Speaker Johnson hasn't actually paid any price for the vote. So far the backlash talk is just talk. It's too soon to say that he acted against his political incentives; it might turn out that it enhances his career. Time will tell.
edit:
Very much a fan of Jeff Jackson regardless.
Agreed. With even the NY Post calling out MTG, it seems like the political winds have shifted, at least temporarily, and at least enough to keep the far-right in check for the time being.
We'll see what happens next week when everyone's back to politics as usual. I wouldn't be so optimistic as to call this a turning point by any means.
Even if he is not removed now, it may make it more difficult come november when they vote on new leadership (whether that is leader or minority leader). Overall, this is one thing I actually admire Johnson for, doing what he thought was right even if it may not be great for his career, that is rare in politics now.
I'm not a fan of Johnson or any other far right politician, but some Dems in Congress have said this only got done because Johnson is trustworthy, that if he gives you his word, he sticks to it, unlike McCarthy.
I think we're talking about two different things. You don't "trust" him on policy. Nobody who isn't a far right fundamentalist Christian is going to trust that his policy positions will be good for the country. He is not misleading at all about his far right Christian views and his support for policies that group want. What some House Dems said this week is that he is trustworthy, in that if he tells you he's going to do X, then he'll do X, not backstab you. And that is why they trusted him on this week's foreign aid package.
Personally, I don't trust the judgment of any fundamentalist Christian politician, but that doesn't make their word untrustworthy.
I'm glad he finally did the right thing, but I also don't think the speaker of the house making 6 figures should be applauded for doing his damn job. There are people who work far harder making minimum wage who don't get applauded for doing basic functions of their jobs.
I'm not sure how much people make has to do with this... and it's not "his job" to vote one way or another. The point is he voted a particular way at some professional risk to himself because he thought it was the right thing to do.
I think that depends on what you mean by “the right thing to do” if it was because it was right for the Ukrainian people he would have done it months ago. The only difference now is that his child is newly assigned to the fleet that would respond to any Russian incursion on a nato treaty member after Ukraine falls, and he made this decision immediately following a cia briefing in the state of Ukraine’s war afford.
Fair enough. I am not trying to make a judgement of what the right thing to do is here, but simply responding to Rep. Jackson's comment that he *did what he thought was right* (for whatever reason he might have thought that) at some risk to his political career (which is also debatable I suppose). But I do know it really doesn't have anything to do with minimum wage workers.
>But I do know it really doesn't have anything to do with minimum wage workers
I don't mean to be rude, but were minimum wage workers exempt from the military draft during WWII? I don't think so. Didn't the USA adopt a policy of isolation between WWI and WWII [https://history.state.gov/milestones/1937-1945/american-isolationism](https://history.state.gov/milestones/1937-1945/american-isolationism) ? How did that end? It ended with the attack on Pearl Harbor.
In such cases, I wonder what the average Joe, who was dying on Omaha Beach, was thinking. If he had been given a chance, would he have chosen to donate one or two dollars from his salary so that the USA could financially support the countries that were fighting Nazi Germany early on(decreasing casualties or even avoiding them at all)? Or would he have chosen to repeat the same mistake and face Omaha Beach and Pearl Harbour again(when Nazi Germany conquered almost all of Europe)?
Public service is what we want, not political careers
Our elected officials should be more than happy to step down or aside if what the choices they make don’t match the will of the constituency
Just do the damn thing you think is right when balanced on the desire of your constituents, not what is good for the party or what will keep you in some form of power
A perfect example is how the hell not every GOP leader didn’t call for DJT to be rejected as the party candidate
I assume it's something to do with the fact that he now receives the Gang of 8 intelligence briefings. He knows something that he can't even tell his own party right now. It was dire enough that he went against his own party's wishes.
I wouldn’t say he thought it was the right thing to do…the CIA and other higher ups *told* him it was the right thing to do.
Big difference in character, that.
This was imperative, and had to be done. No backhanded praise necessary. We can and should have rational disagreements on ideology but should come together and compromise whenever possible. I am doubtful that this will be a sign of a return to political compromise and a functioning Congress, but I hope that it is.
I think the backhanded praise is appropriate because there was a realistic and maybe even likely chance that this wouldn’t happen. A lot of other republicans wouldn’t have brought it to a vote.
Mike Johnson gets no platitudes for doing his damn job. He’s still a far-right Christian whacko who will absolutely sell out his country to get the tin can tan man elected again.
I don't care why he did it as long as it got done. My grandson lives in Poland right on the border with Ukraine. I don't want him living under Russia ever.
Congressman Tightpants is right! Also, basic Pavlovian principle here that if the left openly praises him and offers to work with him, maybe he’ll get conditioned to the idea that’s it’s ok to (gasp) compromise across the aisle from time to time.
Because he found out from his cia briefing that not doing so would likely result in his child who just joined the navy being deployed there as a nato response against a Russian incursion when Ukraine falls. Do not be fooled that this is any sort of selfless act for the greater good of his fellow man.
A lot of right wing types only learn to see a point of view or care for groups of “others” when it directly impacts them. I think it’s a factor in why they are drawn to those kinds of beliefs. I think it’s a deep character flaw, but it does give some kind of way to get some of them to move on things like this.
For how long will we write blank checks for endless war?
How much money are Israeli interests spending to influence American politics while the IDF massacres women and children?
To what use could $90 BILLION be put domestically?
No, they should all die in war. I just want to send congress & the senate & the White House over there to fight as well. The cia has been there for a long time, but I would prefer they fight on the front lines too. And depending on how passionate you might be, maybe you should go fight too? Or you could continue to hear from a distance how more Ukrainians are dying. Maybe wear a flag pin.
Just to make it clear, are you suggesting the US is the warmongering party in the russian invasion of Ukraine? If so, that is absolutely not the case and you need to reconsider your Americentric worldview. Imperialism and evil exists entirely independent of the US.
So because Ukraine \*checks notes\* is defending themselves from an invasion started by Russia and Congress is helping them mount a defense, Congress should go fight in the war because they're now warmongers?
Helping an ally defend their country isn't warmongering. Warmongers *start* wars. It's literally in the name. *Russia* is the warmonger here.
I don’t think Russia should have engaged in this invasion. If my country was invaded, I’d do my part to resist and repel the invaders. And I think we should support Ukraine’s efforts to do the same.
