Post New

...than voted for foreign aid for Ukraine, with 112 republicans voting against the aid.

The House approved assistance to Israel 366 to 58 and to Taiwan 385 to 34.

The legislation includes $60 billion for Kyiv; $26 billion for Israel and humanitarian aid for civilians in conflict zones, including Gaza; and $8 billion for the Indo-Pacific region. Much of the funding for Ukraine is earmarked to replenish U.S. stockpiles after shipping supplies to Kyiv.

It also contained a measure to help pave the way to selling off frozen Russian sovereign assets to help fund the Ukrainian war effort, and a new round of sanctions on Iran. The Senate is expected to pass the legislation as early as Tuesday and send it to President Biden’s desk, capping its tortured journey through Congress.

Republicans like Marjorie Taylor Greene introduced amendments that were literally Russian propaganda.

Literally.

Democrats waved small Ukrainian flags on the House floor as the vote for Ukraine passed. Hard-right Republicans jeered. Greene repeatedly gave a 'thumbs down' sign.

In the end, House Speaker Johnson relied on Democrats to push the measure for Ukraine through so kudos to him for finally stepping up.

He should consider bringing up the southern border vote before Trump gives the 'ok' to have him removed.

When asked last Tuesday if the Speaker's chair should be vacated, Trump said "Well, we'll see what happens with that."

Not exactly a ringing endorsement.



https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-message-mike...

When asked last Tuesday if the Speaker's chair should be vacated, Trump said "Well, we'll see what happens with that." ,

------------

Well, Johnson did renege on this promise to the Republicans concerning border security. The dems are eager to praise him for being a great statesman for it.

The opposition likes to point out how important the Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, and that fourth thing are.

The Freedom caucus thinks so too but insists border security is at least as important.

Not more important, but at least as important. The dems and a few republicans are saying no it really isn't.

I am with the Freedom caucus on this. The dems are so used to the Republicans rolling over and Republicans (leadership anyway) is so used to doing so, they can't perceive the vast change in voter sentiment regarding Biden's open border.

Republicans like Marjorie Taylor Greene introduced amendments that were literally Russian propaganda.

Literally.

What a sad disgrace the GOP has become.

Don't worry Colonel Flagg, you got the billions to fight the pinko commies lol -- - and enrich your Defense buddies and Zelensky's cabal too....

You won.

I'd say I lost - but hey, you get more debt, you have less for other priorities.

Works for me either way on this issue.

border security is at least as important.

Border security is important and you blew it.

I thought the amendments were both amusing and sad. I don't know if the article I read yesterday had the complete list, but I remember one saying that anyone who voted for the bill had to "conscript" in the Ukrainian Army. (I think she meant "enlist".)

I agree that the Republican Party has fallen to depths I never could have imagined. I always had my qualms about their close ties to religion (remember: I was a registered Republican for 20 years). But I could support a lot of other stuff, like them not giving into the USSR on pretty much anything. Now they didn't bat an eye when Russia took Crimea (though, to be fair, most Dems didn't either), and now they actively want to allow Russia to conquer a neighbor that wasn't provoking them. The Republican Party I was a part of all those years ago NEVER would have tolerated that. I was a member of the Party that was funneling money and weapons to the mujahideen to thwart Russia in Afghanistan in the 80s. Today's party bears no resemblance to that Party.

Greene (MTG) apparently is pushing to remove Johnson now. I have no love for Johnson, but I'm torn. He -finally- did the right thing and let people have a vote.** On the other hand, he thinks our problems are because we aren't pious enough. I did read that they want to rename MTG's office "The Neville Chamberlain Room", and she as "Putin's Special Envoy to the US Congress".

I don't think Greene has as much going on between her ears as Chamberlain did, but they both misjudge(d) the global situations. Chamberlain was shown to be fantastically wrong. Greene didn't even have to wait as long as Chamberlain did to be shown to be wrong. She was wrong the moment she opened her mouth because the invasion has been going for two years now. Chamberlain (having been wrong already, that Germany would be satisfied with the Rhineland in 1936) had to wait a full year after "there will be peace in our time" to be shown to be wrong (when the Germans invaded Poland).



**If it had failed, I would have been disappointed, but at least the democratic process would have been observed. Instead of governing by extortion, i.e. "put that bill up for a vote and we'll fire you".

Well, I cut BHM a little slack on this point.

At least once, he said that the bill should have been put on the floor for debate and vote. He may have wanted it to fail, but he also wanted the debate process to do its work. The final bill probably wouldn't have looked like the original from the bipartisan committee, but we never got to find out. He lamented that at least once.

Trump, and especially Johnson (whom declared the bill dead before he even saw it) are the ones that blew it.

