The Dispatch Podcast - Liz Cheney Makes Her Case

Episode Date: May 14, 2021

Minutes after New York Rep. Elise Stefanik was elected the House GOP’s new conference chairwoman, her predecessor, Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney joined Sarah and Steve on today’s show to chat about the 2022 midterms, the future of the Republican Party, and the factors that precipitated her ousting from GOP leadership. Tune in to hear Cheney talk to our hosts about her relationships with her colleagues and why she won’t stop pushing back against the former president’s claims that the election was stolen: “Fundamentally for me, at the end of the day, if being on House leadership on the Republican side requires the embrace of that lie, that’s not something I’m willing to participate in.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to the dispatch podcast. I'm your host, Sarah Isger, joined by Steve Hayes. And this week, we are talking to Congresswoman Liz Cheney, the former number three in the Republican caucus as the vote is occurring to pick her replacement. Let's dive in. Congresswoman. Thank you so much for joining us. And in person, this is our first in-person interview in so, so long. What a treat. Did you vote this morning? And who'd you vote for? I did not vote this morning. And I do not know yet what the results are, but we will see. Elise Stefanik was elected as the number three by a pretty overwhelming vote. Over 130 members voted for her, you know, 30 to 40 voted for Chip Roy. Given that,

what do you think the message for Republicans should be heading into the 2022 elections? Well, look, I have always, over the course of the last several months, been very clear about, I think this is a much bigger set of issues than about who's in leadership among the House Republicans. And I think that for us, going into 22 and into 24, the election has got to be about truth. It's got to be about building a party that brings back the voters that we lost in 2020, that we aren't going to be able to convince people to come back to us, to support us, to help us to be able to convey the policies that we know are right for the country if we continue to be drug backwards, continue to be complicit in the lies the former president

is telling about the election and about our process as a whole. So you think that that should be part of the conversation on the campaign trail, not Joe Biden's policies, not sort of drawing that distinction with the other party, but actually sort of having this internal family conversation, as serious as it is, with voters. Well, I would put it differently. I would say we have to defeat the really dangerous Biden policies. They're really bad for the country. They're certainly bad for Wyoming.

Doing that requires that we can build a coalition that prevails. And we can't build that coalition if we are. are a party based on lies, if we are a party that is walked away from the rule of law, walked away from the Constitution. So I think actually having this discussion now isn't a choice. We have to have it because there are so many people in our party, including in our House Republican leadership, who are embracing the lies. And if you look at this from a political perspective, you know, 18 months before an election is probably a good time to have this discussion. a good time to be clear about what the party stands for so that we are going in as strong as

we can to the midterm elections and into 2024. From an electoral politics standpoint, I agree that the Republican Party lost some voters in 2020 that they used to have as part of their coalition, particularly white college-educated voters ticked down a little, but non-college educated white voters ticked up. In the coalition that you're talking about, aren't you all? also going to lose some voters? You know, we shouldn't. I mean, the idea that we're going to lose voters because we're telling the truth, I think, does a disservice to our voters. I think people have been misled, people have been betrayed, people who voted for President Trump, people who, you know,

believe what he's saying. And I think that makes it even more important for those of us who know it's not true and who know how dangerous it is to speak out against it. And it's necessary for for us to do it. I think that as a party, we have to be very clear. We stand for the policies. You know, the policies for the most part, not all of them, but limited taxes or limited government and low taxes, resources for the Department of Defense, a strong national defense. Those are policies we believe in. And those are policies that are much better for the country than the Democrats' policies. But to defeat the Democrats, we have to have enough voters to do that. And you can't do that. It's a fundamental, it's toxic to the party. And I would say also to the country

for us to sort of say, well, you know what, the former president is lying and the former president provoked an attack on the Capitol. But we're just going to ignore that and we're going to sort of continue to coddle him and continue to be complicit in those lies. You know, it's fundamentally dishonest and I think dangerous for the country. So setting aside Republican leadership for a second, think about one of your Republican colleagues who's running in a swing district. Can't you understand why that person would say, I don't want to be talking about 2020. I don't want to be talking about Donald Trump. I don't want to be facing this. I need to make a case that Joe Biden's policies are bad, that my specific Democratic opponent,