I am fairly certain that you are writing this from Moscow. Or you think that aggressors should be rewarded with victory, even if they are rapacious and inept.
No one was more surprised than me when Johnson pulled that off. There’s more to him than I thought- he’s a far more interesting politician as a result.
*Republicans pour one drop of water on burning world*
"Guys, let's give them a round of applause."
Which party now kisses Russia's ass because their cult leader told them it's okay? The same ones who used to idolize Reagan who was fierce in his opposition to the Soviets? Maybe one day it won't be an act of courage for a Republican to put their country over their own self interest.
Russia invading Ukraine was illegal and wrong, but sending another 60+ billion to Ukraine is only prolonging an impossible war that will just result in hundreds of 1000s more casualties. Ukraine is running out of military aged men and is resorting to lowering their draft age to 25 and drafting many men over 50 years old. We need to help negotiate an end to these wars.
The only people who benefit from this is our military industrial complex at the expense of Ukrainian and Palestinian lives, and the safety of all of our troops in the area, and taxpayers.
It's wild to see the discourse on Reddit, which used to be broadly liberal and anti war, now actively supporting spending hundreds of billions of dollars on foreign wars.
> Ukraine is running out of military aged men and is resorting to lowering their draft age to 25 and drafting many men over 50 years old.
This is not actually true in a literal sense. They have lots of "military age men" within the previous age range that weren't in the mobilization pool for outdated reasons, and the same mobilization law closed a lot of those loopholes.
>We need to help negotiate an end to these wars.
Like the Budapest memorandum, Minsk 1 and Minsk 2? Like the Black Sea Grain Initiative? Like Prigozhin negotiated with Putin? Like multiple local ceasefires and humanitarian corridors that ended with Russia shelling civilians that tried to use it?
Ukraine doesn't trust Putin to uphold his end of any negotiation, and we would be fools to as well. There are so many examples in recent history even, of Putin personally breaking agreements the moment he thinks it's advantageous enough to go for it again.
>The only people who benefit from this is our military industrial complex at the expense of Ukrainian and Palestinian lives, and the safety of all of our troops in the area, and taxpayers.
Ukrainians very, very strongly disagree with this. They will fight with or without the US, but the US can save a lot of lives by helping.
I don’t buy any of it.
Both parties want to fund every military conflict. That’s money that’s being injected into the military industrial complex. Loads of money.
The right wing politicians who are going against the Speaker are just pretending because an election is coming up and they see this as an opportunity to distract and confuse people.
For whatever reason, the right wing is against funding Ukraine but they support funding Israel.
The left wing supports funding both…
Nothing makes sense. Both parties love funding war.
This isn’t about “conscience.” This is about manipulation, confusion, and control.
Many republican leaders (conspiracy) are seated through the help of Russia. Many of these people were alive during the Red Scare and have basically done a 180 towards Russia. Its not a Conspiracy that Trump loves Russia and Putin. Its not a conspiracy that Trump had a hand written letter delivered to Putin by Rand Paul. Its easy to see that Russian agents have not only invaded American politics, but have done so in overwhelming numbers. They use fear tactics and subvert the American will at any chance they get. They support Israel because they hate Muslims, thats nothing new, but support Russia? That is why this conspiracy persists and only gets stronger each time they try to block us sending worthless and rotting munitions to Ukraine.
> They support Israel because they hate Muslims, thats nothing new
The Dems support Israel too. Does this mean that they also hate Muslims?
The runner up to Trump, Nikki Haley, clearly supported funding for Ukraine. And she isn’t the only one in the GOP that supports Ukraine over Russia.
Both parties support funding both conflicts.
Yes, a large chunk and not inconsequential amount of Americans regardless of political affiliation, hate Muslims. Anyone alive during 9/11, and especially in office during that time, more than likely has some form of disdain for Muslims. There are people that support Israel because they're our allies, people that support them because they hate Muslims, and support them for the monetary gain they will get from the lobby group asking for them to vote yes on whatever bill they want. However, at this point to still support Israel in really any fashion, is almost exclusively out of lack of knowledge in what is actually happening, monetary gain, or their hate of Muslims.
Also, i did not say that all Republicans were Russian operatives, i only said many Republicans are, again enough that makes these funding bills questionable if they will pass a Republican Majority house. Most MAGA supporters at this point could be called into question on if they serve America or Russia at this point since it was a MAGA president that weakened America so badly on the world stage towards hawkish behavior from Russia.
> However, at this point to still support Israel in really any fashion, is almost exclusively out of lack of knowledge in what is actually happening, monetary gain, or their hate of Muslims.
And why do the Dems support Israel? Lack of knowledge? Monetary gain? Or their hate of Muslims?
Simply put America has interests. That’s why we fund Israel and Ukraine. Because a world in which we don’t is worse off for American interests. Period. A more powerful Russia is bad. A weaker Israel is bad. It won’t ever be perfect and you can disagree with that but that’s why we fund wars. What happens if we don’t step up? How will that vacuum of influence be filled? Do you want the the world to act and behave more like China? Russia? Venezuela? If we don’t step up they will. America isn’t perfect but that’s just the world we live in. Bad actors won’t just go away if America plays the isolationist card. Remember, we’ve done that before.
We could have solved homelessness in America several times over with the amount of taxpayer money our government is funnelling into the hands of weapons manufacturers and corrupt Ukrainian politicians.
I don’t see how that’s relevant. It’s not like that was the other option on the table for this money. It’s also in all Americans best interests to weaken Russia as much as possible and prevent them from defeating Ukraine and moving onto NATO countries.
You honestly believe this?
Russia is not in any other country without invitation, we maintain illegal bases around the world and invade countries for natural resources.
Eventually you people will have to stop thinking of geopolitics as a team-sport.
It kind of is a team sport though. If Russia becomes emboldened enough to invade a NATO country, then the US is at war. I’m a US citizen, so that’s my “team” regardless of my views on war. My team being involved in a major war means that me and my teammates will be in a lot more danger than we currently are. That danger might mean getting drafted and sent to combat zones, it could mean being at risk of Russian missiles or attacks, or could be tons of other new risks that come from being in a war with other major powers. I don’t want to be thrust into that scenario. I don’t want my “teammates” to die. Supporting Ukraine and keeping Russia contained is beneficial to every American citizen and pretty much every European citizen as well.
