National Review editors defend Cheney from party attacks

Prominent conservative outlet National Review’s editors defended Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) from attacks by those in the Republican Party in an op-ed published on Wednesday.

“Indeed, Cheney is being accused of distracting from the fight against Biden when some Trump supporters have displayed more passion about taking her out than opposing Biden’s $6 trillion agenda. If Cheney’s enemies think we should be talking about Biden and not Trump, they’ve certainly picked a funny way to show it,” the editors wrote.

Cheney, the House Republican Conference chairwoman, is in danger of losing her spot as the third most powerful Republican in the lower chamber, with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) now supporting efforts to remove her from the seat.

Many are saying that Cheney is no longer representing the party correctly as she has been speaking out against former President Trump and the election fraud conspiracy theories he continues to peddle.

“It’s also worth noting that Cheney is not in danger because she is a RINO [Republican in Name Only] who has broken with the party on policy. She has maintained an overwhelmingly conservative voting record and, while noninterventionists may object to her hawkishness, that does not explain the movement to oust her,” the editors wrote.

NR’s editors contend that Cheney’s comments about Trump and the election haven’t been controversial and the issue is that “Republicans consider her obviously true statements to be controversial.”

Cheney’s likely successor would be Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), whom Trump himself has said would be a good choice to take Cheney’s position.

“But unlike Cheney, Stefanik stood with Trump by peddling his mendacious claims and voting against certification of President Biden’s Electoral College victory,” the editors wrote.

The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board also released an op-ed that defended Cheney and said voting her out would “diminish the party.”