whoever he or she may be, has to be the focus of my attention. And if we've got Liz Cheney in leadership or, you know, elsewhere making these big arguments focusing on Donald Trump, that makes it less likely that I'm going to win. Well, I think each, individual members got to decide what's right for their their district. I think that these things aren't mutually exclusive. And again, I think that fundamentally, you either accept that this is dangerous or you ignore that it's dangerous. And I think some people could say, you know what, we just don't think it's that dangerous. Certainly there are Republican leaders who've taken the position. Let's just ignore him. Let's hope for the best. He's going to fade away. And I think that if ignoring

the former president was an option that really would lead to him fading away, then you would have many more of us doing that if we thought that what he was doing wasn't dangerous. People were saying that in 2015, too, right? Yeah, I mean, look, hoping for the best when you have a former president who is basically telling the American people that our electoral system cannot be counted on to convey their will, that our electoral process is so broken that, you know, basically the same thing that the Chinese Communist Party says about us, he's saying about us. I think that is, that's something we must stand up against. How many of your colleagues in the House, I mean, you worked with them

on messaging, you spent a lot of time with them after the election. How many of your colleagues in the House, Republican Conference, really believed that the election was stolen in the way that Donald Trump describes it, meaning nefarious vote flipping, should have won Michigan, should of one Arizona, should have won Georgia. How many would you say really believe that? I think it's a very, very small number who really believe it. I think, you know, clearly there's a larger number who are willing to sort of go along with it. I think that, you know, you've seen that, including from Elise Stefanik, the willingness to continue to make claims that are just not true. And then I think you have, you know, a large

number of members of the conference who really just want to focus on Biden, which I completely agree with, and hope that this will go away. But you've got another fundamental problem, which is our leadership, Kevin McCarthy, going to Maralago, rehabilitating the former president, the extent to which the NRC is basically sending out loyalty oaths around the former president. the the rehabilitation of him and the embrace of him and talk about him as the leader of our party makes this a different kind of a choice this isn't sort of you know be silent and he'll go away or stand up against him this is you've got to embrace him and and i you know fundamentally for me at the end of the day if being in house leadership on the republican side requires the

embrace of that lie that's simply not something i'm willing to participate in so Dave Wasserman of the Cook Political Report in NBC News has reported a couple different times that Kevin McCarthy told him, look, I know Trump lost, but we know that Trump lost. And in fact, at one point, predicted that he McCarthy and Mitch McConnell would have to put out a statement because Donald Trump wouldn't accept the fact that he lost. In your conversations with Kevin McCarthy after the election, what did you say to you? Does he know that Trump lost? He knows Trump lost, yeah.

And I think that he also, I know, he also knows, you know, as he said on the floor of the House on January 13th, Trump was responsible for the attack on the Capitol and that he should have immediately taken action to stop it. And I think that it's important for us all to look at January 6th as, you know, that's the line that can never be crossed. And no matter what you thought about Donald Trump's policies, no matter what you thought about the politics, no matter what you thought about the tweets, all of those things, you know, during the presidency that we talked about so much. And again, the policies were good ones in large part. January 6 changes everything.

And if we're really committed to our oath, if we're really committed to the Republic and the Constitution, then we have to be willing to say we're not going to allow someone who provoked an attack on the Capitol to try to steal the election to continue to be heralded as a leader of our party. I guess I'm a little confused. this is happening now. So you voted to impeach the president. There was a vote to remove you then.

