Rep. Banks is "one of the Republicans leading the charge to remove Rep. Liz Cheney" and replace her with Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY). Lots of us find that choice interesting, given Cheney's much more conservative voting record (80% to Stefanik's 48% rating from Heritage Action) and her 93% vote-with-Former Guy record, compared to Stefanik's 78%.
Of course, Stefanik has a 100% Former Guy Cult rating, compared to Cheney's 0% there, and that's really all that matters. And Former Guy even knows how to pronounce her name now, I think (he used to say Steph-a-nick, for Pete's sake.)
Banks said the Rs are "almost completely unified in a single mission to oppose the radical dangerous Biden agenda and win back the majority" in the midterms - and anything else gets in the way of that.
And any leader who's not focused on that, on pushing back against the Biden -- the radical dangerous Biden agenda, at this point, needs to be replaced. But the -- the point here is that we are almost entirely unified on that mission except for Liz Cheney.
When Wallace pushed him to define what Cheney's not doing in that regard, Banks just started babbling.
I'm the -- I'm the leader of the largest conservative caucus Republican study committee. Chris, it's uncomfortable at times, but one of my jobs is to hold my Republican leadership accountable for being focused on the Republican ideals that we stand for and the single mission that we have to win back the majority. And, at this point, the reason, Chris, that you and I are talking about Liz Cheney on this important program on Sunday morning is -- is exact -- the exact evidence that she's failed in her mission as the chief spokesperson of our party. We shouldn't be talking about Liz Cheney; we should be talking about pushing back against the radical Biden agenda. And this is all a distraction from our ability to be able to do that. That -- that's why she will likely be replaced this week.
He says he doesn't know who'll replace her, but the entire universe, including the Chinese rocket derbis, knows it's going to be Stefanik. Wallace asked Banks why he wouldn't talk about Cheney's criticism of Former Guy. More babbling ensued, including Banks saying again that Cheney has lost focus on "the single mission we have in winning back the majority, to push back against the radical Biden agenda is the reason that she needs to be replaced." And, he continued,
-- and -- and make it clear, make it clear to all of your viewers, Chris, that we're not kicking her out of the Republican Party if she's removed from her leadership post. But in her leadership post, she doesn't just -- any member of Congress doesn't just represent their district, they represent 212 members of the Republican conference and -- and right now it's clear that she doesn't represent the views of the majority of our conference or the focus that all of us have to win back the majority.
Wallace then asked if Joe Biden was the legitimate president. Banks said "Yes, Joe Biden was elected. He was -- he was inaugurated on January 20th. And he -- he's -- he's the -- our focus." And when Wallace explained that he asked the question because Banks supported the Texas lawsuit challenging the election results in other states. And he asked Banks if he still questions "whether or not Joe Biden won the election fair and square and got over 270 electoral votes fair and square?" The answer to that question is, well, yes, he does question it.
Yes, Chris, I -- I stand by my vote to object on January 6th. I stand by the Texas lawsuit because I have serious concerns about how the election in November was -- was carried out.
The rest of his answer was the same as his answer to every other question Wallace asked: fighting the radical dangerous Biden agenda and taking back the majority and having a singular focus (on getting rid of Liz Cheney, of course, but he didn't come right out and say that this time).
Wallace - he did a great job with this interview, I must say - pushed Banks again on Former Guy and the insurrection, pointing out that Banks had said "... (Former Guy) was not responsible for the attack on the Capitol," something that even GOP leader Kevin McCarthy said was not true. Banks generalized, noting that
...every single Republican in the Republican conference denounced what happened on January 6 and almost all of us agree there should be some sort of a bipartisan commission to study what happened on that day to make sure that it never happens again.
And when Wallace had to explain that he was asking Banks for his opinion on whether Former Guy contributed to the insurrection, and about the Big Lie, that the election was stolen from him, Banks said he "never said the election was stolen," but he did have concerns about how it was run, and that he'd never apologize for going along with the Texas lawsuit. And then, almost like clockwork, it was back to the distraction and Liz Cheney and "what we have to do to save this country" and that's why they don't need her any more.
And the final question? Did Banks think that Cheney was "misguided" when she makes points like "history is watching and you can't go forward until you resolve this question, the election was fair and square, and that Former Guy played a negative role?" Yep, he does.
Yes, I -- I've called on Liz Cheney to rejoin the Republican team and help us go out and win the majority in the midterm election. That -- that's where my frustration has bubbled up. I wrote a memo, Chris, recently to Leader McCarthy about how we keep Trump voters in the Republican fold... And Liz Cheney is the only Republican leader who attacked the memo about making the Republican Party the party of the working class. If she doesn't get that, that that's an important part of the formula to win the majority back in the midterm election and win the White House back in 2024, then she doesn't belong in a leadership position.
So, to recap: Former Guy good. Former Guy voters good. Mission to win back the majority good. Election bad. Cheney bad. Any questions?
See you around campus.
