Liz Cheney warns Trump will never leave office if he's elected president again
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Dec. 4, 2023, 3:21 PM By Rebecca Shabad
WASHINGTON — Former Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., warned Monday that if Donald Trump is elected president next year for a second term, he will try to remain in power beyond those four years.
"There's no question," Cheney said about that possibility in an interview on NBC's "TODAY" show with host Savannah Guthrie in advance of the release Tuesday of her book, "Oath and Honor: A Memoir and a Warning."
Asked if she believes Trump would try to stay in power forever, Cheney said, "Absolutely. He's already done it once," referring to his efforts after the 2020 presidential election to overturn Joe Biden's victory and to stop its certification on Jan. 6, 2021.
The U.S. could become a dictatorship if Trump is re-elected, Cheney warned. "I think it's a very, very real threat and concern. And I don't say any of that lightly and frankly, it's painful for me as someone who has spent her whole life in Republican politics, who grew up as a Republican to watch what's happening to my party and to watch the extent to which Donald Trump himself has basically determined that the only thing that matters is him, his power and his success."
Cheney said it's "naive" for Americans to think the country would survive another Trump presidency. She argued that Americans cannot count on a House led by Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., to stop Trump or a Senate whose members include Republicans Josh Hawley, of Missouri, or Mike Lee, of Utah.
Asked what would happen if Trump tried to overturn the election again with Johnson as House speaker, Cheney said it's "too dangerous to even contemplate going down that path" because, she said, they all had a "practice run" in 2020 and 2021.
Cheney suggested it would be safer for the country for Democrats to take control of the House, saying emphatically that Johnson and the Republicans currently serving there cannot be in the majority in 2025, especially if it has to determine the outcome of the presidential election.
"I think what we have seen is that you cannot count on this group of elected Republicans to uphold their oath," she said.
Cheney repeated that she would "never vote for Donald Trump" and that she would "do whatever it takes to make sure that Donald Trump is defeated in 2024." Asked if that means she would vote for Biden, she repeated, "I will do whatever it takes."
"A vote for Donald Trump may mean the last election that you ever get to vote in," she warned. "A vote for Donald Trump is a vote against the Constitution."
The former congresswoman and daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney said she would see how the presidential race unfolds over the next couple of months before deciding if she would try to launch her own White House bid.
Rebecca Shabad
Rebecca Shabad is a politics reporter for NBC News based in Washington.
Just a word: that second meme is quite interesting in its appearance.
You know the former 'president' didn't plan on leaving the first time. 'The boss said he wasn't leaving'
I would have love to see White House Security physically manhandling out the front door
I'm chuckling as I write this - picturing that is hilarious - it would take quite a few WH security to get the job done.
lol
He and George Santos could form a support group.
Does it not bother you that Trump (a vindictive traitor) might be PotUS?
There are people who it not only doesnt bother, but are happy to see it. There is not a lot of point in asking people when you know their answer.
Extremist MAGA are not interested in answering intelligent questions.
Has Trump been charged with treason?
Apparently you do not understand that one can be a traitor without being convicted of treason.
The word you are looking for is "No". As in "No, he has not been charged with treason".
What you said, that's opinion. Nothing more, nothing less.
I did not claim he was charged or convicted of treason. I stated that he is a traitor.
You not understand the difference between these terms. Treason is a crime. 'Being a traitor' is not, in itself, a crime.
Treason = a legal term
Traitor = a descriptive term
One can be a traitor without being convicted of treason, but anyone convicted of treason is ipso facto a proven traitor.
Then by all means explain your traitor comment.
The question in 1.3.3 was:
Pay attention. I was a simple "Yes" or "No" question. If he was charged, then the answer would be "Yes". If he wasn't charged then the answer would be "No".
Given he was NOT charged with treason, the only answer to this question is "No". Again, what you gave is opinion.
What do you not understand? Look up the meaning of the word 'traitor'. Surely you know enough of what Trump did after he lost the election to understand that he violated his oath of office, attempted to undermine the CotUS, and attempted to disenfranchise the electorate.
Again, you fail to understand that treason and traitor are distinct words with different meanings.
I used the word traitor. You keep translating that into treason.
You do not understand what you are talking about. Look up the meaning of the words.
I don't care what word(s) you used. The question was:
And you dodged the question with nonsense you accuse others of doing.
So where is it written and charged that Trump committed treason?
LOL, you do not care about the words I actually wrote; you just want me to answer a question that has nothing to do with what I wrote.
What a pathetic, ridiculous little game you play.
Jeremy, Trump has not been charged with treason. Thus he has not been convicted of treason. Trump has also not been charged with grand larceny, attempted murder, and many other things.
He is, however, a traitor.
You can be a traitor against , uh, your family as an example. You cant commit treason against your family.
Trump put his own interests above his constitutional duty to protect America. That makes him a traitor all day long.
You are playing this pathetic little game too?
You want me to show where Trump committed treason when I have never once suggested that he has.
What blows my mind is that you, et.al. actually seem to think that you have something here when in reality you are just illustrating that you do not know what you are talking about. Treason and traitor are not synonyms.
And on your quote, I have already written @1.3.6 that someone who has committed treason is ipso facto a traitor. But someone can be a traitor without committing treason:
Even the most basic Google search delivers the two usages I have already described:
Trump is a traitor per usage 1. If Trump were to be charged and convicted of treason, he would then also be a traitor under usage 2.
[Deleted]
Don't give me your condescending bullshit, you made the claim, you define what you meant!
"You want me to show where Trump committed treason when I have never once suggested that he has"
Then, by definition, you can't call him a traitor.
You either understand the difference between 'traitor' and 'treason' or you do not. Thus far, your comments illustrate that you do not understand the distinction.
To understand the distinction you first need to do some work. So, as I noted:
Look up the meaning of the word 'traitor'. Surely you know enough of what Trump did after he lost the election to understand that he violated his oath of office, attempted to undermine the CotUS, and attempted to disenfranchise the electorate.
No, Jim, by definition I absolutely can call him a traitor. See usage 1. Good grief man, this is obvious.
You continue to ignore the meaning of the English word 'traitor' and keep on with your bullshit.
What do you, et. al., hope to accomplish by illustrating to all readers that you cannot ( not likely ) and/or will not understand the meaning and differences of the words: traitor and treason?
In case you haven't noticed Jim is gone for the night.
Allow me to help you.
Treason: taking money from an enemy country, failing to secure the nation's borders and letting everyone in and last but not least, letting a terror group monitor and murder 13 American service members.
Corruption: An Attorney General who has two standards of justice, protects his boss and prosecutes his bosses opponents.
Un-American: Voting for such people.
[deleted]
Calling someone a traitor is an opinion, nothing more.
Actually it is applying standard, common, definitions to Trump's behavior. Trump was point blank asked by Kristin Welker of Meet The Press what was he doing during the afternoon of Jan 6th. His answer was "I'm not going to tell you that". If he had been doing his duty as president he would have been doing everything he could to stop the riot, and would be happy to say that to Meet The Press.
What Trump was doing was watching the riot on tv and making phone calls to Republican congresspeople trying to get them behind the plan to stop or delay the electoral vote.
You would know all this if you watched the Jan 6th committee.
And all the people who testified to this were Trump's white house aides.
I have no need for help. I am correctly using the English language.
Help your friends who (clearly) refuse to even acknowledge standard English definitions.
So based on your opinion of standard, common, definitions it is your opinion he is a traitor. Got it.
Good talk.
Well you finally got one aspect of this correct.
Yes, RDtC, the word 'traitor' per usage 1 is a colloquial term. It is not a legal determination, it is an opinion. The opinion can be supported by substantial evidence, but it is an opinion.
The word 'traitor' per usage 2 is formal — the result of a legal consequence. If someone if found guilty of treason, they are ipso facto a traitor.
Do you acknowledge the dictionary meaning (usage 1) of the word traitor?:
If so, then you should understand that Trump can be legitimately labeled a traitor based on his post election loss behavior.
If not, then you should do a little research and get on the right side of truth.
Whenever someone says "you should" it means you should look at the evidence the way I do and come to the same conclusions I do because it is my opinion that my opinion represents "truth".
I just say you are welcome to your opinion and I am welcome to mine and don't try to convince them that my opinion is more accurate than theirs.
You SHOULD try it.
what is your opinion of what trump was doing on jan 6th
He could have handled it better.
What they want is for everyone to forget Jan 6th and Trump's attempt to steal the election ever happened. With that sort of amnesia in place, they think they can then justify putting him back in office.
Is that what that means, RDtC? You have declared the one and only meaning of the phrase "you should"? How ridiculous.
Read the dictionary. I am correct. This is obvious.
Do you actually believe that anyone really (I mean really really) believed the actions of Jan 6th would change the outcome of the election? Maybe a dozen whackadoodles but I would have a hard time believing that is what a thousand people (including Trump) really believed. If our democracy is that fragile we might as well stop having elections now and let the warlords have at it.
And if you say yes I will tell you that you are welcome to that opinion.
