Liz Cheney's Commencement Speech at Colorado College: "The Truth Shall Make You Free"

Liz Cheney at Colorado College

Have we ever had a year when so many people gave speeches about truth? 

Ceremonial speeches teach us about values. What value can be higher than truth? In her May 28, 2023 commencement address at her alma mater, Colorado College, former Republican representative Liz Cheney explained to the graduates that truth matters. She started with this thesis:  

“The first thing we ask of you is that you live in the truth.” 

Continuing, Cheney cited the inscription on a building on Colorado College’s gorgeous campus: “Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.”

Cheney immediately followed that noble premise by reminding the graduates that:

“…after the 2020 election and the attack of January 6th, my fellow Republicans wanted me to lie. They wanted me to say the 2020 election was stolen, the attack of January 6th wasn’t a big deal, and Donald Trump wasn’t dangerous. I had to choose between lying and losing my position in House leadership.”

Continuing, Cheney talked about her final meeting as Chair of the Republican House Conference:

“As I spoke to my colleagues on my last morning as chair of the Republican conference, I told them that if they wanted a leader who would lie, they should choose someone else.”

How can we disagree? Cheney was right that it is, indeed, a basic life rule: to be free, we must embrace truth. Cheney continued:

“It is a fundamental fact - we cannot remain a free nation if we abandon the truth. As you go out to change the world, resolve to stand in truth.”

Yes, truth is life’s most basic virtue. How can we expect our plans and ideas to work out if they arise from falsehood? Why should it surprise us that lies never turn out to be true? That relationships based on lies mean nothing? 

For her second value, Cheney asked the students to “do good and be kind to each other.” That is also a basic value, but it is, once again, subordinate to truth. If we live in lies, all else falters.

Liz Cheney concluded by repeating her values:

“Class of 2023, go forth. Stand in truth. Do good and be kind. Always do the next right thing. Be heroes. Be incandescent with courage. Defend our democracy. Love and serve our country. She – and we – have never needed you more.”

Yes, it’s easy to talk about truth. It is easy to say that we each have our own truths. It is, unfortunately, all too easy for us to fabricate beliefs that we know, deep inside, to be false. We often admire the truth as a principle, while rejecting its harsh reality. Truth challenges us. In contrast, all too often, lies comfort us. 

Cheney was not only applauded but booed during her speech, perhaps partly by Trump supporters, but also by many students who protested her conservative views. More generally, Cheney paid a price for her integrity. She was essentially expelled from the Wyoming Republican Party. She was censured by the Republican National Committee, which, astonishingly, held that the January 6 Capitol riot was “legitimate political discourse.” Rejected by Democrats for being too conservative, rejected by most Republicans for being too honest, she wanders without a political home. She chose to rely, instead, on truth. 

Cheney was absolutely correct to tell the students to honor truth. She rightly told them that this requires courage. It is, after all, often much easier to tell lies. Her successor as Republican Conference Chair, Elise Stefanik, happily and falsely tells people that the 2020 election was stolen, and her voters and the caucus alike seem to love her. Stefanik won almost 60% of the vote in her rural New York State district. The point is not that liars never prosper. Nor is it even true; indeed, we all know that liars often triumph. No, the point is that people tell lies when they know they are in the wrong, and yet do not care. The point is that liars never know what it means to be free. 

Ceremonial speeches are about values. Cheney talked about the most important value of all, the value of truth. Although she is just as dedicated to right-wing policies as the typical Republican voter, she refused to lie about Donald Trump or the 2020 election. That ended her political career. She discovered that it was too much to speak even one word of truth to people who didn’t want to hear it. Truth could turn her into an exile, a pariah. So it was.

Liz Cheney Used Examples to Remind Us of Our Values in Her Courageous Speech about Trump's False Election Claims

Liz Cheney and the Firehose of Truth: Using the Republicans' Text Messages Against Them

Liz Cheney is a very smart woman. She knows that her party has rejected truth. She knows that she will never again win any election as a Republican. She gave this speech, I imagine, because she hopes that the new generation of leaders can learn more integrity than the old ones.