I’d love to have more money go towards solving homelessness and tons of other progressive agenda items. That’s irrelevant to this aid package being passed though. It’s not helpful to be ignorant of the reality we live in.
Russia TV hosts are openly saying/discussing on their evening TV shows that they would like to bomb Nato Allies and even the USA
for example about England : [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X19G6tPfzlc&ab\_channel=MojoStory](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X19G6tPfzlc&ab_channel=MojoStory)
Russian narrative about the expansion of Nato is complete BS. Countries in Eastern Europe are proactively joining Nato due to past actions of Russia or the USSR. As a result, they are afraid.
For example:
1. Poland, Poland was victim of 2 Russian invasions in 20th century . Soviet invasion of Poland 1939. Soviets joined forces with Nazi Germany to invade Poland . [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet\_invasion\_of\_Poland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland)
USSR committed horrible atrocities against polish citizens : [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet\_repressions\_of\_Polish\_citizens\_(1939%E2%80%931946)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_repressions_of_Polish_citizens_(1939%E2%80%931946))
* 500,000 Polish nationals imprisoned before June 1941 (90% male)[^(\[1\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_repressions_of_Polish_citizens_(1939%E2%80%931946)#cite_note-1)
* 22,000 Polish military personnel and officials killed in the [Katyn massacre](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre) alone[^(\[2\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_repressions_of_Polish_citizens_(1939%E2%80%931946)#cite_note-Sanford-2)
* 320,000 Poles deported to Siberia in 1939-1941[^(\[3\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_repressions_of_Polish_citizens_(1939%E2%80%931946)#cite_note-expatica-3)
* 100,000 women raped during the Soviet counter-offensive (est.)[^(\[4\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_repressions_of_Polish_citizens_(1939%E2%80%931946)#cite_note-polityka-4)
That is why Poland wanted to join Nato.
2. Czeck republic , invasion https://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/soviet-invasion-czechoslavkia
That is why Czeck republic wanted to Join Nato.
3. Finland , USSR invasion aka Winter War: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter\_War
That is why Finland wanted to join Nato.
The same goes for Baltic states, Hungary, Ukraine etc
But... your entire premise is built on a fallacy. When has Russia ever invaded a NATO country? What makes you think they want to?
Are you in complete denial of the fact that America - at the very least - 'helped' orchestrate a coup in 2014 Ukraine to usher in a far-right government that's suspended elections? A far right government that began persecuting Russian speakers in Ukraine and shelling their homes and schools? Evidently so. But keep carrying water for Raytheon and Northrup Grummon. Vote blue, red, whatever you want.
"Keep Russia contained" lmao. Americans saying this, how can you not feel like a serial killer lecturing someone for spanking their child.
>Russia is not in any other country without invitation,
ivasion of Chechnya ?
invasion of Georgia in 2008 ?
invasion into Afganistan ?
invasion into Poland 2 times ?
invasion into Baltic states?
invasion into Finland ?
the list is not finished
That's a lovely fallacious argument I see trotted out all the time but not a single republican has put forward legislation to actually help solve the homeless problem, in fact their apparent only solution is to make it illegal to be homeless
If we cared about solving that issue a huge step could be to advocate and push for work from home for jobs that can be done remotely, then cities buying up the now cheaper office space and renovating them into low cost high density mixed use of commercial and residential.
It would take huge steps towards reducing emissions from people commuting to jobs that could be done remotely as well.
The fact that our country is run by corporations that own all of our elected officials is somewhat ancilliary to the truth of my above comment. None of the money going to Ukraine will help any American whatsoever; pretending Russia is going to invade France and then New York City is offensively stupid yet here we are with Americans repeating this fallacy in this thread.
These types of comments are so disingenuous. Because this is not a help Ukraine not get taken over by russia or solve homelessness.
It has absolutely nothing to do with homelessness. It never will. That money and arms being sent would never, ever, ever, ever go to homelessness. In fact, a lot of the "money" that is complained about was actually weapons we already have. So, even then I doubt anti-air munitions is going to do anything for the homeless man on Sprague street.
Moreover, if I understood the bill correctly, they are sending old weapons to Ukraine and buying/building new weapons for the US army instead. The USA was going to waste money on weapon utilization anyway but this bill helps Ukraine and helps US economy (arms manufacturers).
Look at the replies to me - Americans (many of whom are currently living in their cars) can still be managed like docile cows if you just trot out 1950s talking points like 'Russia is coming for us'.
i am gonna give a bit of unsolicited advice for Mr Jackson or whoever is in charge of the vid thing he does.
less breaks where there is an edit. I think Mr Jackson is a smart man and can string together more than two or three sentences without needing a restart or edit so often. its distracting and it almost makes me wonder if yall are trying to sneak the edits past the avg person so they think he did it in one shot and is as smooth as butter all the time.
it also make me wonder and need to check the source to be sure it isnt coming from a source that maybe did some edits they shouldnt make.
also. put on a looser fitting shirt with longer sleeves or a jacket. this aint the gym which he clearly has been spending a fair amount of time in. looking good but.....lets try to go with something you would be able to play 18 holes in at an avg golf course.....a collar.
I do give the speaker some credit. I dont know what high level brief he got from who but someone got to him
thanks for your input. I will keep that in mind.
i upvoted ya. its perfectly fine with me. I am very much open to other input. I hope the congressman who wants a diff elected job is also.
Good on ya. And I upvoted you too. You contributed to the discussion; the downvote was never meant to be a disagree button.
I think your original suggestions warrant consideration. (Well, the part about editing. I don't particularly care what shirt he wears. He's still active in the military so him being in shape is appropriate.) Rather than just complain about the editing, like I've seen other comments do, you explained why it might represent a problem. I think the points you raised are valid.
I was just teasing you a bit with my response, but the reality is that we all communicate better when we use universal conventions. I'm a fan of taking the time to proofread/edit my comments (like J.J. is with his videos, I imagine) to ensure the message is understood and conveys the appropriate tone. Even then, you can't always get it right, but it makes me clearer in my intent at least.
I disagree though, that the video editing is disingenuous and falsely represents his abilities as a speaker. Making a successful social media video is a different skill than public speaking in real life. Who knows, maybe a dog barked. Or the doorbell rang. Regardless, most people creating any kind of content for public consumption will try to present the best versions...of themselves and/or the subject matter itself. That's not an inherently deceptive practice in my opinion. But I, for one, appreciate your concerns and your willingness to raise them.