And you overwhelmingly your caucus voted to keep you in power. Kevin McCarthy said that the president was responsible. He said this week that Joe Biden won the election and then nobody believes that Trump won the election in the GOP caucus. What is this argument about? You know, I think we've seen several things happen in the last couple of months. I think one is really concerning move in the conference back towards the former president. And whereas you saw in the immediate aftermath of the 6th and the 13th, you know, people saying basically, okay, enough. You know, Lindsey Graham, for example, enough. This is it. In the days and weeks since then, you've seen a move back towards him. The other thing that has happened is, you know, there are a number of big issues

and challenges we have to confront about January 6th, including whether we establish a commission. And, you know, part of this most recent sort of public battle was really set off when I said publicly that the commission has to be focused only on the 6th, subpoena power, former officials, so there's no political pressure. And that is not what Kevin McCarthy's position has been about it. And I think that, you know, the effort by him and others to say the commission has to include a look at BLM and Antifa violence is wrong. I don't think we, there's, there's no justification for diluting the focus of the commission. And again, the BLM and Antifa violence was a criminal and, you know, that ought to be prosecuted. People should

be accountable. But we need a commission that looks at how did we get to a place where a president launched an attack on the capital, who was responsible, who was involved, how did it come about that he didn't send help when help was necessary. The American people deserve to know that. And that should not be an issue of partisan debate. When do you think it became untenable for you to stay as conference chair? I assume that in that question, by the way, that you agree to some extent with your colleagues that if there hadn't been a vote this week, you would not have been an effective conference chair

going into next week or something. But maybe you disagree with that. You know, I look at it more as it became increasingly clear that staying as conference chair would require that I embrace the lie. And I wasn't willing to do that. Kevin McCarthy hasn't embraced the lie. He has said that he believes Joe Biden is president. But embracing the lie includes things like saying that the former president should speak at CPAC,

includes things like going to Mar-a-Lago. I mean, if you really believe what Kevin McCarthy, if you're really willing to stand on principle in terms of what Kevin McCarthy said on January 13th on the House floor, then there's no justification for going to Marilago to rehabilitate the former president. I think you saw again and again and again Kevin, Steve, members of the leadership saying, you know, Donald Trump is actually one of the leaders of our party. He should be the leader of our party. And when I would say, no, he must not be, that clearly, you know, created a situation where we had different paths. we were going down. And being really clear, helping people understand that the big lie is the

big lie. And helping voters understand how dangerous the big lie is requires more than silence. You know, silence is complicity here. And if I'd been willing to be silent, if I had been willing not to say, I don't think Donald Trump has any role that he can play in our party or our government, if I'd been willing to sit in silence or to embrace claims about election fraud, then, you know, I think things would have been on a different, in a different path, but I wasn't willing to do that. There's not going to be a commission, is there? I'm not ready to say that. I think every day that goes by, it's less likely. And I think there are problems on the Republican side. I think Pelosi clearly, when she put forward the proposal that, you know, said

This is going to have, whatever it was, nine Democrats for Republicans. You don't do that. You don't do what she did if you want a serious commission, right? I mean, you don't propose a lopsided commission right away. It said to Republicans, we're not taking this seriously. We want to, you know, we either want a commission that's designed to condemn Republicans or we don't want a commission because we know you're never going to agree to this. Wasn't that sort of a poison pill?

Yeah, I mean, look, I think it's the same kind of behavior we've seen from Pelosi consistently, which is each time she has the possibility of choosing a path of bipartisanship, choosing a path where we work together, she doesn't. You know, she goes down a far more partisan path. And so clearly, and she had to know. I mean, you know, she obviously has been around. She was there when we did the 9-11 commission. So she knows what a real bipartisan commission looks like.

And that wasn't it. And so she gives, you know, people on our side who don't want a commission an excuse. instead of saying, look, we've got to have one, and it has to be bipartisan. It's not a question. I also think that there could be hesitation at the White House about it. You know, I suspect that you've seen that

on some level, sort of, you know, we want to move past. They don't want to be consumed by talking about Trump. But again, I think for the good of the country, we really need to have one. The conference just voted between Elise Stefonic and Chip Roy,

very different voting records, Elise Stefonic, a much more moderate member of the Republican conference. Chip Roy, quite a conservative member, much more in line with your voting record, I would say. The big difference appears to have been Trump's endorsement. Given that, what does the Republican Party stand for right now

except an increasing distance from any specific policy goals and an increasing closeness to Trump is the Republican Party. Trump equals Republican Party. And it doesn't stand for policies the way that political parties used to back in the day, but rather it is simply a person. I think that that is at the heart of the problem. And I think if you look at what we have to do as Republicans and what I think is my obligation, and I would argue the obligation of, you know, elected Republican officials, but also, you know, Republican voters around the country, we have to get back to standing for policy. We have to get back to standing up. And being able to convey to people, here's what we

believe and why you ought to vote for us. You know, if you go back to the fact that we didn't have a platform, for example, this year or 2020, you know, and you guys have been around enough, you know, party platforms like people, you know, like, I don't agree with everything in it. And there our big fights about it, but it matters, you know, matters to say, here's what we stand for. And we didn't have a platform. And I think that, you know, if you look at the extent to which, for example, in, you know, the hearings that are going on with people who've been arrested for January 6th and the numbers of people who say, well, I was there because Donald Trump told me to be there. He, you know, he's the commander in chief. He told me. You really do have a situation

that is dangerous and one where the party gets oriented around an individual. You know, I've said it's a cult of personality, and it's anti-democratic. And I think that what we've seen in the conference and what we've seen more broadly is exactly the reason why we can't be silent right now, why we have to stand up and say, no, this is what this party is and what we stand for and what we're going to fight for. And our loyalty is not to a former president who did what he did. But the Republican Party in the House has voted. They voted for a lease over Chip. They voted to move you out. You just said they don't, you know, they're standing for this cult of personality. Why are you still a Republican if Republicans don't stand for anything? Well, I view this as the opening battle of a much longer war. I've been a Republican and I'm a Republican. I believe in this party. I believe that the country needs this party. And I'm going to fight to restore the party as a party. party of ideas. And, you know, I think that there are people who say, well, it's time to leave

the party, Republicans who certainly have left the party. I'm going to fight to try to bring those people back. I think it's a battle that's worth having that we have to have. What would you say to somebody who listens to you describe that and your preference for policy over some of this other stuff and says, boy, she's just hopelessly naive. I mean, that's so That's so anachronistic. Like, people don't care about policy the way that you do. I mean, the way that I do. They care about a fight, and they care about performance,

and they care about, you know, getting the next hit on Fox News and praise from Sean Hannity. What do you do if that's the trend in the Republican Party? And I think it's unmistakable that that's the trend in the Republican Party. Well, look, I mean, I think I'm, I'm, you know, up for a fight just as much as the next person is. And I think that the key is we have to fight about policy. And you're right.

I mean, the incentives run now towards people that are going to be, you know, want to come to Washington and be social media stars, argue about Dr. Seuss. I just, I think the issues matter too much. I think that the threats are too great, whether you're talking about what's happening domestically or whether you're talking about national security set of issues, that I think it is incumbent upon us to have this fight and to continue to do it based on substance. And I also think, you know, people are exhausted. They're really tired of sort of the way politics has been run, certainly for the last four years. And I think that, you know, we just have an obligation

to stand up and say, look, here's what the Republicans believe. We really really. don't think you should defend the police, and here's why that's so dangerous. We don't think you should get back in the Iranian nuclear courts, and here's why that's so dangerous. We don't think that we should have, you know, $6 trillion proposed in appropriations in the first hundred days of an administration with virtually no hearings in Congress. I mean, there are things happening that are really bad, and if we want to stop that, we've got to convince people why they should vote for us. I don't think that we're going to be convincing a lot of people to come back for us if we're spending our time on Dr. Seuss.

Let me come out a different way on policy. Let's say, some of your critics say, actually, the problem, a few, a few, I've heard. I mean, you get love from Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. Sounds like that doesn't go both ways. Some of your critics say, look, it's not really about Donald Trump. This is really about Liz Cheney being a, you know, a Bush Cheney-era Republican. You want strong national defense. You want to project our power all over the world.

