Liz Cheney, a former Republican congresswoman, has indeed been vocal in her opposition to Rep. Jim Jordan's potential election as Speaker of the House. However, opinions on her relevance and the validity of her claims vary widely.
Cheney's criticism of Jordan is rooted in her belief that he was involved in efforts to overturn the 2020 election and the attack on the Capitol Building. It's important to note that she has not provided concrete evidence to support these allegations, and no legal action has been taken against Jordan in connection with these accusations.
.@Liz_Cheney: “If the Republicans decide that Jim Jordan should be the Speaker of the House…There would no longer be any possible way to argue that a group of elected Republicans could be counted on to defend the Constitution.” pic.twitter.com/Li4BeDgKes
— Republican Accountability (@AccountableGOP) October 5, 2023
The accusation that Cheney is merely making baseless claims to remain in the public eye is a common criticism from her detractors. They argue that her statements lack substance and are driven by political motives rather than genuine concern for constitutional principles.
Cheney's recent shift from advocating for the removal of Kevin McCarthy to expressing concern for the Constitution has raised eyebrows among some observers. Critics view this change in stance as opportunistic and question the consistency of her political positions.
The mention of Cheney's record of governance and allegations of causing harm may refer to her policy positions and actions during her time in Congress, which have been a subject of controversy and debate among conservatives.
It's important to remember that public figures often attract both strong support and criticism, and opinions on individuals like Liz Cheney can be highly polarized. Ultimately, the perception of her relevance and the validity of her claims are subjective and vary depending on one's political perspective.