why does he have two passports?”

The post attacking Trump came the same day Strzok appeared on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” to defend the FBI’s raid of the former president’s estate, with Strzok attempting to claim the agency applies the law “objectively” to both sides of the political aisle.

“It’s not that the FBI is targeting any one side or the other,” Strzok said. “What you see is the FBI going out on a day-in and day-out basis objectively investigating allegations of law.”

As outlandish as his “Russian passport” claims may seem, peddling Trump-Russia conspiracy theories is nothing new for the former FBI agent. In addition to being a notable figure in the Hillary Clinton email probe, Strzok, along with his former mistress and fellow agent Lisa Page, was notorious for playing an incredibly biased role in the FBI’s investigation of then-candidate Donald Trump’s campaign leading up to and following the 2016 presidential election.

In publicly revealed text messages between Strzok and Page, the two agents repeatedly exchanged feelings of harsh animosity towards Trump.

“Omg [Trump’s] an idiot,” a message sent on March 3, 2016, said.

“Trump is a disaster. I have no idea how destabilizing his Presidency would be,” said another, dated July 21, 2016.

The more alarming of the messages, however, came the following month when the two agents discussed the use of an “insurance policy,” were Trump to be elected that November.

“[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!,” Page said on Aug. 8, to which Strzok replied, “No. No he’s not. We’ll stop it.”

“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in [Andrew McCabe’s] office-that there’s no way [Trump] gets elected-but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk,” Strzok emphasized in a text dated Aug. 15. “It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40…”

An inspector general report released in 2018 criticized Strzok for, as The Federalist reported at the time, his “biased handling of the Hillary Clinton email and Russia collusion investigations” and “for using personal tech devices to handle FBI business,” with the report highlighting the institutional “damage” Strzok and his counterparts caused as a result of their openly biased conduct.

“[T]he damage caused by [Strzok and his colleagues’] actions extends far beyond the scope of the Midyear investigation and goes to the heart of the FBI’s reputation for neutral factfinding and political independence,” the report said. “At a minimum, we found that the employees’ use of FBI systems and devices to send the identified messages demonstrated extremely poor judgment and a gross lack of professionalism.”




Mike Pence Gets to Work Burning His 2024 Campaign to the Ground


Bonchie reporting for RedState 

It’s abundantly clear that former Vice President Mike Pence is going to run for president in 2024. He’s been putting in the leg work lately, with a scheduled trip to New Hampshire coming up. He’s also positioned himself as a Trump foil in the mid-term GOP primaries, taking a contrary position to the former president in several states, most recently in Arizona.

For my part, I think Pence’s pursuit is delusional. There is exactly one person in the GOP who would be palatable to Trump voters if Trump himself weren’t the nominee, and his name is Ron DeSantis. There is no one else who comes close to having the track record necessary, both regarding policy and the willingness to fight.

Certainly, Pence doesn’t fit the bill. He’s not a charismatic individual, and when push came to shove, he folded in the face of the woke lobby as governor of Indiana (we didn’t use the term “woke” back then, but you get the idea). That Trump even picked him to be vice president has always been a bit of a head-scratcher, though, it’s understandable that he wanted some establishment credibility on the ticket to galvanize the party.

Regardless, Pence is going to run in 2024, and he’s getting a head start on burning his campaign to the ground. Here he is defending the FBI after the Mar-a-Lago raid via the Washington Examiner.

Former Vice President Mike Pence had a clear message to his fellow Republicans: Stop attacking rank-and-file FBI personnel.

Acknowledging Republican concerns about the FBI raid on former President Donald Trump’s lavish Mar-a-Lago resort last week, Pence warned the GOP to steer clear of calling to defund the FBI or taking their ire over the raid too far.

“Our party stands with the men and women who stand on the thin blue line at the federal, state, and local levels. These attacks on the FBI must stop,” Pence declared at a forum in New Hampshire Wednesday. “Calls to defund the FBI are just as wrong as calls to defund the police.”

Talk about not knowing what time it is. I think it’s safe to say that most Republicans are past the point of defending the “rank-and-file” FBI agents who happily follow the orders of their partisan superiors. At some point, you can’t continue to defend a blatantly corrupt and politically weaponized agency by saying, “well, the rank-and-file are all good guys.” What’s the evidence of that? And given the FBI’s extremely checkered history, there’s every reason to believe that outsized egos and abuses of power are far more common throughout the bureau’s hierarchy than Pence would have us believe.

To put it in broader terms, these bland “back the blue” talking points don’t play with GOP voters anymore. Republicans are sick and tired of being told to support people who don’t support them. Yes, it’s still a good thing to stand behind your local law enforcement if they do things properly, but these generic demands that we never criticize the police? Pence can jump in a lake with that stuff. State power is state power, and it needs to be curtailed, not coddled. In the case of the FBI, it is not an agency worth saving, and calls to defund it, at least until it stops being a political organization, are absolutely proper.

Pence wasn’t done, though. He also recently said that he would consider appearing before the January 6th committee.

“If there was an invitation to participate, I would consider it,” Pence said during an event at Saint Anselm College in Manchester, NH.

“I would have to reflect on the unique role that I was serving in as vice president,” the former Indiana governor added. “It’d be unprecedented in history for a vice president to be summoned to testify on Capitol Hill.”

The committee generally videotapes interviews with subjects and then airs snippets of the most damning parts at public hearings.

“I don’t want to prejudge. If there’s ever any formal invitation rendered to us, we’d give it due consideration,” Pence emphasized Wednesday. “But my first obligation is to continue to uphold my oath [and] continue to uphold the framework of government enshrined in the Constitution.”