Almost a year ago, Liz Cheney told the Select Committee investigating January 6 that, “Tonight, I say this to my Republican colleagues who are defending the indefensible: There will come a day when Donald Trump is gone, but your dishonor will remain.” In this remarkable commencement address at Colorado College. Cheney was speaking to history. This was not only a speech for our times, and not just a speech about the danger that Trumpism still poses to the United States of America. It was a speech for the ages.

Liz Cheney's Courageous Speech Asking Republicans to Reject Trump's False Election Claims

______________________

Research Note: Speech scholars have various theories of ceremonial or epideictic speaking. A good ceremonial speech is never just empty show. A good ceremonial speaker appeals to basic values, reminds the audience about what is important, and aims for social cohesion. In his Art of Rhetoric, Aristotle said that epideictic speaking aims at the goal of honor. That is true enough, and Cheney honored truth. Belgian philosophers Chaïm Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca expounded the idea that epideictic speeches promote social cohesion by stressing shared values.

Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca also introduced the postmodern idea that the audience exists in the speaker's mind. From that viewpoint, Cheney spoke to multiple audiences, not just to the students, but also to the audience of the future. She spoke for history. 

Of course, “Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free” is from the King James Bible, John 8:32.

Image: Lonnie Timmons III / Colorado College. Used by permission.

Liz Cheney and the Firehose of Truth: Using the Republicans' Text Messages Against Them

“We are under siege in the Capitol.”

“We are all helpless.”

Those are just two of the text messages that Republican Congresswoman Liz Cheney quoted in her speech to Congress on December 13, 2021.  She read a series of text messages sent to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. The messages all date to the January 6, 2021 riot at the United States Capitol. The messages were presumably from Republican politicians. Cheney cited messages, one after the other, that asked Donald Trump to call off the attackers.

In other words, she unloaded a firehose of truth, proving her point by quoting message, after message, after message.

Liz Cheney, official portrait

 Cheney gave far more evidence than she needed. Much more than the minimum. Such massive evidence can be persuasive; the RAND corporation shows how pro-Trump Russian propaganda outlets use the “Firehose of Falsehood” to spread propaganda. Propaganda artists spew out more lies than anyone has time to refute. In contrast, Cheney used a firehose of truth. She gave the proof. That is why, helpless in the face of her facts, conservatives have not even tried to rebut her.

A firehose of truth

Unlike so many speakers, Cheney had done her homework. The effect was devastating.

 

Cheney States Her Point

Cheney’s thesis was that Former President Donald Trump had failed to do his duty to control the January 6 rioters. That crowd was shouting things like “stop the steal” and “hang Mike Pence.” Their announced goal was to use violence to stop the counting of the electoral votes that made Joe Biden President. Trump delayed for hours before asking the rioters to go home. Cheney’s secondary thesis proved that Fox News hosts knew that Trump was behind the riot, even though they would broadcast false accusations that the rioters were left-wingers.

To prove those points, Cheney read a string of text messages that Meadows had produced for the congressional committee investigating January 6. She read from a manuscript in a calm, nearly expressionless voice. She proved her points by turning people’s own words against them.

She began with her thesis:

“Mr. Meadows received numerous text messages that he produced without any privilege claim, imploring that Mr. Trump take the specific action that we all know his duty required. These text messages leave no doubt that the White House knew exactly what was happening here at the Capitol.”

Cheney Proves Her Point 

She then read a string of text messages sent to Meadows:

“One text Mr. Meadows received, ‘You are under siege at the Capitol.’ Another, ‘they have reached the Capitol.’ And a third, ‘Mark, protesters are literally storming the Capitol. Breaking windows and doors, rushing in. Is Trump going to say something?” ‘There is an armed standoff at the House Chamber door,’ and another from someone inside the Capitol, ‘We are all helpless.’”