Border security is important and you blew it. - lapsody

The dems don't care about border security. The evidence

1) they produced such a stinky bill it is as if they wanted it to be rejeted for the campaign issue it gave them, the one you are using now; and

2) If they genuinely cared about border security they would have pressed for engagement and dialogue. Instead, it was one and done. Sort of, "we got our ticket punched" so we have dealt with the issue and can move on to the best part of our job, spending money earned by others.

and now they actively want to allow Russia to conquer a neighbor that wasn't provoking them. - 1pg

-------------

No.

The Republicans, at least the Freedom Caucus, see the issue of Border security as at least equal to Ukraine in importance and urgency for US Security. Apparently the dems, a few republicans, and many here don't think so.

"put that bill up for a vote and we'll fire you". = 1pg

---------------

More accurately,

"put that bill up for a vote without attaching border securityand we'll fire you".

Johnson did make that promise when he was running for speaker.

BTW, I don't like his constant religious references either.

"border security is at least as important."

To me, border security is at least as important and maybe more important that Ukraine aid. Absolutely no doubt.

To you though, border security wasn't important enough for you to go against your dear leader. Trump chose the status quo over border security because he needed an issue to campaign on. You chose Trump over border security because he told you to.

Sen James Lankford thought the bill would greatly improve border security, dozens of Republicans thought it was going to greatly improve border security, at least until their leader told them not to. The Border Patrol Union (which endorsed Trump) came out for the bill.

You didn't want it so instead you got nothing.

That is true: I don't think so. Can't speak for anyone else, but autocratic aggression is about the worst thing that could happen in the world. Especially involving a nuclear power (Russia...though China has ambitions of their own).

Not to say border security isn't a legitimate problem. It is. But the urgency is almost negligible compared to what else is going on at the moment. That said, we should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. We can do both. The Reps haven't had any interest in the better part of a generation. They've had the trifecta a few times in the past 30 years, and all they did with it was an abortive attempt at a wall (that's falling down in places already). The one time they had the Dems over a barrel, and they passed on it.

It’s interesting all the libs are celebrating sending loads of US money overseas without a dime for the border, then pretending to take the patriotic position.

Curious, that. It’s almost like they want an open border.

And here’s the Nonsense on Stilts way the democrats view the world:

https://twitter.com/Rep_Clyde/status/1781713868990...

Some say, well, we have to deal with our border first. The Ukrainian Russian border is OUR border!"

Real policy of genius, this is. Are there pills that democrats take that kill enough brain cells so that this sounds intelligent, or is it an excessive consumption of alcohol that does it?

Pro tip: Most can walk (secure our border) and chew gum (aid foreign countries that are in need or furthering our interests) at the same time. The democrats CHOOSE not to walk.

They WANT an open border.

bighairymike: 1) they produced such a stinky bill...2) If they genuinely cared about border security they would have pressed for engagement and dialogue. Instead, it was one and done.

Dope1: It’s interesting all the libs are celebrating sending loads of US money overseas without a dime for the border, then pretending to take the patriotic position.

First, it was a bipartisan immigration bill, hammered out by a democrat, an independent, and a pretty conservative republican, Lankford, whom Republican Leader Mitch McConnell had delegated to negotiate the bill combining Ukraine aid and border security. McConnell had been closely involved in the negotiations.

Lankford spent four months negotiating the bipartisan immigration bill that met many of the GOP’s demands, including more narrow standards that migrants need to reach to qualify for asylum, new powers for the president to pause asylum processing if migrant crossings reach a rolling weekly average of more than 5,000, and which put an end to the humanitarian parole known as "catch and release."

Second, in less than four days republicans in both the House and Senate yielded to objections by Trump, their presumed presidential candidate at the time, who objected to what might be perceived as a "win" for president Biden.

Talk about "pretending to take the patriotic position".

Third, House Speaker Johnson stated publicly that he would not allow the Senate bill to reach the House floor for a vote, no matter what. He killed it dead.

Fourth, an issue that republicans call a "national emergency" every single day is, at the same time, an issue that republicans insist can wait 12 months before being addressed again by, they hope, their party's republican president.

Democrats were willing in principle to support a bill that focused entirely on border security without provisions to legalize the status of any migrants who had entered the country illegally, not even the “Dreamers” brought to the United States by their parents while they were infants and children and who knew no other country.

That kind of support will never happen again.

There's nothing "patriotic" about turning down improvements to immigration because your side didn't get exactly what it wanted in the bill. Getting everything your side wants while the other side gets nothing is not the end result of any normal adult negotiation and killing an opportunity to further negotiate an issue with a flat out "We won't even consider this" when it can be used as a campaign cudgel by your side is anything but "patriotic".