Given how the January 6th committee members have conducted themselves, obfuscating and even altering evidence in order to present a false narrative, the only right answer to an invitation to appear is “you better subpoena me.” It’s not 2021 anymore. It’s obvious the committee exists simply to harm Republicans and that it has none of the evidence it claims it had to prove a “seven-step” plan by Trump to overthrow the government.

Pence giving that committee even a hint of credibility instead of lambasting it is another red flag about what kind of politician he is. He’s doggedly establishment, and unwilling to say the tough things when the moment calls for it. Is that really what he thinks Republicans want in 2024? Ironically, Pence running will probably only help Trump secure the nomination. That his ego won’t allow him to see that is a testament to what Washington does to people.




Ron DeSantis Wins the Coveted David Frum Endorsement – The Acceptable Republican Presidential Candidate


In addition to being a featured writer in The Atlantic, David Frum is a tenured member of the republican professional political class.  Frum has a similar pedigree to many well-known republican politicians, and his curriculum vitae includes:

“David Frum has been active in Republican politics since the first Reagan campaign of 1980. From 2014 through 2017, Frum served as chairman of the board of trustees of the leading UK center-right think tank, Policy Exchange. In 2001-2002, he served as speechwriter and special assistant to President George W. Bush.

David Frum holds a BA and MA in history from Yale and a law degree from Harvard, where he served as President of the Federalist Society.  He and his wife Danielle Crittenden Frum live in Washington DC and Wellington, Ontario. They have three adult children.” (link)

[ Source Link ]





Did Abraham Lincoln star in “Fatal Attraction?”

Liz thinks she’s Abraham Lincoln? Who is she kidding? 
She’s less “stove-pipe hat” and more “boil a bunny on a stove.”

Yesterday, after losing to her primary challenger by over 35 points, Congresswoman Liz Cheney compared herself to Abraham Lincoln in her sanctimonious concession speech.

Yeah. Really.

What is it about the obsessive Trump haters? Eventually, all of them start exhibiting the same behaviors they claim to hate in Trump.

Imagine the hubris and denial necessary to believe getting your ass handed to you in a humiliating defeat makes you the next Abraham Lincoln.

Has there ever been an incumbent Republican House member who lost a primary challenge by such a wide margin?

I’d be embarrassed for Liz Cheney. But she’s so lacking in self-awareness that my being embarrassed for her would be a waste of energy.

Besides, right now my health hasn’t been too hot and I need all my energy to keep from taking to my bed for a week.

Yes, Abraham Lincoln lost some elections too.

But that’s where the comparison ends.

Abraham Lincoln wasn’t a bitter fishwife so obsessed with a single politician that he burned every bridge and blew up his own career out of miserable spite.

This woman, so fueled by spite and malice that she vilifies half the country as white supremacists, insurrectionists, and “election deniers” actually has the gall to compare herself to the man who called for healing the divisions of the Civil War saying, “With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds.”

Who does she think she’s kidding with this nonsense?

Liz Cheney isn’t Lincoln. She’s Glenn Close in “Fatal Attraction.”

There’s a lot less “stove-pipe hat” and more “boil a bunny on a stove” to Liz Cheney.

She can’t let go of Donald Trump.

Her obsession with him has become all-consuming that she thinks nothing of spitting malicious slanders at half the population.

Sure, her fan base in the media is claiming Cheney’s scorched-earth insanity show she is “principled” and “courageous.”

Those of us not blinded by Trump hate find the media’s claims rather amusing.

But not Liz Lincoln. Nope. Liz is buying into it lock, stock, and barrel.

Then again, she’s never been particularly good at reading the room, has she?

Since her embarrassing defeat last night, people have been retweeting a September 2021 tweet of Liz Lincoln Cheney responding to Trump endorsing Harriet Hageman’s primary challenge against her.

Reading the tweet today is all kinds of funny:

Bring it tweet

Consider it brought, Liz, you clueless, out-of-touch harridan.

The woman who confidently tweeted “Bring it” is the same woman who just yesterday compared herself to Abraham Lincoln to imply that she too will one day be President of the United States.

That’s pretty much all you need to know.

Listen, Liz will do about as well in the 2024 Republican primaries as that slack-jawed idiot Joe Walsh did in 2020, whether or not Donald Trump runs again.

There simply isn’t a groundswell of support for this woman among Republican voters. Sure, she might get a couple thousand people in Iowa and New Hampshire to vote for her. She may even manage to stay in the race long enough to come in dead last in South Carolina. She might even try to pull a John Kasich and stay in far beyond her sell-by date. But it won’t matter. Liz will never get the Republican nomination.

The only constituency clamoring for a Liz Cheney 2024 run are registered Democrats in the media. And those people wouldn’t vote in a Republican Primary if their lives depended on it.

Intelligent Republicans know not to take the advice of left-wing activists in the American corporate news media.

But not Abraham Lincoln Cheney. Nope. She is so blinded by their slobbering praise that she can’t see how quixotic her presidential aspirations are.

Sure, she could announce she’s running as a Democrat. But when given a chance to vote for a real Democrat or a desperate, grasping loser like Liz, most Democrat primary voters are going to pull the lever for the real Democrat.

It’s equally possible Liz might decide to run as an Independent.

You know, like Evan McMullin did in 2016.

But a third-party run by Cheney would likely siphon off just as many Democrat votes as Republican, effectively neutralizing her chance of monkey-wrenching the eventual Republican nominee.

Whatever she chooses to do, I’m sure Liz found one silver lining to yesterday’s humiliation.

At least now, the “Beltway Cowgirl” (as Kurt Schlichter calls her) can stop pretending she lives in Wyoming and finally come out of the closet as a permanent resident of Northern Virginia.