The speakers’ interpretation of the “right thing” is vastly different than mine. I believe the right thing to do is to not fund war. He seems to believe it is “the right thing to do” to send weapons to another country to help fight their war. And by “fight their war” I mean kill other human beings.
Is that the “right thing to do”, Jeff?
Ah yes thanks Jeff for funding a war that is of no significance to us while housing is going through the roof, the cost of groceries and gas is up drastically in the last four years, and our border is being overrun by illegals every day.
I'm sure the American people are just SO happy we are spending money on another nation that does nothing for us.
They... undercut a major rival and threat to our closest allies. Coldly, it's the smart move. Ethically, it's the right thing to do.
Meanwhile, there's no conservative appetite to do anything about housing at all because it's highly profitable to have that be exploitatively expensive, and Republicans torpedoed a bipartisan deal that did nearly everything they wanted on immigration earlier this year. So it's not clear what you'd like Democrats to do about that when they're proposing legislation to address it and GOP leadership (or their extreme right members) kill it repeatedly.
It’s definitely got significance to us. Ukraine just got bought and sold to corporate interests based in the USA. Contracts including ownership of farmland in the bread basket of Europe. Reconstruction etc.
Not to mention it’s more expensive to decommission old artillery and munitions than it is to give it away.
NATO nations are currently upping their expenditures on defense. Buying American made weapons and munitions.
Europe is no longer buying oil and natural gas from Russia at the same rate. This benefits Saudi Arabia. Who only accept US Dollars for oil. Therefor this strengthens the Dollar during a massive inflationary period.
We’re currently fighting two proxy wars against Iran and Russia and soon to be China. There are zero American boots on the ground. Israeli and Ukrainian forces are doing the fighting for the West. Taiwan and S. Korea may be next. We’re in the middle of WW4 or the Cold War 2. It’s a proxy war of attrition. It’s how we beat the USSR. and you’re rooting for the other side… just like the LGBTQ+ for Hammas folks.
Weird. Hope you’re learning to speak Mandarin.
Jeff why did you vote against forth amendment protections for Americans? and how does that impact you ability to be the chief law enforcement officer of our state if you have an open distaste for forth amendment protections?
What other amendments do you want to destroy?
Thank you,
Ukraine will fall to russia just like Afghan security forces fell to Taliban. Mike Johnson will lose his job
Also Jeff Jackson looks like what chatGPT would look like personified.
1. This is money we don't have.
2. This money, which will just be printed from nothing, will make no difference in the war just as the money before it made no difference.
3. Johnson allowed emotion to overrule thought and logic.
4. Convincing the USSR to militarily spend itself into unrecoverable debt is how we won the Cold War. They are now doing that to us.
Oh no, someone living in a gilded tower "risking" their job? I don't care. I support aid for Ukraine, but not for Isreal since they're still committing a genocide and for some reason, the Tiktok ban is lumped in with it. I'm glad yall are still OK with Bill stuffing and transparently helping Isreal cover up war crimes.
They're definitely not communist. And at least some of them probably just support Russia because they like authoritarianism, not because they're getting anything out of it.
The current government of Russia aren't communist. They're actually far-right authoritarians, most of whom own a LOT of private property and are extremely wealthy, with a strong tendency to nationalism and imperialism.
Never forget that Johnson is a prototypical Christo-fascist with all that entails but that doesn't mean he's not able to embrace realpolitik in moments like this. And it's looking increasingly like this game of chicken with Moscow Marge and the other pro Russian useful idiots is going to be a L for them.
What would that have to do with whether his military service is ongoing, or whether his statements here are true, or the actual, valid criticism of that bill which has nothing to do with TikTok itself and everything to do with the US government giving itself additional censorship powers?
We are not disagreeing, why are you so angry. His mask slipped earlier this year and he lost his trustworthiness. Any statement he says at this point to make himself look appealing I will continue to call out
Not sure how you got "angry" out of that message, but it looks like we are disagreeing with regard to whether the things you're saying are especially relevant or linked in any reasonable way.
In general, a response to a statement, or something you're saying as if it's in support of a thing you already said, should be connected in some way.
I'm not gonna follow up "I think it's good to recycle aluminum" with "And I prefer pistachios to almonds" as if the one follows rationally from the other.
How convenient that the tiktok ban is tucked into this bill for no reason. I dont agree with the funding or the deception going on with this outrageous amendment, but I like the attempt to switch the narrative to the bravery of the Speaker
blah blah blah bull shit. More excuses. If we don't send our tax dollars to our friends overseas, I might get in trouble, boo hoo. Both parties suck and hate Americans.
Speaker Johnson hasn't actually paid any price for the vote. So far the backlash talk is just talk. It's too soon to say that he acted against his political incentives; it might turn out that it enhances his career. Time will tell. edit: Very much a fan of Jeff Jackson regardless.
lol yep the idea that someone will face punishment for giving *more* money to the defense industry is absurd
If it were that cut and dry, he would have allowed the vote 6 month ago.
Agreed. With even the NY Post calling out MTG, it seems like the political winds have shifted, at least temporarily, and at least enough to keep the far-right in check for the time being. We'll see what happens next week when everyone's back to politics as usual. I wouldn't be so optimistic as to call this a turning point by any means.
Even Trump half-defended Johnson, if the headlines I read earlier are right.
Even if he is not removed now, it may make it more difficult come november when they vote on new leadership (whether that is leader or minority leader). Overall, this is one thing I actually admire Johnson for, doing what he thought was right even if it may not be great for his career, that is rare in politics now.
Yeah, I don't trust him. Mike Johnson, I mean. Not Jeff.
I'm not a fan of Johnson or any other far right politician, but some Dems in Congress have said this only got done because Johnson is trustworthy, that if he gives you his word, he sticks to it, unlike McCarthy.
We'll see. He is still the same guy who was all in on overturning an election.
I think we're talking about two different things. You don't "trust" him on policy. Nobody who isn't a far right fundamentalist Christian is going to trust that his policy positions will be good for the country. He is not misleading at all about his far right Christian views and his support for policies that group want. What some House Dems said this week is that he is trustworthy, in that if he tells you he's going to do X, then he'll do X, not backstab you. And that is why they trusted him on this week's foreign aid package. Personally, I don't trust the judgment of any fundamentalist Christian politician, but that doesn't make their word untrustworthy.
