Maxim 29: The enemy of my enemy is my enemy’s enemy. No more. No less.
Of course she responded well to Lindsey’s comments.
Someone having top secret clearance defending someone who leaks documents is so surreal, but what is surrealler about it is that it more or less just garners shrugs. So far.
It makes me wonder: Exactly what information is MTG sharing directly with the Russian government at this point? She seems to think that this is perfectly acceptable.
Because what she is pitching is that it is perfectly acceptable that specifically white Christian cishet junior ranks in the forces should thumb their noses at the Chain of Command if they don’t like who’s heading it. Her point is sedition itself.
Holy Moly! lol. (titter titter)
^ This.
These Republicans are promoting the concept that armed-services members doing whatever they feel like is justified by ‘Fighting Government Overreach.’
All of them should be invited to move to a more congenial-to-their-views nation, such as Russia, China, or North Korea.
What is that?
A picture of Barney Rubble and Sammy Davis Jr.?
Ali Alexander not having enough attention given to his ego again.
Yeah, we know that MTG should have her security clearances revoked immediately.
Who can do it?
I wish they’d find out. An avowed insurrectionist and Putin ally with a top-secret clearance is insanity. How can this be allowed?
I wouldn’t be surprised to find the answer is “Kevin McCarthy”. She presumably has the clearance because of her committee assignment, and separation of powers possibly means that Congress is entitled to do that.
A lot of our rules/expectations are dependent on the assumption of good faith, but the GOP has thrown a lot of that out of the window with their embrace of “what if we didn’t?”.
I suspect you are correct.
For your average joe working building ships or whatever, that clearance falls to the FBI I think. But for a congressperson (or the President) not so much.
I think.
I could be wrong, but I think all security clearances ultimately derive from the President’s authority (usually delegated, of course, the President doesn’t personally approve every single clearance). So if that’s true Biden could yank it, though the political consequences could be severe.
If Biden can yank it he should, consequences be damned. It would probably be good for his ratings, if nothing else. And there has to be a lot of secretly sane Rs who would like to see her knocked down a peg.
Couldn’t agree more.
It’s WAY past the time when these morons should see consequences for their actions. Way, way past the time.
The Republicans will throw hissy fits and tantrums, whatever is, or is not done. F’em.
Should we let badly behaving children run/ruin our country? I think not.
That may apply to the Executive Branch (where the alphabet soup of national security agencies - NSA, CIA, FBI, et al reside).
But I doubt the President can revoke the security clearance granted a congressperson by virtue of their committee assignment. That strikes me as a separation of powers issue - the Executive can’t usurp Legislative authority over its own members.
That’s probably right. But I imagine the Executive Branch could stop briefing the entire legislative branch on top security issues until they got their members in line.
I still say MTG should be fed disinformation on the assumption that it will go straight to the Kremlin.