You guys are so deep in the cult you've lost complete touch with reality.

Second, in less than four days republicans in both the House and Senate yielded to objections by Trump, - CO

---------------

And the democrats, despite their deep commitment and desire for Border Security, immediately gave up, helpless in the face of Trump's awesome power. That is not a very pretty picture either.

bighairymike: 1) they produced such a stinky bill..

Commonone explained how completely wrong you are.

The only stink was from Trump, demanding that the GOP sacrifice border security so that he could campaign on the issue.

And look how well it works with the MAGA crowd! You are too gullible.

It's a cult.

LOL@him, attempting to conflate the old crappy bill with the complete zero for the border that this one was. ChatNPC needs a reboot.

The dems don't care about border security. The evidence

1) they produced such a stinky bill it is as if they wanted it to be rejeted for the campaign issue it gave them, the one you are using now; and

2) If they genuinely cared about border security they would have pressed for engagement and dialogue. Instead, it was one and done. Sort of, "we got our ticket punched" so we have dealt with the issue and can move on to the best part of our job, spending money earned by others.

They don’t care about the border. The ones who say they do are lying and/or engaging the usual repertoire of performance art.

We know this because in sane times with a sane democrat party - which we don’t have - a single issue bill with the title “The Border Security Act” with common sense measures in it would pass unanimously. But since we don’t live in sane times governed by sane people, we got the farce of a bill that libs on this board are now holding up as some kind of mythology, a magic talisman that would have fixed everything.

You and I tore that stupid excuse for a bill to shreds, so I’m now quite sure who these think they’re fooling.

Trump's ... power ... is not a very pretty picture...

We agree here.

Hey Mitt....

Russia isn;'t the most dangerous threat.

The 80s called and want their foreign policy back.






PS: This is solely about 2 things: Protecting the arrogant, colonizer, slave trading, discriminatory, mooch weak Western Europeans *AND* Liberals having personal hate for Putin which is NOT over the killings or the tyranny - no way. Not a chance. They've got despots on the UN Human Rights council and lambasted us in the SandyLeeLee years for calling it out.

Hint: Their Putin Hate got started when Putin and W seemed to get along. That's 100% EXACLY why the Putin hate started. Otherwise, these 401KKK'ers spent much of their adult lives in praise of the Soviets and pooping on Reagan and American defense buildups. One of their icons even honeymooned in the Soviet Union..... one of their Presidents even protested America - from Russia. I am hoping that demographically one day -Russia is Muslim Majority. If I'm still alive, I hope it's me who can shout "let's Roll" from the mega phone.

Dope1: And here’s the Nonsense on Stilts way the democrats view the world:

https://twitter.com/Rep_Clyde/status/1781713868990...

Some say, well, we have to deal with our border first. The Ukrainian Russian border is OUR border!"

Real policy of genius, this is. Are there pills that democrats take that kill enough brain cells so that this sounds intelligent, or is it an excessive consumption of alcohol that does it?

Actually, isn't representative Connolly delivering a poor man's version of the Brandenburg Gate speech in April, 1987, by president Ronald Reagan (granted, probably not intentionally, and not nearly so eloquently or with the same communication skills; nor did Conolly have a speech writer like Reagan in Peter Robinson)?

And as usual, by getting your news from Xwitter, you get representative Clyde's heavily edited version of Connolly's floor speech in which he said: "I will continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with our Ukrainian brothers and sisters, who for 1,151 days have been holding off Vladimir Putin’s depraved and brutal invasion of their homeland. Ukraine represents the front line of the fight between freedom and repression. Between democracy and autocracy. Between those who carry the flame of democratic ambition and those who aim to extinguish it."

Reagan said: "Standing before the Brandenburg Gate, every man is a German, separated from his fellow men. Every man is a Berliner, forced to look upon a scar. . . . As long as this gate is closed, as long as this scar of a wall is permitted to stand, it is not the German question alone that remains open, but the question of freedom for all mankind."

In short, we're all in this fight for democracy over autocracy, freedom over oppression. And that border of Ukraine's might as well be our border, too.

Dope1: Pro tip: Most can walk (secure our border) and chew gum (aid foreign countries that are in need or furthering our interests) at the same time. The democrats CHOOSE not to walk.

Nope, wrong again.

Republicans control what comes to the House floor and the republican Speaker of the House refuses to bring an immigration bill to the floor because Donald Trump told him to kill the bill.

Democrats -- and a number of republicans -- would vote for the bipartisan bill if it were to reach the floor.

Peter Robinson's story of writing the famous Reagan speech: https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/200...