Not really saying much there. Imagine if someone gave you a serious analysis of Biden's illegal immigration actions as: "he could have handled it better". Would you be impressed?
[Deleted]
The wrongdoing is not contingent upon being successful.
So it does not matter how utterly stupid it was for Trump to attempt to steal the election, the attempt is the wrongdoing. His indictment is not because he was successful but because of his (failed) actions.
It seems the dems new favorite term is "threat to democracy". Treat to Democracy started with Donald running and went through a thousand people protesting (and some rioting) and now has landed on anyone that doesn't agree with what I want.
have you ever heard the phrase STOP The Steal ?
If you were positive that doing something would not change the outcome would you do it anyway?
Yes, I also recall "Not my President" after Trump got elected.
No, I would not. But, then again, I am rational. We are talking about Trump.
Some people said Bill Clinton was not their president, some said George W Bush was not their president, some said Obama was not their president. None of those people broke into the capitol building and entered the Senate or tried to enter the House.
Unfortunately it is probably a better strategy for Biden if he does focus on it. Of course the Republicans are trying to help him with their militant stance on abortion.
Correct, and they are being punished for doing so. But it still begs the question how many of them believed their actions would change the election and how many of them were just being stupid.
It seems that way but I don't understand it.
The question what is your opinion of what trump was doing on jan 6th
The response He could have handled it better.
Seems like a direct response to a direct question.
To me, yes that is what it means
Now that I can relate to.
While he can be irrational I don't think he is stupid. My opinion is he may have been pissed and decided to let it ride while he was still looking for ways to legally keep his job. He can be petty and vindictive and not have alot of loyalty to those that support him unconditionally but I do have trouble thinking he believed his little insurrection would change things.
[Deleted]
[Deleted]
At first I figured he was just throwing a tantrum and was emotionally refusing to concede the election because it was embarrassing for him ... his ego could not take it.
But when he started engaging in coercion and fraudulent activity that caused me to think that he was operating irrationally — that he had gone over the edge. People who are desperate will often become irrational. He could very well have understood that he had no real shot at stealing a US election, but pursued it anyway because he simply could not bear the idea of being a loser after all the trash talk he has made during his lifetime about 'losers'.
Hard to say, I cannot imagine how a mind like Trump's operates. Someone whose entire existence is a labyrinth of lies and exploitation is beyond my comprehension.
And Ashley Babbitt would not have died on January 6, 2021. Oddly enough it was not until after a shot was fired and heard all around D.C. and the country. . . taking Ashley's life that President Trump finally settled in to issuing a statement of "surrender" to the truth that he could not win or force Congress to concede to his wishes of throwing out a legitimate election.
Just think about it long and hard (everybody who reads this): Had Trump not persisted in stalling for time during the "storming of the Capitol" . . .Ashley Babbitt would be home alive somewhere RIGHT NOW.
[Deleted]
[Deleted]
[Deleted]
[Deleted. Use your flag.]
[Deleted]
That is YOUR comment. It is totally false and I think you know it is totally false.
Post the sentence of Tigs where you think he said Trump committed treason or STFU.
[Deleted]
IT IS NOT AN OPINION. What Tig has said about this is right there in black and white. What he said is not a matter of opinion. Just stop.
Post the sentence of Tigs where you think he said Trump committed treason or [Deleted]
He called him a traitor. To be a traitor, one needs to commit treason.
You get shown dictionary definitions and still come back with this crap? WTF? You are not as bad as the other guy, but keep going in this vein and you will get there.
Jim, I have provided you the dictionary definition of the word 'traitor' @1.3.15. I have repeatedly explained that there is a colloquial usage of the word 'traitor' and a legal one (the one that is determined as a consequence of being guilty of treason).
You ignore the colloquial usage (and this is listed as the first usage) and insist that the only meaning of the word is the legal one.
You are demonstrably wrong. Yet you, et. al., continue with this obvious charade.
Trump is a traitor. The reason he is a traitor (this is my argument) is because while PotUS, he violated his oath of office by attempting to subvert the CotUS which he had sworn to preserve, protect, and defend (“I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”).
He violated it by attempting to steal the 2020 election through lies, coercion, fraud and incitement. On top of that, he sought to violate the foundation of our democracy by disenfranchising the voters.
Trump is not guilty of treason and has not even been charged with same. He is a traitor because of his violation of his oath to the nation while PotUS.
[Deleted]
Post the sentences or sentences where you think Tig said Trump committed treason.
If you are right, then we will all know it. Come on, make yourself look good.
Those sentences DO NOT show Tig saying Trump committed treason. I am flagging you again for trolling.