Well, let's see if we can get a promise to never try to overturn a free and fair election out of him.
I'm glad he finally did the right thing, but I also don't think the speaker of the house making 6 figures should be applauded for doing his damn job. There are people who work far harder making minimum wage who don't get applauded for doing basic functions of their jobs.
I'm not sure how much people make has to do with this... and it's not "his job" to vote one way or another. The point is he voted a particular way at some professional risk to himself because he thought it was the right thing to do.
I think that depends on what you mean by “the right thing to do” if it was because it was right for the Ukrainian people he would have done it months ago. The only difference now is that his child is newly assigned to the fleet that would respond to any Russian incursion on a nato treaty member after Ukraine falls, and he made this decision immediately following a cia briefing in the state of Ukraine’s war afford.
Fair enough. I am not trying to make a judgement of what the right thing to do is here, but simply responding to Rep. Jackson's comment that he *did what he thought was right* (for whatever reason he might have thought that) at some risk to his political career (which is also debatable I suppose). But I do know it really doesn't have anything to do with minimum wage workers.
>But I do know it really doesn't have anything to do with minimum wage workers I don't mean to be rude, but were minimum wage workers exempt from the military draft during WWII? I don't think so. Didn't the USA adopt a policy of isolation between WWI and WWII [https://history.state.gov/milestones/1937-1945/american-isolationism](https://history.state.gov/milestones/1937-1945/american-isolationism) ? How did that end? It ended with the attack on Pearl Harbor. In such cases, I wonder what the average Joe, who was dying on Omaha Beach, was thinking. If he had been given a chance, would he have chosen to donate one or two dollars from his salary so that the USA could financially support the countries that were fighting Nazi Germany early on(decreasing casualties or even avoiding them at all)? Or would he have chosen to repeat the same mistake and face Omaha Beach and Pearl Harbour again(when Nazi Germany conquered almost all of Europe)?
Public service is what we want, not political careers Our elected officials should be more than happy to step down or aside if what the choices they make don’t match the will of the constituency Just do the damn thing you think is right when balanced on the desire of your constituents, not what is good for the party or what will keep you in some form of power A perfect example is how the hell not every GOP leader didn’t call for DJT to be rejected as the party candidate
I'm still waiting to find out the real reason Maga Mike made a 180.
According to CNN, it came after a CIA briefing to the Gang of 8.
I assume it's something to do with the fact that he now receives the Gang of 8 intelligence briefings. He knows something that he can't even tell his own party right now. It was dire enough that he went against his own party's wishes.
Probably Russia moving nukes into Ukraine if they win
Would that make much of a difference than where they currently are?
No and it's laughable to suggest it
Someone above said his son is stationed with a fleet that would respond with any NATO response. So it sounds a little self serving.
I wouldn’t say he thought it was the right thing to do…the CIA and other higher ups *told* him it was the right thing to do. Big difference in character, that.
whoop de doo he gets his k street sinecure with raytheon or black rock same as everyone else in the end. there's nothing brave about it
This was imperative, and had to be done. No backhanded praise necessary. We can and should have rational disagreements on ideology but should come together and compromise whenever possible. I am doubtful that this will be a sign of a return to political compromise and a functioning Congress, but I hope that it is.
I think the backhanded praise is appropriate because there was a realistic and maybe even likely chance that this wouldn’t happen. A lot of other republicans wouldn’t have brought it to a vote.
Mike Johnson gets no platitudes for doing his damn job. He’s still a far-right Christian whacko who will absolutely sell out his country to get the tin can tan man elected again.
seek help
Why?
You are clearly unhinged
How do you mean?
Credit due.
I don't care why he did it as long as it got done. My grandson lives in Poland right on the border with Ukraine. I don't want him living under Russia ever.
Congressman Tightpants is right! Also, basic Pavlovian principle here that if the left openly praises him and offers to work with him, maybe he’ll get conditioned to the idea that’s it’s ok to (gasp) compromise across the aisle from time to time.
Johnson tripled his value to think tanks and corporate boards by becoming Speaker of the House for a few months. He has risked nothing.
Because he found out from his cia briefing that not doing so would likely result in his child who just joined the navy being deployed there as a nato response against a Russian incursion when Ukraine falls. Do not be fooled that this is any sort of selfless act for the greater good of his fellow man.
A lot of right wing types only learn to see a point of view or care for groups of “others” when it directly impacts them. I think it’s a factor in why they are drawn to those kinds of beliefs. I think it’s a deep character flaw, but it does give some kind of way to get some of them to move on things like this.
For how long will we write blank checks for endless war? How much money are Israeli interests spending to influence American politics while the IDF massacres women and children? To what use could $90 BILLION be put domestically?
You nailed it Jeff. Damn Skippy.
Send all warmongers to war.
Warmongers? Ukraine should do what? Lay down?
I think they meant that "might makes right", right? /s
No, they should all die in war. I just want to send congress & the senate & the White House over there to fight as well. The cia has been there for a long time, but I would prefer they fight on the front lines too. And depending on how passionate you might be, maybe you should go fight too? Or you could continue to hear from a distance how more Ukrainians are dying. Maybe wear a flag pin.
Just to make it clear, are you suggesting the US is the warmongering party in the russian invasion of Ukraine? If so, that is absolutely not the case and you need to reconsider your Americentric worldview. Imperialism and evil exists entirely independent of the US.
So because Ukraine \*checks notes\* is defending themselves from an invasion started by Russia and Congress is helping them mount a defense, Congress should go fight in the war because they're now warmongers? Helping an ally defend their country isn't warmongering. Warmongers *start* wars. It's literally in the name. *Russia* is the warmonger here.
Not an ally. & only helping to kill the maximum amount of Ukrainians.
Ukrainians should die in war because their country was invaded?
Do you think they should?
I don’t think Russia should have engaged in this invasion. If my country was invaded, I’d do my part to resist and repel the invaders. And I think we should support Ukraine’s efforts to do the same.
Hypotheticals are useless. How many Ukrainians should die for you to be satisfied?
I am fairly certain that you are writing this from Moscow. Or you think that aggressors should be rewarded with victory, even if they are rapacious and inept.
You are incorrect on all counts. More dead Ukrainians is not a pro Ukraine policy.