You care about spending and free markets, which Donald Trump has moved the party away from. You're reluctant to be sort of protectionist. Could this is some of this about policy, actually, and even though there wasn't a platform, what Donald Trump, the effect of the Trump presidency is to turn the Republican Party into a more non-interventionist party, less free market party, skeptical of trade party. I mean, these things have happened. Yeah, they have happened. And I think that they're so important that we have to have the debate, you know.

So if the issue is what role should America play in the world and what role is necessary for America to be able to defend our freedom, it doesn't really matter to me if somebody says to me, oh, that's old-fashioned. It's right. And if you want to have the debate, we'll have the debate. And you explain to me why, you know, why you think it's right for Joe Biden to be going down the path in Afghanistan now that Barack Obama went down in Iraq. And we know what that led to. So I think it's important for us to be willing to say, let's have the fight. Let's have the debate. I think what we saw in the Trump era was, you know, too often just sort of the attacks, the vitriol, that, again, you know, people are just sick of that.

I think that we have to be able to say, this is what I believe, this is what you believe, let's fight it out. And we also, as Republicans, we have to be confident enough in our views that we're actually willing to have that debate. So I think there are clearly substantive disagreements, certainly with the Democrats, certainly within our conference. There's no question. But at the end of the day, this set of issues

in what's transpired since the sixth, I would say is, you know, about the lie and about what the requirements are being in leadership, whether you're willing to, you know, perpetuate that, and I'm not willing to do that. Not long ago, I saw someone go through a sudden loss, and it was a stark reminder of how quickly life can change and why protecting the people you love is so important. Knowing you can take steps to help protect your loved ones and give them that extra layer of security brings real peace of mind. The truth is the consequences of not having life insurance can be serious. That kind of financial strain, on top of everything else, is why life insurance

indeed matters. Ethos is an online platform that makes getting life insurance fast and easy to protect your family's future in minutes, not months. Ethos keeps it simple. It's 100% online, no medical exam, just a few health questions. You can get a quote in as little as 10 minutes, same-day coverage, and policies starting at about two bucks a day, build monthly, with options up to $3 million in coverage, with a 4.8 out of five-star rating on trust pilot and thousands of families already applying through ethos. It builds trust. Protect your family with life insurance from ethos. Get your free quote at ethos.com slash dispatch. That's ethos.com slash dispatch. Application times may vary. Rates may vary.

Do you think Donald Trump will run again for president in 2024? It certainly seems that way. It certainly seems that he is, you know, hinting at that. gearing up to do it. So, you know, if I had to guess today, I'd say yes. Are you hinting at it and gearing up to do it as well? My view of this is whatever it takes to make sure that he's nowhere near the Oval Office again is what's required. And, you know, I think he's really dangerous. And his determination, his lack of faithfulness to the Constitution,

is something we've never seen before. If your goal is to prevent him from getting to the Oval Office, and presumably you would lose the Republican nomination based on polling of how many Republicans support Donald Trump right now, the most effective way to prevent him from getting to the Oval Office is running as a third party, would you do that? Look, I am not leaving the Republican Party. I believe that 2024 is a long time away.

I think that we have to win this battle sooner than that. that. I think we've got to be in a position where, you know, we make it clear that this is a party based on truth. And that's what I'm focused on doing. Mitch McConnell, back when you came up for a no-confidence vote a couple months ago, stood up and spoke out rather forcefully on your behalf and said you were an important member of Congress. He looks forward to keep working with you, said your reelection in Wyoming was important. He hasn't said those things this time. He was pressed by Brett Baer on Fox News the other night and said, I stand by what I said before, didn't stand up.

Is he trying to just hope that this all fades away? What's your sense of why he hasn't sort of joined the fight? Yeah, look, I think Mitch and I, and I have tremendous respect for him and for his leadership over in the Senate, but we have a different perspective on this moment. And I think that, you know, his view is, if we ignore the former president, then the threat will go away.