[Deleted]
As you have been told already, calling someone a traitor is a matter of opinion. How did he violate his oath specifically?
LOL, you pretend as though you were telling me something that I have directly stated and pretending that I disagreed. Who do you think you are fooling?
I have been telling you that calling Trump a traitor using the colloquial usage (usage 1) is opinion. It is not a legal determination (usage 2) but rather an individual determination .... that means it is opinion by definition. I have stated this clearly and repeatedly.
You have replied to my post where I explained in detail my argument as to how Trump violated his oath and why he is a traitor. The answer to your question is right there in my post. But here it is again to make it super crystal clear:
Trump is a traitor. The reason he is a traitor (this is my argument) is because while PotUS, he violated his oath of office by attempting to subvert the CotUS which he had sworn to preserve, protect, and defend (“I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”).
He violated it by attempting to steal the 2020 election through lies, coercion, fraud and incitement. On top of that, he sought to violate the foundation of our democracy by disenfranchising the voters.
Trump is not guilty of treason and has not even been charged with same. He is a traitor because of his violation of his oath to the nation while PotUS.
As an addendum. How on Earth can you not see that Trump violated his oath by attempting to steal the 2020 election? What would Trump have to do in your mind beyond engaging in lying, fraud, coercion and incitement to cause you to recognize a violation of his oath of office?
Attempting to disenfranchise the US electorate alone is a violation of his oath. Suborning Pence to table certified votes from states is a violation of his oath (and the CotUS). Attempting to coerce Raffensperger and Bower to find votes / submit false electors (respectively) is a violation of his oath. Do you need me to deliver the entire list again?
[Deleted]
The impossible truth is Trump can not do anything wrong when it is action taken against democrats, liberals, independents, secularists, and Others. Negative partisanship, the ability to detail problems caused by the aforementioned individuals while ignoring issues and actions on the part of their support network, abounds. We have to get rid of Trump once and for all—politically.
Keep talking Liz. Hopefully the sane members of the Republican party will hear you and oust the nuts.
Thank-you for saying, that Ma'am. The only saving grace is that he won't live forever
Anybody who actually believes this is a fucking moron.
The fucking morons are people who believe he won't try.
So yes you do believe it?
Personally, I do not believe Trump would try for a third term, but I would also not be surprised if he tried. Would you?
Prior to him losing the election in 2020, if someone told you that he would try to steal a lost election through fraud, coercion, lies and incitement, would you have believed them?
I would have not believed them. No other sitting PotUS has ever done anything like that in the history of our nation. I would have seen it as possible given the character of Trump, but even for Trump, the Big Lie con-job was unexpected.
Trump will do whatever he can get away with, and anything that keeps him out of prison.
Im sure he would claim that preventing him from a third term is unconstitutional and thus he would not follow the precedent.
Since he is capable of publicly stating that the PRA gives him the right to hold classified documents when it does the exact opposite, he is certainly capable of ignoring the 22nd amendment. Maybe a stupid excuse like "not part of the original Constitution; just an add on because of FDR". Or maybe he will argue that this only applies to elections and that he can have a third term without an election and thus be constitutional:
If he has a chance to run for a third term he will say the 22nd amendment doesnt apply to him.
Amazing that after all he has done, this miserable human being might be reelected to the most powerful office on the planet.
I can recall a movie I watched about 2 decades ago about Nixon, (can't remember its name), and there is a scene where Nixon is in the Oval office lamenting to his aides that he is concerned about not being re-elected as Republican candidate for a second term at the upcoming convention when Kissinger walks in and tells Nixon that Nixon is going to go to China, meet Chairman Mao and open up trade relations with China to gain a market of a billion consumers to American manufacturers and retailers and that on his return he will walk into the Republican convention to get the biggest first vote re-election candidacy in the history of the USA. Nixon goes to Kissinger and hugs him and says: "Henry, you're a genius". Nixon then goes back to his desk and says (and this is why I posted this comment) something like "Do you think we can alter The Constitution to allow for a third term?"
So perhaps in the minds of Trump and Trump supporters they may not be the first to think of staying in power longer than is authorized. However, I think Cheney was foolish to make that comment about becoming a dictator because according to American law it cannot happen and even though Trump may have tried to stay in power he failed. It was a foolish comment because it should be an impossibility and would probably just be considered an attempt to scare people - and I think that it will have a negative rather than positive effect.
Nixon asking about a 3rd term is ironic given he didn't survive his 2nd term
Well, keep in mind it was just a movie, but IMO not only does art imitate life, but also life often imitates art (or do I just watch too many movies to have noticed that).