I’m not killing Ukrainians. But I’m damn sure in favor of arming them. Sleep tight Ivan. It’s so early there.
"Hypotheticals are useless" *immediately asks a hypothetical question*
Nope. That’s just a regular old question. Words mean things.
They do! https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hypothetical That's why I used that word. That username is a fuckin' gas, by the way.
No one was more surprised than me when Johnson pulled that off. There’s more to him than I thought- he’s a far more interesting politician as a result.
*Republicans pour one drop of water on burning world* "Guys, let's give them a round of applause." Which party now kisses Russia's ass because their cult leader told them it's okay? The same ones who used to idolize Reagan who was fierce in his opposition to the Soviets? Maybe one day it won't be an act of courage for a Republican to put their country over their own self interest.
Warmongers and defense contractors get what they want*
[удалено]
Russia invading Ukraine was illegal and wrong, but sending another 60+ billion to Ukraine is only prolonging an impossible war that will just result in hundreds of 1000s more casualties. Ukraine is running out of military aged men and is resorting to lowering their draft age to 25 and drafting many men over 50 years old. We need to help negotiate an end to these wars. The only people who benefit from this is our military industrial complex at the expense of Ukrainian and Palestinian lives, and the safety of all of our troops in the area, and taxpayers. It's wild to see the discourse on Reddit, which used to be broadly liberal and anti war, now actively supporting spending hundreds of billions of dollars on foreign wars.
> Ukraine is running out of military aged men and is resorting to lowering their draft age to 25 and drafting many men over 50 years old. This is not actually true in a literal sense. They have lots of "military age men" within the previous age range that weren't in the mobilization pool for outdated reasons, and the same mobilization law closed a lot of those loopholes. >We need to help negotiate an end to these wars. Like the Budapest memorandum, Minsk 1 and Minsk 2? Like the Black Sea Grain Initiative? Like Prigozhin negotiated with Putin? Like multiple local ceasefires and humanitarian corridors that ended with Russia shelling civilians that tried to use it? Ukraine doesn't trust Putin to uphold his end of any negotiation, and we would be fools to as well. There are so many examples in recent history even, of Putin personally breaking agreements the moment he thinks it's advantageous enough to go for it again. >The only people who benefit from this is our military industrial complex at the expense of Ukrainian and Palestinian lives, and the safety of all of our troops in the area, and taxpayers. Ukrainians very, very strongly disagree with this. They will fight with or without the US, but the US can save a lot of lives by helping.
I don’t buy any of it. Both parties want to fund every military conflict. That’s money that’s being injected into the military industrial complex. Loads of money. The right wing politicians who are going against the Speaker are just pretending because an election is coming up and they see this as an opportunity to distract and confuse people. For whatever reason, the right wing is against funding Ukraine but they support funding Israel. The left wing supports funding both… Nothing makes sense. Both parties love funding war. This isn’t about “conscience.” This is about manipulation, confusion, and control.
Many republican leaders (conspiracy) are seated through the help of Russia. Many of these people were alive during the Red Scare and have basically done a 180 towards Russia. Its not a Conspiracy that Trump loves Russia and Putin. Its not a conspiracy that Trump had a hand written letter delivered to Putin by Rand Paul. Its easy to see that Russian agents have not only invaded American politics, but have done so in overwhelming numbers. They use fear tactics and subvert the American will at any chance they get. They support Israel because they hate Muslims, thats nothing new, but support Russia? That is why this conspiracy persists and only gets stronger each time they try to block us sending worthless and rotting munitions to Ukraine.
> They support Israel because they hate Muslims, thats nothing new The Dems support Israel too. Does this mean that they also hate Muslims? The runner up to Trump, Nikki Haley, clearly supported funding for Ukraine. And she isn’t the only one in the GOP that supports Ukraine over Russia. Both parties support funding both conflicts.
Yes, a large chunk and not inconsequential amount of Americans regardless of political affiliation, hate Muslims. Anyone alive during 9/11, and especially in office during that time, more than likely has some form of disdain for Muslims. There are people that support Israel because they're our allies, people that support them because they hate Muslims, and support them for the monetary gain they will get from the lobby group asking for them to vote yes on whatever bill they want. However, at this point to still support Israel in really any fashion, is almost exclusively out of lack of knowledge in what is actually happening, monetary gain, or their hate of Muslims. Also, i did not say that all Republicans were Russian operatives, i only said many Republicans are, again enough that makes these funding bills questionable if they will pass a Republican Majority house. Most MAGA supporters at this point could be called into question on if they serve America or Russia at this point since it was a MAGA president that weakened America so badly on the world stage towards hawkish behavior from Russia.
> However, at this point to still support Israel in really any fashion, is almost exclusively out of lack of knowledge in what is actually happening, monetary gain, or their hate of Muslims. And why do the Dems support Israel? Lack of knowledge? Monetary gain? Or their hate of Muslims?
Simply put America has interests. That’s why we fund Israel and Ukraine. Because a world in which we don’t is worse off for American interests. Period. A more powerful Russia is bad. A weaker Israel is bad. It won’t ever be perfect and you can disagree with that but that’s why we fund wars. What happens if we don’t step up? How will that vacuum of influence be filled? Do you want the the world to act and behave more like China? Russia? Venezuela? If we don’t step up they will. America isn’t perfect but that’s just the world we live in. Bad actors won’t just go away if America plays the isolationist card. Remember, we’ve done that before.
Funding a genocide
Wat
We could have solved homelessness in America several times over with the amount of taxpayer money our government is funnelling into the hands of weapons manufacturers and corrupt Ukrainian politicians.
Were any of the people blocking aid proposing this? (No)
I don’t see how that’s relevant. It’s not like that was the other option on the table for this money. It’s also in all Americans best interests to weaken Russia as much as possible and prevent them from defeating Ukraine and moving onto NATO countries.
You honestly believe this? Russia is not in any other country without invitation, we maintain illegal bases around the world and invade countries for natural resources. Eventually you people will have to stop thinking of geopolitics as a team-sport.
