House Speaker Mike Johnson faced down threats to oust him on Saturday, April 20. In spite of this, he said “We did our work here and I think history will judge it well,” after the U.S. House of Representatives with broad bipartisan support passed a $95 billion legislative package providing security assistance to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan, over bitter objections from Republican hardliners.
“The world is destabilized and it's a tinderbox. It’s a dangerous time,” Speaker Johnson told the press.
He identified Russia, Iran, and China, as the U.S. 's “primary adversaries” that “are working together and they’re being aggressors around the globe.“
“And they’re a global threat to our prosperity and our security. Their advance threatens the free world, and it demands American leadership. If we turn our backs right now, the consequences could be devastating,” he said, explaining his decision to schedule the Saturday vote in spite of the isolationist wing of the Republican party.
Johnson defended his decision to put the bills, particularly the one pertaining to Ukraine, through to the vote, saying its House version was “unlike the Senate’s blank check” and that, unlike the Senate version, “It provides for greater accountability over Ukraine aid. It forces an endgame strategy for the Ukraine war. It includes a loan instrument of this foreign aid to Ukraine and the Repo Act to ensure that Russian assets pay for part of the bill.”
“Now, remember that 80% of the Ukraine funding will go to the replenishment of American weapons and stocks and our facilities and our operations,” Johnson stressed the counterargument to the often-reiterated “blank check” narrative, that was previously frequently used by the Republican hardliners (including Johnson himself), to justify their obstinacy with a tendency to reiterate the talking points of Kremlin’s propaganda.
He identified Russia, Iran, and China, as the U.S. 's “primary adversaries” that “are working together and they’re being aggressors around the globe.“
“And they’re a global threat to our prosperity and our security. Their advance threatens the free world, and it demands American leadership. If we turn our backs right now, the consequences could be devastating,” he said, explaining his decision to schedule the Saturday vote in spite of the isolationist wing of the Republican party.
Johnson defended his decision to put the bills, particularly the one pertaining to Ukraine, through to the vote, saying its House version was “unlike the Senate’s blank check” and that, unlike the Senate version, “It provides for greater accountability over Ukraine aid. It forces an endgame strategy for the Ukraine war. It includes a loan instrument of this foreign aid to Ukraine and the Repo Act to ensure that Russian assets pay for part of the bill.”
“Now, remember that 80% of the Ukraine funding will go to the replenishment of American weapons and stocks and our facilities and our operations,” Johnson stressed the counterargument to the often-reiterated “blank check” narrative, that was previously frequently used by the Republican hardliners (including Johnson himself), to justify their obstinacy with a tendency to reiterate the talking points of Kremlin’s propaganda.
“It’s an old military adage, but we would rather send bullets to the conflict overseas than our own boys, our troops,” Johnson finally admitted and when asked about whether he’s worried that the decision to put the Ukraine bill to vote might cost him his post. Having drawn the ire of GOP isolationist hardliners, he responded:
“I have to do my job. [...] And as I’ve said, you do the right thing and you let the chips fall where they may. And I will continue to do that."
The vote on passage of the Ukraine funding was 311-112. But significantly, 112 Republicans opposed the legislation, with only 101 in support. Isolationist hardliners among the Republican representatives have threatened to remove Johnson from office over this issue.
The decision to put the bill to vote must not have been an easy one for Johnson, as he is widely perceived as one of the Republican isolationist hardliners. But the Republicans who are in support of Ukraine are more understanding toward Johnson.
Mike McCaul, a Republican Representative from Texas, said that Johnson had reached the decision by doing what any other devout evangelical Christian, among whom Johnson counts himself, would do.
“I think he was torn between trying to save his job and doing the right thing,” said McCaul, who serves as the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee and who has pushed for months for more Ukraine aid.
“We’ve told him what’s at stake here, and you want to be on the right side of history. And he’s a man of faith. He doesn’t wear it on his sleeve, but he, obviously, the night before he made a decision, reached out for guidance, and the next day he made the call,” McCaul said, cited by The Hill, an outlet dedicated to reporting on the news coming from the Capitol and the White House.
“I have to do my job. [...] And as I’ve said, you do the right thing and you let the chips fall where they may. And I will continue to do that."
The vote on passage of the Ukraine funding was 311-112. But significantly, 112 Republicans opposed the legislation, with only 101 in support. Isolationist hardliners among the Republican representatives have threatened to remove Johnson from office over this issue.
The decision to put the bill to vote must not have been an easy one for Johnson, as he is widely perceived as one of the Republican isolationist hardliners. But the Republicans who are in support of Ukraine are more understanding toward Johnson.
Mike McCaul, a Republican Representative from Texas, said that Johnson had reached the decision by doing what any other devout evangelical Christian, among whom Johnson counts himself, would do.
“I think he was torn between trying to save his job and doing the right thing,” said McCaul, who serves as the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee and who has pushed for months for more Ukraine aid.
“We’ve told him what’s at stake here, and you want to be on the right side of history. And he’s a man of faith. He doesn’t wear it on his sleeve, but he, obviously, the night before he made a decision, reached out for guidance, and the next day he made the call,” McCaul said, cited by The Hill, an outlet dedicated to reporting on the news coming from the Capitol and the White House.
Source: Reuters, TVP World, The Hill
More In Politics MORE...