Again, without a break, barely pausing for breath, she continued her firehose:

“Dozens of texts, including from Trump administration officials, urged immediate action by the president: ‘POTUS has to come out firmly and tell the protesters to dissipate. Someone is going to get killed.’ In another, ‘Mark, he needs to stop this. Now.’ ‘Tell them to go home.’ POTUS needs to calm this s—t down.”

Notice that, by this point, Cheney was simply reading a string of text messages, all on the same theme, all directly supporting her point. Not only their clarity, but their sheer numbers, rendered her point irrefutable.

She then turned her massive evidence against the duplicitous Fox News hosts who, only a few hours later, would be telling people that the January 6 rioters were actually left-wingers who supported Biden:

“Multiple Fox News hosts knew the president needed to act immediately. They texted Mr. Meadows and he turned over those texts. ‘Mark, the president needs to tell the people in the Capitol to go home. ...This is hurting all of us…He is destroying his legacy,’ Laura Ingraham wrote. ‘Please get him on TV. Destroying everything you have accomplished.’ Brian Kilmeade wrote. Can you make a statement? … Ask people to leave the Capitol.’ Sean Hannity urged.”

Cheney’s long string of quotations eliminated all doubt. We all understand beyond question that Republican leaders and Fox News hosts knew that the rioters were Trump’s people and were under his control. The sheer power of Cheney’s speech is reflected by the fact that, for the most part, conservative media are making little effort to refute her. For the most part, they are ignoring her speech. They are ignoring a speech that no one could ignore. It was not until the next day that Fox News made even a feeble effort to discuss the text messages. Trump himself remains silent. As of this writing, I can find nothing about Cheney’s speech on the websites of the conservative National Review, Breitbart, or other right-wing outlets.

So, for the moment at least, Liz Cheney and her allies on the January 6 committee now control the public agenda. Even more, when Cheney mentioned “dozens of texts, including from Trump administration officials,” she tantalized the audience by hinting that the January 6 Committee has tanks full of more evidence. Trump’s supporters are no longer setting the agenda.

And She Gave a Public Speaking Lesson  

Thousands of years ago, the Greek philosopher Aristotle explained that the two essential parts of the speech are to state your case and prove it. That is exactly what Liz Cheney did. She stated her point in simple, bold language. She then presented massive evidence to support her point.

So, we learned a lot about the January 6 Capitol riots from Cheney’s brief speech. She also taught us two public speaking lessons:

1. State your case and prove it. Good advice from the old days.

2. Do your homework and show your audience the facts.

Liz Cheney showed how it is done. She made it seem simple. Do your homework and prove your point. Now, although the conservative media are thrashing around to change the subject, it looks as if the irresistible truth is coming out.

______________

Earlier Post: Speakers Need Research: Donald Trump Suggested Injecting Disinfectants to Cure the Coronavirus

Earlier Post: Mike Lee Tries to Make Fun of the Green New Deal but Only Makes Fun of Himself (P.S.: Speakers Need Research)

Earlier Post: Liz Cheney's Speech Against Trump's False Election Claims

Earlier Post: Liz Cheney Reminded Us of Our Values
_____________

P.S.: Cheney’s expressionless delivery was, oddly enough, perfect for the occasion. Instead of sounding like an angry radical, she projected a serious demeanor. Reading from a manuscript ensured that she got the quotations exactly right.

P.P.S: There are minor differences between Cheney’s text and the speech as she delivered it. As usual, her prepared text was polished. She ad-libbed during the presentation to make a few points extra clear. For the most part, this post uses the speech as delivered. C-SPAN provided a video and rush transcript. NPR published a polished text. To understand everything she said and meant, we should pay attention to both versions. None of the differences affect her message. 

Image: House Facebook page

Liz Cheney Used Examples to Remind Us of Our Values in Her Courageous Speech about Trump's False Election Claims

Liz Cheney Giving a Speech

Yesterday, I wrote about Congresswoman Liz Cheney’s courageous May 11, 2021 congressional floor speech, in which she criticized former President Donald Trump’s false claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him. Let’s now turn to her public speaking technique. In particular, she did not select examples to prove that Trump was wrong. Instead, she expanded the debate to the United States of America’s moral standing.