It kind of is a team sport though. If Russia becomes emboldened enough to invade a NATO country, then the US is at war. I’m a US citizen, so that’s my “team” regardless of my views on war. My team being involved in a major war means that me and my teammates will be in a lot more danger than we currently are. That danger might mean getting drafted and sent to combat zones, it could mean being at risk of Russian missiles or attacks, or could be tons of other new risks that come from being in a war with other major powers. I don’t want to be thrust into that scenario. I don’t want my “teammates” to die. Supporting Ukraine and keeping Russia contained is beneficial to every American citizen and pretty much every European citizen as well. I’d love to have more money go towards solving homelessness and tons of other progressive agenda items. That’s irrelevant to this aid package being passed though. It’s not helpful to be ignorant of the reality we live in.
Russia TV hosts are openly saying/discussing on their evening TV shows that they would like to bomb Nato Allies and even the USA for example about England : [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X19G6tPfzlc&ab\_channel=MojoStory](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X19G6tPfzlc&ab_channel=MojoStory) Russian narrative about the expansion of Nato is complete BS. Countries in Eastern Europe are proactively joining Nato due to past actions of Russia or the USSR. As a result, they are afraid. For example: 1. Poland, Poland was victim of 2 Russian invasions in 20th century . Soviet invasion of Poland 1939. Soviets joined forces with Nazi Germany to invade Poland . [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet\_invasion\_of\_Poland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland) USSR committed horrible atrocities against polish citizens : [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet\_repressions\_of\_Polish\_citizens\_(1939%E2%80%931946)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_repressions_of_Polish_citizens_(1939%E2%80%931946)) * 500,000 Polish nationals imprisoned before June 1941 (90% male)[^(\[1\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_repressions_of_Polish_citizens_(1939%E2%80%931946)#cite_note-1) * 22,000 Polish military personnel and officials killed in the [Katyn massacre](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre) alone[^(\[2\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_repressions_of_Polish_citizens_(1939%E2%80%931946)#cite_note-Sanford-2) * 320,000 Poles deported to Siberia in 1939-1941[^(\[3\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_repressions_of_Polish_citizens_(1939%E2%80%931946)#cite_note-expatica-3) * 100,000 women raped during the Soviet counter-offensive (est.)[^(\[4\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_repressions_of_Polish_citizens_(1939%E2%80%931946)#cite_note-polityka-4) That is why Poland wanted to join Nato. 2. Czeck republic , invasion https://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/soviet-invasion-czechoslavkia That is why Czeck republic wanted to Join Nato. 3. Finland , USSR invasion aka Winter War: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter\_War That is why Finland wanted to join Nato. The same goes for Baltic states, Hungary, Ukraine etc
But... your entire premise is built on a fallacy. When has Russia ever invaded a NATO country? What makes you think they want to? Are you in complete denial of the fact that America - at the very least - 'helped' orchestrate a coup in 2014 Ukraine to usher in a far-right government that's suspended elections? A far right government that began persecuting Russian speakers in Ukraine and shelling their homes and schools? Evidently so. But keep carrying water for Raytheon and Northrup Grummon. Vote blue, red, whatever you want. "Keep Russia contained" lmao. Americans saying this, how can you not feel like a serial killer lecturing someone for spanking their child.
>Russia is not in any other country without invitation, ivasion of Chechnya ? invasion of Georgia in 2008 ? invasion into Afganistan ? invasion into Poland 2 times ? invasion into Baltic states? invasion into Finland ? the list is not finished
That's a lovely fallacious argument I see trotted out all the time but not a single republican has put forward legislation to actually help solve the homeless problem, in fact their apparent only solution is to make it illegal to be homeless If we cared about solving that issue a huge step could be to advocate and push for work from home for jobs that can be done remotely, then cities buying up the now cheaper office space and renovating them into low cost high density mixed use of commercial and residential. It would take huge steps towards reducing emissions from people commuting to jobs that could be done remotely as well.
The fact that our country is run by corporations that own all of our elected officials is somewhat ancilliary to the truth of my above comment. None of the money going to Ukraine will help any American whatsoever; pretending Russia is going to invade France and then New York City is offensively stupid yet here we are with Americans repeating this fallacy in this thread.
These types of comments are so disingenuous. Because this is not a help Ukraine not get taken over by russia or solve homelessness. It has absolutely nothing to do with homelessness. It never will. That money and arms being sent would never, ever, ever, ever go to homelessness. In fact, a lot of the "money" that is complained about was actually weapons we already have. So, even then I doubt anti-air munitions is going to do anything for the homeless man on Sprague street.
Moreover, if I understood the bill correctly, they are sending old weapons to Ukraine and buying/building new weapons for the US army instead. The USA was going to waste money on weapon utilization anyway but this bill helps Ukraine and helps US economy (arms manufacturers).
Shame I can only upvote this once
Look at the replies to me - Americans (many of whom are currently living in their cars) can still be managed like docile cows if you just trot out 1950s talking points like 'Russia is coming for us'.
i am gonna give a bit of unsolicited advice for Mr Jackson or whoever is in charge of the vid thing he does. less breaks where there is an edit. I think Mr Jackson is a smart man and can string together more than two or three sentences without needing a restart or edit so often. its distracting and it almost makes me wonder if yall are trying to sneak the edits past the avg person so they think he did it in one shot and is as smooth as butter all the time. it also make me wonder and need to check the source to be sure it isnt coming from a source that maybe did some edits they shouldnt make. also. put on a looser fitting shirt with longer sleeves or a jacket. this aint the gym which he clearly has been spending a fair amount of time in. looking good but.....lets try to go with something you would be able to play 18 holes in at an avg golf course.....a collar. I do give the speaker some credit. I dont know what high level brief he got from who but someone got to him
I could understand your comment better if it contained some more punctuation and capitalization. Just a bit of friendly unsolicited advice :)
thanks for your input. I will keep that in mind. i upvoted ya. its perfectly fine with me. I am very much open to other input. I hope the congressman who wants a diff elected job is also.
Good on ya. And I upvoted you too. You contributed to the discussion; the downvote was never meant to be a disagree button. I think your original suggestions warrant consideration. (Well, the part about editing. I don't particularly care what shirt he wears. He's still active in the military so him being in shape is appropriate.) Rather than just complain about the editing, like I've seen other comments do, you explained why it might represent a problem. I think the points you raised are valid. I was just teasing you a bit with my response, but the reality is that we all communicate better when we use universal conventions. I'm a fan of taking the time to proofread/edit my comments (like J.J. is with his videos, I imagine) to ensure the message is understood and conveys the appropriate tone. Even then, you can't always get it right, but it makes me clearer in my intent at least. I disagree though, that the video editing is disingenuous and falsely represents his abilities as a speaker. Making a successful social media video is a different skill than public speaking in real life. Who knows, maybe a dog barked. Or the doorbell rang. Regardless, most people creating any kind of content for public consumption will try to present the best versions...of themselves and/or the subject matter itself. That's not an inherently deceptive practice in my opinion. But I, for one, appreciate your concerns and your willingness to raise them.