And that isn't my view. So I think we have a difference of opinion there. And, you know, I think I've been pretty clear about what my view is and where we are. What's it like just on a day-to-day basis with your colleagues? And these are people you've worked alongside for years. It depends which ones. Let's say the ones who have been critical. I mean, you know, some of these folks you've worked with, you've gotten to know pretty well,

some of them have been skeptical of what you're doing, some of them have been hostile to what you're doing. You've got this reports are you got a sort of mocking standing ovation when you left conference the other day. I mean, how are you going to handle these relationships with your colleagues? Look, I mean, I love the House. I still love the House. I think that it is, it's a place where you really can have the kinds of debates about policy you need to have. You know, my view is that we still need to have those. There are certainly some of my colleagues that I have respect for and some I don't. When I opened the conference a couple of days ago, you know, I said I have affection and admiration for. I can't remember if I said many or most of you in this room. But, you know, it's true. I do. Can you give us a list of names of the people you don't?

I think you can probably guess. But, you know, I think that the house itself and the Capitol building. I mean, those places are really, I think they're sacred places. And I think that the people who are elected to serve there, have a responsibility to treat our jobs and to treat the House of Representatives as a place that really is the heart of our republic. And we have to treat it with dignity and respect. You know, certainly we fall short of that.

Both sides of the aisle fall short of that. But, you know, I don't think that that can ever be sort of old-fashioned. I think it's really important. Have you had much outreach from colleagues who have. said sort of whispered to you hey keep going i'm i'm with you i have and i've also had a lot of outreach from colleagues saying hey we voted with you on that voice vote but there was an account there was an account yeah but that so does that uh does that tell us anything i mean you know we've talked a lot on our podcast here about how how it was the case that so many of these

Republicans were, you know, skeptical of Trump or critical of Trump, but just unwilling to say it in public. Do you think now that you're sort of, you're planting a flag, you're saying like, no, I'm saying this in public. Does that move any of those people who are whispering to you that they really are for you, but not doing it publicly? You know, I hope it does. I think there's something else going on, though, too, which is real, which is people are afraid for their security. and that's a real thing and that ought to just give everybody pause. Like if we're now at a place

and, you know, I'm sure you guys have heard from members, I've heard from them, where people feel like they can't cast a vote that they should because they have to fear for their lives, that's not an America that we've been in before. And I think that also really ought to give people, you know, people need to pause and think about what that means

and where we are as a country. You gave Donald Trump another notch in his belt. You lost. He won this vote. Did you pick your moment wrong? I don't view it that way. I don't think you'll be surprised to hear. I think that actually, if I had been willing to go along with the lie, that would have been the victory for him

because you would have then had nobody standing up saying stop. Nobody's standing up saying what this man's doing is a fundamental threat to the republic. And I think part of the, you know, aggressive response from him to me in the last week or so is because he knows that. It's a lot easier for him if you don't have anybody in the Republican leadership who's objecting to what he's doing. If we all were just sort of saying, okay, we'll go along, great.

We're going to fundraise off of it. Great. You know, sure, you might be the nominee again. I think that's a lot easier path for him. You said that Kevin McCarthy was leading without principle. Who are the Republicans right now that our listeners should be looking to who, you believe are potential leaders with principal? Look, I think you've got people all over the country.

You've got people in governors' mansions. You've got people in the Senate and in the House. Give us some names. I would say people like Ben Sasse. I think he's been very committed throughout this. People like Senator Cassidy, certainly Senator Romney. In the House, obviously, the 10 of us, the other nine, who took the principled vote to impeach.

I think if you look at the 60 or so House members who voted on the Republican side to certify the election, I think people, those are people that I think really deserve, you know, deserve a lot of respect and support. You know, the whole momentum as we were getting to January 6th was one of, come on, just vote to object because it'll be a lot easier. It's what Trump wants us to do. It's what the base wants. And it was unconstitutional. And so I think that the 60 or so Republicans, who stood against that all deserved a lot of support and respect and admiration for doing what's

right. I have one last question for you. You have five children. Amy Coney Barrett also has quite a few children. When I and some of my fellow working moms look at you guys, this is sort of a watershed moment in leadership in Washington, not just moms, like Uber moms, Uber powerful jobs with Uber big families. I like that Uber moms. I'm wondering what advice you have as a woman and an Uber mom to the rest of us. I have to tell you, one of my most favorite and actually most moving images of the last, you know, year or so was the video of Amy Coney-Barris.

walking out of her house with all of her kids getting into a minivan. But you knew she was getting into a minivan to come be a justice of the Supreme Court. I mean, it was, it's really an amazing thing. And, you know, I think that as moms, you know, also some of the most moving moments for me over the course of the last couple of months have been with with our kids. And I had the chance last week to be with my three daughters for an early Mother's Day in Wyoming. And having the chance to talk to your kids about things like truth and freedom and the Constitution, I think it's always important. And I had this experience as a child when you see your parents involved in things

that are sort of beyond yourself and themselves and, you know, fighting for something that matters. And I also, you know, because as a mom, obviously, you have constant mom guilt. But am I there enough? What am I doing? But having grown up in a family where both my parents, you know, were working, you know, outside of what was happening at our house, you know, I also have the ability to sort of look back and think, my gosh, that was such a blessing and such a blessing to be able to understand the wider world and to see people who were involved in those things. things. And I think I made it out okay. Some people might say no. She has issues, but I think I was okay. So I, I just encourage moms. I think it, I think it makes me a better mom. And I think

also, like, you have to have a high tolerance for chaos. All right. Well, the brisket turned 11 months this week. And I've tried to tell him the truth about not sticking his head in a toilet full, but he has rejected the truth. He's embraced a big lie, but heads go in the toilet bowl. Well, he's a boy. Yeah, oh, he is such sorry. Wait a second. You know, Steve, maybe when everything calms down

just a little, you'll let me do like a full just mom podcast with Congresswoman Cheney. I'd love to do that. Because I feel like I have an infinite number of mom questions that I just have that I need her advice on. I mean, I think that would be good. I think we get a lot of people to listen. Final question

for me. What's next? I'm going to obviously focus on re-election in Wyoming and also spend time working around the country raising money for candidates who believe in the Constitution, candidates who know the party's got to be a party of substance, and doing everything that I can to help guide the party back to where we need to be. And actually, the real last question for me. What's it like? I mean, you've become sort of a media darling.

I mean, the mainstream media is treating you very well in the long history of Cheney family. You're going to say that. Seeking good press. You know, you certainly have critics who say, well, she just wants to, she just wants this platform to be treated well by the media. I mean, listen, I've been around long enough. I know anything good that anybody says about. you is probably going to be countered tomorrow with something bad. And, you know, if it had been about getting good press,

there are a lot of things I clearly could have done a lot sooner. But, look, I think the press itself isn't the issue as much as it is. The messages that come in, I mean, I think I've talked about messages I've been getting from a Gold Star father. and the desperation that people have felt, you know, Republicans and others about, you know, people watching, thinking, are we really going to have a situation where everybody who's an elected Republican just says, fine, let's let the country go down that path. And, you know, I don't know.

At each moment of this, my decision about what to do, because it's so big, is just been what is the right thing to do. And, you know, I don't know. Ultimately, I feel very confident that the right's going to prevail. And, you know, I think you just have to keep doing the next right thing here. Thank you so much for joining us. We'll be following you. Thanks for the mom questions.

That was great. With Amex Platinum, access to exclusive Amex pre-sale tickets can score you as a trackside. So being a fan for life turns into the trip of a lifetime. The Powerful Backing of Amex. Pre-sale tickets for future events subject to availability and varied by race. Terms and conditions apply. Learn more at mx.ca.ca slash Yanex.