Flynn’s words hit like a political grenade.
In one blistering broadside, he didn’t just question Mike Pence’s judgment—he questioned his courage,
his loyalty, his very place in the movement that once embraced him.
Conservatives are now asking: was Pence a guardian of the Constitution,
or did he walk away when the base demanded a fight? The answer is rip… Continues…
Flynn’s criticism cut deeper than a simple policy disagreement because it spoke to a raw,
unresolved wound on the right: who truly stood firm in 2020, and who,
in their eyes, folded when the stakes were highest. For Flynn’s supporters,
Pence became the embodiment of a familiar betrayal—the politician who campaigns as a warrior,
then disappears behind rules, norms,
and legalisms when the moment turns dangerous.
They see his actions not as constitutional courage,
but as abandonment dressed up as duty.
Pence’s defenders, meanwhile, argue that history will remember him as the adult in the room,
a man who refused to bend the Constitution to partisan fury.
That clash—between populist passion and institutional restraint—now defines a movement still at war with itself.
Flynn’s attack didn’t start that war, but it
reminded everyone that the question of who
betrayed whom is still very much alive, and still painfully unresolved.