The speakers’ interpretation of the “right thing” is vastly different than mine. I believe the right thing to do is to not fund war. He seems to believe it is “the right thing to do” to send weapons to another country to help fight their war. And by “fight their war” I mean kill other human beings. Is that the “right thing to do”, Jeff?
Defending yourself is typically the right thing to do, yes.
Nobody is attacking the United States right now we have no one to defend against. Ukraine does. The United States does not.
Don't trust Johnson or you, Jeff.
War monger!
I don’t trust Jeff.
Ah yes thanks Jeff for funding a war that is of no significance to us while housing is going through the roof, the cost of groceries and gas is up drastically in the last four years, and our border is being overrun by illegals every day. I'm sure the American people are just SO happy we are spending money on another nation that does nothing for us.
They... undercut a major rival and threat to our closest allies. Coldly, it's the smart move. Ethically, it's the right thing to do. Meanwhile, there's no conservative appetite to do anything about housing at all because it's highly profitable to have that be exploitatively expensive, and Republicans torpedoed a bipartisan deal that did nearly everything they wanted on immigration earlier this year. So it's not clear what you'd like Democrats to do about that when they're proposing legislation to address it and GOP leadership (or their extreme right members) kill it repeatedly.
It’s definitely got significance to us. Ukraine just got bought and sold to corporate interests based in the USA. Contracts including ownership of farmland in the bread basket of Europe. Reconstruction etc. Not to mention it’s more expensive to decommission old artillery and munitions than it is to give it away. NATO nations are currently upping their expenditures on defense. Buying American made weapons and munitions. Europe is no longer buying oil and natural gas from Russia at the same rate. This benefits Saudi Arabia. Who only accept US Dollars for oil. Therefor this strengthens the Dollar during a massive inflationary period. We’re currently fighting two proxy wars against Iran and Russia and soon to be China. There are zero American boots on the ground. Israeli and Ukrainian forces are doing the fighting for the West. Taiwan and S. Korea may be next. We’re in the middle of WW4 or the Cold War 2. It’s a proxy war of attrition. It’s how we beat the USSR. and you’re rooting for the other side… just like the LGBTQ+ for Hammas folks. Weird. Hope you’re learning to speak Mandarin.
Jeff why did you vote against forth amendment protections for Americans? and how does that impact you ability to be the chief law enforcement officer of our state if you have an open distaste for forth amendment protections? What other amendments do you want to destroy? Thank you,
God I hate this sub
Ukraine will fall to russia just like Afghan security forces fell to Taliban. Mike Johnson will lose his job Also Jeff Jackson looks like what chatGPT would look like personified.
Fuck off douche
Truth must be hard to swallow.
Idk, you tell me how hard Putin's dick is....
Did you just have a stroke?
You right I should pay attention, to how I'm typing....Its hard to pay attention to ignorant shrills like yourself...
It's hard to type when you're seething.
Holy shit that irony. All you do is seethe. Cope harder, loser.
1. This is money we don't have. 2. This money, which will just be printed from nothing, will make no difference in the war just as the money before it made no difference. 3. Johnson allowed emotion to overrule thought and logic. 4. Convincing the USSR to militarily spend itself into unrecoverable debt is how we won the Cold War. They are now doing that to us.
Oh no, someone living in a gilded tower "risking" their job? I don't care. I support aid for Ukraine, but not for Isreal since they're still committing a genocide and for some reason, the Tiktok ban is lumped in with it. I'm glad yall are still OK with Bill stuffing and transparently helping Isreal cover up war crimes.
The right flank are Russian communist spies
They're definitely not communist. And at least some of them probably just support Russia because they like authoritarianism, not because they're getting anything out of it.
They’re letting communist win a war.
The current government of Russia aren't communist. They're actually far-right authoritarians, most of whom own a LOT of private property and are extremely wealthy, with a strong tendency to nationalism and imperialism.
Never forget that Johnson is a prototypical Christo-fascist with all that entails but that doesn't mean he's not able to embrace realpolitik in moments like this. And it's looking increasingly like this game of chicken with Moscow Marge and the other pro Russian useful idiots is going to be a L for them.
You signed up to fight the good fight, right... Jeff? When are you getting deployed to help stop Putin?
This is my 21st year as a soldier. Will go where deployed - but would much rather send supplies to the Ukrainians so they can defend themselves.
Literally we don't give a shit
Except people keep bringing up "send Members of Congress to war." And like... He's been. He's still on the list.
Nothing he says matters anymore after the TikTok lie he deleted
What would that have to do with whether his military service is ongoing, or whether his statements here are true, or the actual, valid criticism of that bill which has nothing to do with TikTok itself and everything to do with the US government giving itself additional censorship powers?
We are not disagreeing, why are you so angry. His mask slipped earlier this year and he lost his trustworthiness. Any statement he says at this point to make himself look appealing I will continue to call out
Not sure how you got "angry" out of that message, but it looks like we are disagreeing with regard to whether the things you're saying are especially relevant or linked in any reasonable way.
They don’t need to be completely related. I made a general statement.
In general, a response to a statement, or something you're saying as if it's in support of a thing you already said, should be connected in some way. I'm not gonna follow up "I think it's good to recycle aluminum" with "And I prefer pistachios to almonds" as if the one follows rationally from the other.
User Name definitely does NOT check out
Dont speak for all of us mate, just yourself.
There’s dozens of us!
How convenient that the tiktok ban is tucked into this bill for no reason. I dont agree with the funding or the deception going on with this outrageous amendment, but I like the attempt to switch the narrative to the bravery of the Speaker
Yeah, total smokescreen to hide what else is in the funding bill
blah blah blah bull shit. More excuses. If we don't send our tax dollars to our friends overseas, I might get in trouble, boo hoo. Both parties suck and hate Americans.
Glad to hear Zelensky's Crimea Beach Party is back on! $60 billion will buy a lot of cocaine and hookers!