The House Foreign Affairs Committee on Tuesday narrowly voted down a bill that would audit the tens of billions of dollars that Congress has approved to spend on the war in Ukraine.
The bill was rejected by the Democrat-led panel in a vote of 26 to 22. The legislation was introduced by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and a small group of Republicans who oppose US aid to Ukraine, but it received strong support from more hawkish Republicans.
Republican Reps. Thomas Massie (KY), Matt Gaetz (FL), Barry Moore (AL), and Andrew Clyde (GA) cosponsored Greene’s bill.
Greene has said that she will reintroduce the measure in the next Congress when Republicans have a majority in the House. “It’s official the Democrats have voted NO to transparency for the American people for an Audit for Ukraine,” Greene wrote on Twitter after the vote. “But we take over in January! This audit will happen!”
Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), who is expected to head the House Foreign Affairs Committee in the next Congress, has come out in favor of the audit bill. “The era of writing blank checks is over,” McCaul said, according to The Washington Post.
McCaul has been critical of the Biden administration for not sending longer-range weapons to Ukraine and wants to encourage Ukrainian strikes on Crimea despite the risk of escalation. But he represents the mainstream Republicans who want to keep arming Ukraine but agree there should be more oversight.
Democrats have been critical of the growing Republican calls for more oversight of the Ukraine aid. Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), the head of the House Armed Services Committee, even dismissed the concerns as “Russian propaganda” and said the calls from Republicans to increase oversight “makes me a little crazy.”
Having experienced the irrational frenzy of IPO’s, our politicians are similarly irrationally getting behind the perceived bandwagon. They are blinded by self-interest and an utter disregard of actual human beings affected by their actions.
“utter disregard of actual human beings affected by their actions.”
tragically clear
All un-audited. Like it’s raining billions from heaven and only costing a few 100K lives of people who don’t count, and can be credited to the evil Putin anyway.
I don’t want to insult anyone, but seriously, why would you insist on not auditing that money? For the CIA talking pointers, that’s just a rhetorical/sarcastic/stupid question.
“We don’t need no education…
We don’t need no thought control…
No dark sarcasm in the classroom…
Teacher, leave them kids alone…”
What’s wrong with insulting idiots?
You got me. I was thinking they would be more like evil idiots but was claiming moral superiority by not saying it out loud. (Sarcasm)
“McCaul (R-TX)… has come out in favor of the audit bill….McCaul has been critical of the Biden admin for not sending longer-range weapons to Ukraine and wants…Ukrainian strikes on Crimea despite the risk of escalation.”
‘Wha-? Prosthetics for Ukrainian amputees??? I wanna see those medical receipts!’
Indication of what a f*cked-up piece of sh*t this country has become: when Taylor-Greene is the voice of reason.
Kind of true. She is just the one chosen to champion this bill while others guarantee it gets shot down.
The only way this passes is if there are procedures put in place assuring that everything is fine, or that most of it is fine other than some small piece done by some company that is now bankrupt.
Behind the scenes, she seems to be one of the most powerful republicans in the House. This allows her to get a ‘serious politician’ persona.
A very strong political nove on the side of the republican party.
F*ck the audit. So, doing proxy wars is fine as long as the money is accounted for? How about Mrs. Ed proposes an end to all aid for Ukraine instead of being a partisan hack that doesn’t give a sh*t about the ongoing loss of life.
These folks don’t see people. They see money and ongoing reelection funding.
But wars, all of these people really Really REALLY don’t give a shit … the amendment you ask for would not have a snowballs chance in hell.
Uncle Joe will donate his personal collection of Ray Bans and make everything hunky dory.
“”… wants to encourage Ukrainian strikes on Crimea …””
because ukraine values crimea so much that they began bombing them a long time ago and had to be rescued by russia
The Democrats can be reduced to a few ad nauseam bumper sticker phrases: “Russian propaganda”; “White supremacy”; “disproportionately effects minorities”; “racism, racism, racism.” There’s no use trying to get any more out of these robots. The reason they have to speak in bumper sticker code is because their policies and ideology are so perverse and destructive, that they cannot risk giving the public details.
The reason is much worse.
Americans only respond to good sound bytes. One minute long messages are barely tolerated, and anything longer gets ignored.
Thr few attempts to actually publish or discuss details leads to one of 2 possibilities
1 – the report gets totally ignored
Or
2 – people that hate your guts take something in the report, rephrase it so that it sounds stupid or evil or both, and turn it into attack ads.
This is a problem that all poloticians face. People vote for good sound bytes. So successful politicians give people exactly what they ask for.
“Rep. McCaul (R-TX)… has come out in favor of the audit bill….McCaul has been critical of the Biden administration for not sending longer-range weapons to Ukraine and wants to encourage Ukrainian strikes on Crimea despite the risk of escalation.”
‘I demand fiscal accountability for every last penny of the weaponry that spikes the death and dismemberment of young Ukrainian and Russian men!’
Little bit of doublespeak here. Wants Z to have longer-range weapons (missiles) that will kill Russian citizens should they be fired into Russia, wants to count how many we send, while at the same time cares about Ukraine and Russian men.
“”McCaul (R-TX)… has come out in favor of the audit bill….McCaul has been critical of the Biden admin for not sending longer-range weapons to Ukraine and wants…Ukrainian strikes on Crimea despite the risk of escalation.”
‘A US-subsidized Ukraine widower’s pension? Sounds as though someone’s been fiscally imprudent in the upkeep of their account for unforeseen household needs.’