What Trump said (in his interview with Tucker Carlson) about the odious Elizabeth Cheney:
“Look, she’s a deranged person. The reason she doesn’t like me is that she wanted to stay in Iraq, she wants to — tough, tough person, you know, people get killed all over, she’s real tough, right? … But the reason she couldn’t stand me is that she always wanted to go to war with people. I don’t want to go to war. She wanted to go — she wanted to stay in Syria. I took them out. She wanted to stay in Iraq. I took them out. I mean, if it were up to her, we’d be in 50 different countries. No. 1, it’s very dangerous, No. 2, a lot of people get killed, and No. 3, it’s very, very expensive. … She’s a radical war hawk. Let’s put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, OK? Let’s see how she feels about it, you know, when the guns are trained on her face. You know they’re all war hawks when they’re sitting in Washington in a nice building saying, ‘Oh, gee, well, let’s send, let’s send 10,000 troops right into the mouth of the enemy.’ But she’s a stupid person. And I used to have — I’d have meetings with a lot of people, and she always wanted to go to war with people.“
How the Axis news media reported it:
- The Drudge Report: “TRUMP CALLS FOR CHENEY’S EXECUTION.”
- “Morning Joe” Scarborough: Trump “called for Liz Cheney being shot in the face by nine rifles.”
- CNN: “Trump says ‘war hawk’ Liz Cheney should be fired upon in escalation of violent rhetoric against his opponents.”
- CNN’s Jim Acosta: “When he says nine barrels shooting at her, that obviously evokes images of a firing squad. It evokes images of an execution, does it not?”
- New York Times: “Trump attacks Liz Cheney using violent war imagery.”
-
Washington Post: “Trump embraces violent rhetoric, suggests Liz Cheney should have guns ‘trained on her face’”
- Cheney, who has no integrity, decency or shame, tweeted that Trump had emulated dictators who “ threaten those who speak against them with death. We cannot entrust our country and our freedom to a petty, vindictive, cruel, unstable man who wants to be a tyrant.” (Trump obviously did not threaten Cheney at all.)
Trump said that if Cheney likes war so much, she should get a rifle and see what it’s like having people shooting at her. It’s the “chicken hawk” retort I’ve heard since Vietnam, a bit more vivid than most versions, but still clear in its intent and meaning. The Axis news media deliberately misrepresented what he said, because that’s what they do, and have been doing for almost a decade now. (Added: Maybe Trump’s use of the number nine confused everyone, as if that is the official number of shooters in a firing squad. Except it isn’t: there is no required number. Of course, a professional journalist might research a detail like th…oh, what am I saying? When the idea is to demonize Donald Trump? Why would they do that? And besides, there professional and ethical journalists are as rare as Ivory Billed Woodpeckers, as this disgusting episode so vividly demonstrates.)
And then there’s this: Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes (D, of course, like all the prosecutors trying to beat Trump via “lawfare”) announced that he is investigating what Trump said as a criminal death threat.
Several “Nah!s” are brought to mind by this damning but characteristic behavior:
Nah, there’s no mainstream media bias!
Nah, claiming that the Trump prosecutions are political is a conspiracy theory!
Nah, it’s Trump who lies all the time!
Commit to memory the corrupt hacks who have twisted Trump’s words and intent this way, along with those who claimed he was emulating Nazis by having a rally in Madison Square Garden. These are bad Americans, bad citizens, and bad people. They are enemies of fairness, an informed public, and the republic.
Ethics Alarms 
I am so tired of the lying left’s hysterical chicken little act. It is quite obvious at this point that they know perfectly well that the lies they tell are complete fabrications and the fauxrage they express is performative. It’s a religious ritual for them, pretending to care about representative government when everyone knows they really want an authoritarian dictatorship over the “garbage” Americans who oppose them. They consider themselves to be the anointed ones, bred to lead by divine right of sacred woke piousness. It’s vile.
I can’t remember any “firing squad” where the victim is given a rifle but the mainstream media will continue to journalism…….
Laugh of the day! Thank you.
typo in introduction: not Lynne Cheney.
-Jut
How the hell did THAT happen? Of course, Liz and I are old friends and her old friends all call her by her middle name….(Fixed).
Small point: The routinely awful Kris Mayes is a woman, one of too many running Arizona into the ground. Our governor is a former social worker. Imagine a professional bleeder of public benefits running the state government’s budget and controlling those very purse strings. Talk about a fox in the henhouse.
Thanks for finding the full exact quote. The best I could find were excerpts that the media used to validate their stories.
I am printing this out and will use it when someone tell me that Trump lies all the time. I am going to hand this out at the polls on Tuesday.
Harris called his call for violence against Cheney a disqualifier for the office. I consider her disqualified for falsely stating this as a call to violence.
oh, of course she did.
These media types are the same people in the 1960s and 1970s screaming about the government sending poor and powerless people to fight their wars. Hell, CCR sang a song about not being a senator’s son.
jvb
I was pleasantly surprised to stumble on someone in the media taking it back. Of course, it’s not particularly helpful at this point, but they did do it, and it was on the initial list of google results for me when looking for headlines on the topic. https://www.yahoo.com/news/cnn-contributor-takes-back-cheney-191309492.html
Not sure where to rate the apology.
I’d rate the apology as “too late.” I replied: “An apology doesn’t change the fact that you jump to partisan conclusions without checking facts when you oppose someone. In my field, this called “being untrustworthy.” Or, in the short version, a hack.”
I used to enjoy reading Goldberg, until he…um…evolved into a frothing Never Trumper.
PWS
Tammy Bruce and Mollie Hemingway obliterated his apology.
jvb
Come, you masters of war
You that build the big guns
You that build the death planes
You that build all the bombs
You that hide behind walls
You that hide behind desks
I just want you to know
I can see through your masks
You that never done nothin’
But build to destroy
You play with my world
Like it’s your little toy
You put a gun in my hand
And you hide from my eyes
And you turn and run farther
When the fast bullets fly
Like Judas of old
You lie and deceive
A world war can be won
You want me to believe
But I see through your eyes
And I see through your brain
Like I see through the water
That runs down my drain
You fasten all the triggers
For the others to fire
Then you sit back and watch
While the death count gets higher
You hide in your mansion
While the young peoples’ blood
Flows out of their bodies
And is buried in the mud
You’ve thrown the worst fear
That can ever be hurled
Fear to bring children
Into the world
For threatenin’ my baby
Unborn and unnamed
You ain’t worth the blood
That runs in your veins
How much do I know
To talk out of turn?
You might say that I’m young
You might say I’m unlearned
But there’s one thing I know
Though I’m younger than you
That even Jesus would never
Forgive what you do
Let me ask you one question
Is your money that good?
Will it buy you forgiveness?
Do you think that it could?
I think you will find
When your death takes its toll
All the money you made
Will never buy back your soul
And I hope that you die
And your death will come soon
I’ll follow your casket
On a pale afternoon
I’ll watch while you’re lowered
Down to your deathbed
And I’ll stand over your grave
‘Til I’m sure that you’re dead
Bob Dylan
How prophetic. Trump should play this song at his next rally.
Chris, I can’t tell you how many now aged and wealthy but still reliably lefty and never served in the military Baby Boomers in our golf resort neighborhood have little plywood Ukrainian flags affixed to their gates as if they are supporting a college football team seemingly asserting, pathetically, “This house stands with Ukraine.” Chickenhawks, indeed.
OB
I was one that supported the Bush Cheney wars. Hell, I even defended Halliburton as a necessary entity to support overseas activities. Nonetheless, I believe war is something to be avoided. Liz Cheney’s behavior has forced me to reevaluate my past support for both the Cheney’s and the Bush family.
I just find it historically arrogant that Dylan’s lyrics were embraced by the same type of academics back in the day who are rejecting the same sentiment by their enemy today
Agreed. Ukrainian and Russian young guys are being slaughtered. And whatever happened to “The ‘eighties have called and they want their international policy back?” What an asshole Obama is. And what about Hillary Clinton and her “reset button” being offered to the Russians? Not to mention all the millions she extorted from the Russians for her “foundation.” And they say Trump is corrupt.
And whatever happened to “The ‘eighties have called and they want their international policy back?”
The Russians became a scapeback when Hillary Clinton and the Dems came up with 2016 election trutherism.
The Steele Dossier. The biggest electoral dirty trick in the history of the United States, bar none.