As I mentioned yesterday, few politicians are motivated by any morality higher than the ballot box. If it helps them win, they’ll say it. In her dramatic speech, Cheney raised the debate to a higher level. Doing so, she indirectly reached out to a national audience rather than to her Republican colleagues. Her thesis: “I have been privileged to see firsthand how powerful and how fragile freedom is.” Her proof: she gave examples of people’s struggle for freedom.

Read: Cheney’s Courageous Speech for Freedom

Cheney’s First Example

Within her speech’s first few seconds, Cheney talked about the devotion of Kenyan voters, who defied armed soldiers so they could come to the polls and vote:

“Mr. Speaker, I have been privileged to see firsthand how powerful and how fragile freedom is. Twenty-eight years ago, I stood outside a polling place, a schoolhouse in Western Kenya. Soldiers had chased away people who were lined up to vote. A few hours later, they came streaming back in, risking further attack, undaunted in their determination to exercise their right to vote.”

Cheney’s Second Example

Indirectly challenging former President Trump’s friendship with Vladimir Putin, Cheney’s next dramatic example talked about Russia’s struggle for freedom. That was not just a struggle against communism, but later against Putin’s kleptocracy:

“In 1992, I sat across the table from a young mayor in Russia, and I listened to him talk of his dream of liberating his nation from communism. Years later, for his dedication to the cause of freedom, Boris Nemtsov was assassinated by Vladimir Putin’s thugs.”

Cheney’s Third Example

Warning that we could forget history’s lessons, Cheney then turned to Poland:

“In Warsaw in 1990, I listened to a young Polish woman tell me that her greatest fear was that people would forget. They would forget what it was like to live under Soviet domination. That they would forget the price of freedom.”

Just as Polish people needed to remember the horrors of Soviet rule, so, Cheney, implied, Americans must take care not to be careless with our freedom. 

In the United States, of course, we face a danger opposite to Poland’s. The United States has never lived under communist domination. Instead, we might take our centuries of constitutional government for granted. Conservatives love to honor our nation’s founders. Unfortunately, conservatives seem less eager to live their political lives according to doctrines like equality, freedom, and constitutional government. Cheney hoped, it seems, that the courage of Kenyan, Russian, and Polish voters would inspire Americans to treasure our constitutional republic.


Who Was Cheney’s Audience?

In their influential book about rhetoric, Traité de l'argumentation: La nouvelle rhétorique [Treatise on Argumentation: The New Rhetoric], Belgian philosophers Chaïm Perlman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca made the remarkable claim that the audience is a construct in the mind of the speaker. The important audience, especially in the media age, is not necessarily the small group of people in the room. Cheney, obviously knowing that the Republican Party had turned against her, reached out instead to the larger public. Those larger audiences could watch her speech on the news or read about it on the Web. Will the Republican voting base hear her ideas? Will her appeals reach the larger American public?

Perhaps only time will answer those questions. Notable, however, is that all but one Republican member of Congress in the chamber walked out before she spoke. They chose to ignore what she would say. By walking out, maybe they wanted to show that they disapproved of her integrity. Maybe they were ashamed to know that she was a better person than they were. We may never know.

Are Republican voters listening? Only time will tell, but Cheney tried to elevate the discourse beyond Trump’s election lies. Instead, she raised the larger question of American values. That is going to be a tough sell in the conspiracy theory-infested regions of red-state America.


Why Does Cheney’s Speech Matter?

Cheney’s examples warned us that America’s time-tested system of government is more fragile than we might think. On January 6, 2021, violent insurrectionists tried to stop the election’s certification, while more than 100 Republican members of Congress refused to certify an obviously accurate count of the Electoral College’s votes. The insurrectionists’ simple but crude goal was that the vote didn’t count until Congress said it counted. President Trump repeatedly egged them on. The disorganized, poorly-led mob came perilously close to sabotaging the tally. Liz Cheney was removed from her leadership position precisely because she opposed that sabotage.

