Rep. Liz Cheney called out radio host Mark Levin in a series of tweets this morning saying, the “Eastman memos & fake elector scheme” that he’s defended and allegedly worked on in the past “are indefensible”:

[email protected]: The Eastman memos & fake elector scheme are indefensible. On the memos: Eastman took the opposite legal position a month before the election; he knew all 9 Justices would rule against him; & he admitted it was illegal in an Oval Office meeting & afterwards. (1/3)

She added:

“White House lawyers said it was illegal too. The fake electoral slates were obviously false, and were transmitted to multiple federal officials for purposes of obstructing the electoral count. None of this is ambiguous. (2/3)”

And she told Levin to “watch the hearings”:

“Watch the hearings, and read the opinion of the federal judge who concluded that Eastman and Trump likely violated two criminal statutes. (3/3)”

It looks like Cheney was responding to this explanation from Levin on his radio show last night:

Which, funny enough, was captured and transcripted by the far-left Media Matters, which Levin then shared with his followers. This has to be a first, no?

The gist of it:

Oh, well, what about these so-called fake electors? That is to be resolved by the United States Congress. That is not a crime either. You might not like it. You might think it’s weird, you might think it’s unethical, but it’s not a crime. So to criminalize politics, to criminalize many of these things that have gone on in this country through its history, to completely misunderstand what the Electoral College is all about. And when the election is finally over, which is why they meet on January 6, to make that decision is to take the criminal law process and project it on top of the Constitution to pervert it.

The Democrats are pushing hard. They’re pushing hard the attorney general. They’re pushing hard the U.S. attorney. The U.S.. Attorney, we’re told, is now investigating Trump. These are three the crimes they’re looking at. They’ve gone after his lawyers. They want to see the phone calls. They want to see the texts.

They want to see what? That a candidate Was fighting hard to win. Challenging what was going on in the States. And of course, many of these states don’t. Have clean hands. There is, you know, Article II of the Constitution, where only the state legislatures – the state legislatures – can make the law through which electors are chosen. Early in our history, the very earliest, the state legislatures selected the electors who didn’t vote. They selected the electors. Well, some of them did, but most of them didn’t. And so the state legislatures had all the power. Today, it could be a state Supreme Court majority Democrat, It could be a governor who’s a Democrat. You see that all occurred in the state of Pennsylvania and so forth and so on. And all these cases, hundreds of them, were brought by a law firm and other law firms in Washington, D.C., trying to change the election laws. They were working their Democrat politicians in the – in the courts, working them in the governor’s offices, and so forth. And many of them succeeded. Now, like it or not, they’re free to do that, too. They’re free to do that, too. But the other party is free to respond. And the final say is in the Congress of the United States. It’s not in the U.S. attorney’s office. It’s not by the attorney general of the United States. It’s not even in the courts. The final say is Congress. That’s why it all winds up before a joint meeting of Congress where the vice president oversees the process. That’s why a member or members of the House and the Senate can object – object to the election. And they have – members of this committee and nobody’s been arrested. Nobody’s been charged with obstruction. Nobody’s said that they’re turning democracy on its head. None of those things. I’ll be right back.

Advantage? Levin.

***

Tags: