The Importance of Being Liz

Cheney's endorsement is a bigger deal than you think.

We are, of course, shocked, shocked, to discover that MAGA influencers were actually being paid by the Russians. The Kremlin shills are now loudly insisting that they were unwitting stooges, and thus “victims,” who had absolutely no idea who was paying them $400K a month to parrot Putin’s propaganda.

This, of course, raises all kinds of questions that I’ll deal with in a bit. But first, can we talk about Liz Cheney’s endorsement of Kamala Harris yesterday?

“I don’t believe we have the luxury of writing in candidates’ names, particularly in swing states,” Ms. Cheney said, speaking to students in the hotly contested state of North Carolina. “As a conservative, as someone who believes in and cares about the Constitution, I have thought deeply about this and because of the danger that Donald Trump poses, not only am I not voting for Donald Trump, but I will be voting for Kamala Harris.”

The room erupted in cheers after she made her unexpected announcement.

It was, of course, a BFD. but I’m not sure everyone fully appreciated the magnitude of what she has just done.

To the Contrary is a reader-supported publication. You may disagree with me from time to time (and I expect you will, because I’m not promising you a safe space here). But I’ll always try to give it to you straight. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Liz Cheney’s Choice

After Cheney’s announcement Wednesday, Judge Michael Luttig tweeted: “There was never a doubt that the courageous Liz Cheney would endorse Vice President Harris, because Liz Cheney stands for America. She is the very embodiment of country over party and country over self. And she fears no one -- least of all the former president.”

Fair enough. But we ought to take a moment to reflect on how extraordinary her choice was. As Steve Benen noted, “We’re talking about a lifelong Republican from a prominent Republican family, who was an unapologetic far-right lawmaker who served as the House Republican conference chair — a leadership post she won while running unopposed.”

Unlike some others in the Never Trump camp, Cheney has not abjured her conservativism or tried to remake herself into Woke Liz 2.0. This is important to remember: Cheney is neither a squish, nor a RINO. She voted with Trump roughly 94% of the time, which Benen notes is “a higher score than some members of the House Freedom Caucus.”

But despite this record, Cheney — the Republican co-chair of the bipartisan Jan. 6 committee — recognizes the unique threat her party’s nominee poses to the American political system, so she’s backing his opponent….

[That’s] what makes Cheney’s announcement so notable: She didn’t just declare her intention to vote for Harris, she subtly reminded her party’s other anti-Trump voices that they face a binary choice. One of the two major-party nominees will be sworn into office in January.

In other words, she not only broke with Trump, but also with other anti-Trump conservatives who, despite their detestation of Trump —are unwilling to cross party lines and vote for Harris. She went where Chris Christie, Mike Pence, Mitt Romney, Pat Toomey, and other GOP mugwumps fear to tread.

In doing so, she crossed a line that she knows she can’t re-cross. Even in a post-Trump GOP, there’s no going back for someone who endorses the Democratic nominee. And Liz Cheney knows that.

By backing Harris, Cheney is saying good-bye to all that — a lifetime of allegiances, relationships, and history. It’s the right choice, of course, but let’s be clear: it’s not an easy one.

Just four years ago, she described Kamala Harris as “a radical liberal who would raise taxes, take away guns & health insurance, and explode the size and power of the federal gov’t.” Now she is Harris’s most prominent GOP supporter.

You don’t think that’s hard? Our center-left and progressive readers may think her choice is self-evident and, perhaps, even required.

But try this thought experiment:

How thoroughly awful and dangerous would the Democratic nominee have to be for progressives to support a conservative Republican in a presidential election?

What would it take for a pro-choice progressive Democrat to cross party lines and endorse…. Mike Pence?

Not write-in Barack Obama, or Oprah, or Joe Biden. But actually vote to put Pence into the White House, because it was a binary choice? And campaign for him?

I’m guessing that many of you find that scenario impossible to imagine. Unbelievable. Unthinkable.

Welcome to my world. And Liz Cheney’s.

Here is the full text what Liz had to say Wednesday, explaining her choice:

Donald Trump, no matter what your policy views are—no matter if you are a conservative Republican or not—Donald Trump cannot be trusted with power. The power of the presidency is the most awesome power of any office anywhere in the world, and the character of the people we elect really matters. And, so what I say is, I understand the desire to think that you’re casting a vote for conservative policies, but—first of all, he is not a conservative, and he’s dangerous, and this is not a policy election, and we can talk about getting this country back on track once we get through this election cycle—but Donald Trump, if he is reelected, will be far more dangerous than we have ever seen before.

He has told us he believes you can terminate the Constitution. He’s gone to war with the rule of law. He repeatedly suggests that the people who assaulted and attacked the Capitol should be celebrated. He has said he will ignore the rulings of the courts. He won’t leave office. He is a risk that we simply can’t take, and he has to be defeated.

I say that, not as a liberal Democrat. Not as someone who agrees with policies on the left most of the time, but he is simply a risk that, as a nation, we must never take again.