Is Cheney right? Can the American experiment fail? Of course. Germany in 1933 was wracked by economic and political disaster, but it was also a world-recognized center of industrial power, religion, philosophy, art, and music. Germany was the homeland of Beethoven, Kant, and Goethe. Adolf Hitler’s political base consisted of conservative Christians in southern Germany. He never gained a majority of the vote, and became Chancellor of Germany by manipulating the political system. Does any of that sound familiar? If totalitarian government could seize control of Germany, then, yes, it can happen in the United States.

Read: Hitler and Christian Nationalism 

Back to Cheney’s examples: unlike most conservative speakers, she told no stories about history’s American heroes. Instead, she talked about people in other nations who valued the freedom that we take for granted. Indeed, I am reminded of a statement that Ronald Reagan made many years ago: “If we lose freedom here, there's no place to escape to. This is the last stand on earth.”

Cheney’s examples did not prove her point in a logical manner. Instead, she encouraged her audience to think in broad terms, to remember the United States’ founding values, to recognize that winning elections is not the be-all and end-all of political life. I do not expect Cheney’s speech to have much effect on American politics over the next few years. Maybe, given enough years, her message will finally sink into our national conscience. She asked for us to return to American Revolutionary ideals. She spoke to people’s hearts. As usual, only people with open hearts will hear her.



Technical notes: Perlman and Olbrechts-Tyteca’s book, which presents an innovative, and now widely-accepted, theory of audiences, is available in an excellent English translation under the title, The New Rhetoric: A Treatise in Argumentation. Highly recommended to anyone who wants to understand persuasion. My friend Ray Dearin wrote a fine summary and analysis of Perlman’s philosophy of rhetoric, which is available for paid download. Most good libraries can probably get a copy for free. 

Most printed texts of this speech are based on Cheney's draft. I referred to that draft, of course, but also to the verbatim transcript on Rev.com. Speakers often improvise during delivery. 

Image: Liz Cheney's Congressional Website

Liz Cheney's Courageous Speech Asking Republicans to Reject Trump's False Election Claims

Liz Cheney, US Congress

Never take freedom for granted.

In a dramatic speech, Wyoming congressional representative Liz Cheney told Congress yesterday that the Republican Party needed to reject former President Donald Trump’s false claim that the 2020 election was stolen from him by voter fraud.

Today, the Republican caucus removed her from her leadership role by voice vote: literally shouting down her insistence that the Republican Party should stand for truth. Good public speaking is not just a matter of skill; no, good public speaking requires integrity.

Acts of political courage like Cheney's are remarkably few and far between. Young Senator John Kennedy’s 1956 best-selling book Profiles in Courage summarizes courageous acts of eight United States senators who risked their political careers by taking unpopular political positions. It’s often noted that Kennedy’s book is short because politicians rarely exhibit courage. Most politicians are simple, amoral creatures who never think past next week's opinion polls. Most are willing to take any position, no matter how evil, that they think will help them get elected. This makes Cheney’s speech, which insisted that patriotism matters more than politics, all the more remarkable.

In fact, Cheney stated that theme in her very first sentence: “Tonight I rise to discuss freedom and our constitutional duty to protect it. Mr. Speaker, I have been privileged to see firsthand how powerful and how fragile freedom is.”

Indeed, Americans so often take freedom and greatness for granted. This sometimes makes us think that anything our nation does is automatically great. However, Cheney told Congress – and, more importantly, the American people – that American freedom is both fragile and endangered. She then warned that the nation’s freedom and greatness depend on responding to threats:

“God has blessed America, Mr. Speaker, but our freedom only survives if we protect it, if we honor our oath, taken before God in this chamber, to support and defend the Constitution, if we recognize threats to freedom when they arise.”