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!
So according to you, since this clown is copying Reagan, we’re supposed to take that seriously?

Come on, man. Do better. Or maybe you can’t.

Amd you’re wrong on the border. The GOP has already passed an excellent bill on border security. You don’t want anything approaching a secure border, so it will never pass the Senate.

Stop pretending to be some kind of moderate. You’re not, and everyone knows it. Toodles!

I will continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with our Ukrainian brothers and sisters, who for 1,151 days have been holding off Vladimir Putin’s depraved and brutal invasion of their homeland. Ukraine represents the front line of the fight between freedom and repression. Between democracy and autocracy. Between those who carry the flame of democratic ambition and those who aim to extinguish it."

Sadly, these no longer seem to be the beliefs of many in the Republican Party.

Johnson did make that promise when he was running for speaker.

Actually, he broke that promise a couple of months ago. Where was MTG then? He had a bill negotiated by a very conservative senator that gave the Dems very little in terms of their wishes (not even DREAMERs), but did give Ukraine some aid, and he wouldn't even bring it to the floor.

I don't know if he was making it up, but the quotes I have seen have him saying (paraphrasing) "I looked at the intel, and just couldn't justify delaying it...it was the right thing to do". Did he look at the intel? No idea. He shouldn't have had to. But if he did, I give him credit for grasping reality and the implications of not aiding Ukraine against Putin.**

So, in summary, he had a bill that shoved a bunch of stuff down Dems' throats, and provided aid to Ukraine which he killed. Then (after Ukraine retreated from Adiivka) he forwarded Ukraine aid without any concessions from the Dems on anything (including the border). And you want him removed for the second thing?? He botched (from a Republican standpoint) the first thing.

I'm still a bit torn. But I'm thinking maybe Dems don't save him, and let the mayhem begin. It's only 6 months until the new election, and stuff seldom gets done in the run-up to an election anyway. Just show the American people that the Republicans can't govern. Or remind them of that (since they already showed that with the removal of McCarthy last year).




**I also see this as an opportunity to do what Reagan did: outspend Russia. That's mostly why the USSR collapsed, and we didn't have to fire a shot. Fund Ukraine, make Putin waste treasure and lives in Ukraine until the Russian people say "enough!". Maybe even get Crimea back for Ukraine.

>>Johnson did make that promise when he was running for speaker.

Actually, he broke that promise a couple of months ago. Where was MTG then? He had a bill negotiated by a very conservative senator that gave the Dems very little in terms of their wishes (not even DREAMERs), but did give Ukraine some aid, and he wouldn't even bring it to the floor. - 1pg

------------------------

Actually the senate never sent it over for him to bring to the floor. That is a distinction without a difference, so I agree with your point.

Trump killed it. OK, I still think it shows the dems true thoughts on the matter when they were fine with it being dropped and didn't pressure and advocate for action at every opportunity like they have shown they can do when it matters, like student debt forgiveness, or green stuff. It may have been hammered into something not as stinky but we never had that chance.

Anyway that Bill was dead. The latest dust up with Johnson is because he too forgets that the border is of at least equal importance as Ukraine aid. The speaker could have easily attached HR3602 to the Ukraine bill, but Johnson forced the aid through without it anyway.

Johnson could have put pressure on Senate dems to negotiate and also reminded the Senate of the House Republican stance from the beginning that Ukraine aid and border security travel together. Johnson caving is just what the dems have come to expect from the republicans, weak resistance followed by capitulation, and that is just what they got.

The Republican leadership showed what great statesmen they are by setting aside concerns of the base and gave the Dems a clean Ukraine bill, exactly what they wanted from the get go. End result, dems get their way, the Freedom caucus and all 112 Repubs who voted against the clean bill can go pound salt.

You have to admire the Dems for out maneuvering the Repubs once again. That must change and will change but only if we can find a Speaker with balls big enough to stand up to the Dems and their pals in the MSM.

OK, the Senate never sent it over to Johnson. Because Johnson said "don't bother". We agree.

You have to admire the Dems for out maneuvering the Repubs once again.

Honestly, they did no such thing. They gave in on a lot of stuff in the original bill. They were -hat in hand- "please, sir, may we have Ukraine aid". The Reps outmaneuvered themselves. I can accept that Trump was the root cause, but the Reps (including/especially Johnson) didn't have to listen to him. He has no power or authority at the present time. As you lamented at the time, Johnson should have brought it to the floor for debate (and then it either passed or not).

So I won't blame it all on Trump. As usual, he thinks he's a master of "getting a better deal", but he seldom ever does. He unwittingly outmaneuvered himself, and the other Reps with the actual power went along with it.

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.