Because we are here in North Carolina, I think it is crucially important for people to recognize not only is what I’ve just said about the danger that Trump poses, something that should prevent people from voting for him, but I don’t believe that we have the luxury of writing in candidates’ names, particularly in swing states.

And, as a conservative, as someone who believes in and cares about the Constitution, I have thought deeply about this, and because of the danger that Donald Trump poses, not only am I not voting for Donald Trump, but I will be voting for Kamala Harris.

And let me say that I think it is crucially important—and I would say especially to my fellow conservatives—that we think about the stakes and we think about the extent to which we have a duty, a duty, to put our country and our Constitution above partisanship. We all have that duty and responsibility.

This is what patriotism looks like. Liz is our Iron Lady.

Putin’s Witting Stooges

It turns out the “Russia HOAX,’ wasn’t a hoax, after all. Who knew?

But here’s the wrinkle: This time around, the Kremlin didn’t need to rely on bot-factories in Kharkiv. In 2024, everything they wanted and needed was right there in front of them in TrumpWorld.

“It says a lot that during the 2016 election Russia had to manufacture MAGA sock puppets,” noted Amanda Carpenter, while “in 2024, they just had to throw big money at real-life MAGA puppets.”

According to the Department of Justice’s indictment, Russia funneled roughly $10 million to a company that was throwing cash at some of MAGA’s most prominent influencers, who used their platforms to parrot Putin’s talking points.

The company, which has been identified as Tenet Media, describes itself as a “network of heterodox commentators that focus on Western political and cultural issues.” Those “commentators” included such Trumpist social media stars as Benny Johnson, Dave Rubin, Lauren Southern, and Tim Pool.

The Russians lavished them with cash — $400,000 a month for just “four weekly videos”. Plus a $100,000 signing bonus and promises of an “additional performance bonus.”

**

The Russians helpfully provided talking points to the influencers. They were told to make videos that warned of “record inflation”; the risk of job loss for white Americans; the “constant lies” of Democrats; the threat of crime from non-whites and immigrants (including new immigrants from Ukraine); and the danger of being drawn into a war.

Take a look, from the DOJ Exhibits 24-mj-1395.pdf (justice.gov). [Political Party A is the GOP; Party B, is the Democrats.)

Sound familiar?

*

The insertion of the Kremlin’s propaganda into the right-wing media ecosystem was seamless.

Tim Pool declared: "Ukraine is the enemy of this country” and "One of the greatest enemies of our nation right now is Ukraine.” And lest that is unclear has demanded that: "We should apologize to Russia."

But, as the indictment makes clear, the stooges were willing to go even further in pushing Kremlin disinformation.

After a terror attack in Moscow, their Russian handler asked "our creators” to blame the attack on Ukraine and the United States — even though ISIS had claimed credit for the attack. “I think we can focus on the Ukraine/U.S. angle .... [T]he mainstream media spread fake news that ISIS claimed responsibility for the attack yet ISIS itself never made such statements. All terrorists are now detained while they were heading to the border with Ukraine which makes it even more suspicious why they would want to go to Ukraine to hide."

According to the indictment, one of the MAGA-influencers said that "he's happy to cover it."

**

The Russians were especially anxious to amplify Tucker Carlson, especially when visited Moscow and gushed over a grocery store. This seemed a bit much to one producer who complained: "They want me to post this [a video of Carlson posted by the Russians] but "it just feels like overt shilling." Despite his misgivings, he was told to “put it out there,’ which he did the next day.

**

Johnson and Pool are indignantly insisting that they were duped — that they had no idea where all the money was coming from.

“We are disturbed by the allegations in today’s indictment, which make clear that myself and other influencers were victims in this alleged scheme,” Johnson wrote in a post on X.

“Should these allegations prove true, I as well as the other personalities and commentators were deceived and are victims,” Pool said on X. “The show is produced in its entirety by our local team without input from anyone external to the company,” he added.

But this raises several questions: Where did they think the money was coming from? And why did they think they were saying the same things as the Kremlin all the time?

Of course, the usual suspects on the right are rushing to the defense of the stooges. here’s Ben Shapiro and Elon Musk insisting that the shills aren’t the issue here, because they were deceived by the company’s owners, who were taking the Russian cash:

**

Really?

Our former colleague, Jim Swift, offered a quick reality check:

“No, it's exactly the issue, Ben,” he wrote. “When people are paying you $400k a month, which is more money than they have ever made before by far, they didn't wonder: Gee, who has that kind of money, and why are they spending it on me?”

**

Barton Gellman offered a suggestion to Pool & Co.: “If I were exposed as an unwitting tool of Russian propaganda, and I really hadn’t let my immensely generous paymasters influence what I said, I’d make public all our emails to prove it.

But, as Gellman noted, “Of course, that would also prove my independent work looked exactly like Russian propaganda.”

And why on earth was that?

Dogs, of course

Flashback: Moses, Pete, and Auggie

**

It’s too early to think about winter. But this is Wisconsin.