It required great intrepidity for Cheney to then explain that the greatest threat to American freedom came from the leader of her own political party. Former President Trump has repeatedly, and falsely, stated that the 2020 election was stolen from him. Conservative media, including commentators on Fox News, Newsmax, and so forth, have repeated this thoroughly-discredited claim. Since our constitutional republic depends entirely on the people’s faith in the system, Cheney warned that Trump’s behavior poses a unique and terrible danger:

“Today we face a threat America has never seen before. A former president, who provoked a violent attack on this Capitol in an effort to steal the election, has resumed his aggressive effort to convince Americans that the election was stolen from him. He risks inciting further violence.

“Millions of Americans have been misled by the former President. They have heard only his words, but not the truth, as he continues to undermine our democratic process, sowing seeds of doubt about whether democracy really works at all."

There is much wisdom in her simple phrase, “They have heard only his words, but not the truth.” We’ll return to that in a minute.

Cheney noted, of course, that the courts and the Department of Justice had universally rejected Trump’s false claims. She then called her party to its constitutional duty: “This is not about policy. This is not about partisanship. This is about our duty as Americans.”

She concluded her speech by once again calling on people to rise above party to defend the country:

“Ultimately, Mr. Speaker, this is at the heart of what our oath requires—that we love our country more [than life]. That we love her so much we will stand above politics to defend her. That we will do everything in our power to protect our constitution and our freedom -- paid for by the blood of so many. . . . That is our duty.”

As she gave this speech, Cheney – who is a most astute politician – knew perfectly well that the Republican caucus would soon remove her from her leadership role and that she would become a pariah in her own party.

People can speculate as to Cheney’s political future. If the Trump cult – no other word describes it – collapses, this does not mean that his supporters will ever forgive her. Germany rejected the Nazi Party after World War II, but never fully forgave Oskar Schindler for rescuing Jews from the Holocaust. He got death threats for years. I think that most Republicans know that Cheney is right, but that doesn’t mean they will welcome her again. I’ve heard speculation that Cheney may want to establish her own party or run for president. Neither seems likely.

Read: Senator Jeff Flake Spoke against Trump's Falsehoods

Read: Reagan versus Trump, Unifier versus Divider

Nevertheless, Liz Cheney gave a speech for the ages. Her speech will land in history books. Many speech students will study this speech, write papers about it, and let it inspire them. Other people, although they may stay quiet, will seethe in anger every time they think about what Cheney said yesterday.

In part, Republicans, desperate to remain in power, have shown themselves eager to discard every principle that they ever claimed to believe. Many Republicans, I suspect, quietly know that Trump has shamed them. Instead, however, of turning aside from their dark path, they will simply resent Cheney for being better than they are.

When she made her principled stand, Liz Cheney said that country mattered more than party. Her party, the once-great party of Lincoln, Grant, McKinley, and Eisenhower, rejected her. Heaven help us.



P.S.: Let’s return to Cheney’s statement that, “They have heard only his words, but not the truth.” For many Republican voters, this is probably true. We are long past the point when most people informed themselves by reading newspapers or listening to newscasters like David Brinkley or Walter Cronkite, who delivered carefully-verified reports with voices like heavenly thunder. Today, most conservatives get their news from Fox News, Newsmax, talk radio, or even less reputable sources. On the rare occasions that Fox' Chris Wallace tries to speak truthfully, viewers can tune him out, knowing that an irresponsible pundit will soon come on the air. I suspect that many Republicans, most of whom believe President Trump’s false claims that the election was stolen, have literally never heard the conclusive evidence that this is false. That is because they only listen to news media that tell them what they want to hear. To understand this bizarre phenomenon, look at communication professors Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Joseph N. Capella’s remarkable book, Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment.

Post updated May 13, 2021 to incorporate corrections based on the verbatim transcript published by rev.com. (She said Mr. Speaker, not Madam Speaker,  in the live speech, due to a Speaker Pro Tem presiding,)