Indeed.
Let us consider the damage done by the Steele dossier.
Exactly. When did they DNC become the war party?
jvb
Around 2016, when they went from “the 1980’s called and they want their foreign policy back” to “Russians®™ hacked the election”.
It’s interesting that you brought up the specific use the number 9. I wondered if there was a defined number of shooters in a firing squad and (quickly) researched it to find there is no such specification or standard. Of course, we cannot expect even the smallest bit of effort into research from the current media.
By the way, Jonathan Turley has already written about the legality of any potential procesution. I always find his insights most engaging and enklightening.
https://jonathanturley.org/2024/11/02/no-the-trump-comment-on-cheney-was-not-a-crime/
Me too, as you will find out. Turley is probably the most referenced blogger here along with Ann Althouse, since the exit of Ken White (Popehat).
Speaking of standards, there is an unwritten rule about firing squads that the target is not given a rifle.
-Jut
Seems unfair, somehow…
How is this any different from Democrats grilling Republicans in Congress about whether they’d send their own kids to war?
Answer: It isn’t. And don’t Democrats routinely slime Trump (and Bush II) for not having served in Vietnam?
It isn’t. And it’s a bad argument by Trump, a cheap shot, and not very encouraging from a Presidential candidate, but THAT’S what should be criticized, not the contrived “he wants to shoot his opponents” lie….
And it’s a bad argument by Trump, a cheap shot, and not very encouraging from a Presidential candidate, but THAT’S what should be criticized, not the contrived “he wants to shoot his opponents” lie….
If so, then it was a bad argument by opponents of the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
I am not understanding your statement above. What argument is Trump making except that the warmongers don’t consider the human cost which is perfectly reasonable.
A friend of mine sent me a video of a Ukrainian killing a Russian tank. His text suggested glee. I had to remind him that there were four human beings inside that tank who were just turned into pink mist with our Javelin tank killer. We should not enjoy killing.
See my response to Gamereg.
I’d say it’s a poorly worded argument, but not a bad one. A better way to phrase it would be, “Would Cheney be so hot to go to war if she herself were on the front lines? If her children were on the front lines? I can’t know for sure because I can’t read her mind, but I think politicians should ask themselves this question before supporting any military engagement. Sometimes the answer is going to be “yes”, but other times, I dare say MOST times, the answer’s going to be “no”.
No, it’s a bad argument, an unethical argument. I’ve written about it several times. What it says is: “You wouldn’t have this view if you had a conflict of interest and were biased, and didn’t have the integrity to do the right thing even if it adversely affected your own interests!” It’s also an insulting argument: How do you know I wouldn’t send my own kid to fight if my duty was to do what I felt was in my country’s best interest. I think the version I’ve written about is, “You wouldn’t support capital punishment if your son was convicted of murder!” Right! And that’s why judges recuse themselves and lawyers withdraw when they have a personal interest that gets in the way of their independent judgment.
But that is the right answer. I should only engage in a war vital enough (like defending my country from invaders) that I’d be willing to fight or send my son to fight.
It’s an excellent argument against proxy wars, wars engaged for strategic reasons, or other war-hawkish reasons. If it’s not worth enough to you for you to put your own interests on the line, don’t ask others with less power than you to do so.
Exactly, and to be fair, being willing to fight does not mean, in and of itself, that what you are fighting for is right. In pre-modern times, people dueling for honor and political leaders going into battle was common and expected. But it’s a least a start to ask yourself, “Would I fight this war myself if I could?” And the question of whether or not you’d put your own interests on the line is applicable to many ethical considerations outside of warfare.
That’s different, though. Cheney might well be willing to fight in the wars she favors, but she can’t. Trump and the typical chicken hawk arguments is that you shouldn’t declare and fight a war if you AREN’T GOING TO LITERALLY BE ON THE BATTLEFILD, or your family isn’t. Which is nonsense.
This is clearly the Comment of the Day?
And why were all these old hippies against the South Vietnamese defending themselves against an invasion by North Vietnam when they are now all in on the Ukrainians defending themselves against an invasion by Russia? Oh, I guess consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. I forgot.
That is a very good point.
Of course, the opposition to the Vietnam War was based on the draft.