Trump is doing Putin’s bidding on NATO. It’s sad the House felt the need for this bill but they were right to pass it. I wonder why 22 representatives would oppose it.
The significance of this vote can’t be overstated. It is an extraordinary and radical rebuke of American security and our allies from members that are unfit to serve. A caucus of dupes and useful idiots. Disgraceful https://t.co/D5ox1ecZvk
— Steve Schmidt (@SteveSchmidtSES) January 24, 2019
Gee, these are also 2 of the 22 members of the party that claims it supports National Security who also voted today against ensuring US stays in NATO. Anyone see any trends? https://t.co/PjSgle7wG9
— Mark Hertling (@MarkHertling) January 23, 2019
Who were the 22 Republican lawmakers who voted with Vladimir Putin, former Soviet generals and anti-democratic tyrants who have been trying to undermine and destroy NATO for 50 years?
— Joe Scarborough (@JoeNBC) January 23, 2019
Have any of these members been briefed on the Russia threat? And if so, how do they reconcile this vote with US intel assessments on Russian desire to undermine and dissolve NATO? https://t.co/faYo7LuZzG
— Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) January 23, 2019
Ask yourself why on Earth Trump would be attacking NATO?
— Don Winslow (@donwinslow) January 24, 2019
There is no legit reason.
The House just voted 357-22 to bar President Trump from exiting NATO.
— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) January 23, 2019
Here are the 22 lawmakers who opposed it — all Republicans. pic.twitter.com/bqb15ADvhK
This, as Trump admin and at least one Fox host have raised questions about whether the US should defend Baltic NATO allies in event of Russian attack. https://t.co/ITTFDVlKkN
— Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) January 24, 2019
Reps. Paul Gosar and Andy Biggs play patsies for Vladimir Putin with their NATO votes https://t.co/7mBhg0xUOj via @azcentral
— E.J. Montini (@ejmontini) January 24, 2019
Reps. Paul Gosar and Andy Biggs play patsies for Vladimir Putin with their NATO votes https://t.co/7mBhg0xUOj via @azcentral
— E.J. Montini (@ejmontini) January 24, 2019
U.S. officials typically answer yes unambiguously and refer to such a situation as an "Article 5 obligation" — i.e., something world leaders promised to each other in a treaty. https://t.co/JSCh3T5fcb
— Dan Lamothe (@DanLamothe) January 24, 2019
In case you're wondering what I think of the GOP's hostility to NATO, I have a few words here. (No, not those, but I thought them).https://t.co/eyDyWdTJcT
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) January 31, 2019
Sad! 