"Look, history judges us for what we do," said an emotional Johnson, holding back tears and with a quivering lip at a news conference last week in response to a question from The Washington Post. "This is a critical time right now, critical time on the world stage. I could make a selfish decision and do something that's different, but I'm doing here what I believe to be the right thing."

Johnson's son will be headed to the U.S. Naval Academy in the fall. "To put it bluntly, I would rather send bullets to Ukraine, than American boys," he said. "This is a live-fire exercise for me and for so many American families."

He had never had a high-level intelligence briefing, had never met President Biden, Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) or Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). He had no meaningful relationship with House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.)

In a matter of moments, Johnson became second in line to the presidency. The day after he was elected speaker last October, he met with Biden and the three House national security panel chairs - Reps. Michael R. Turner (R-Ohio), Michael McCaul (R-Tex.) and Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) - who brought him to the White House for a worldwide threats briefing heavy on Ukraine. Former CIA director and ex-secretary of state Mike Pompeo became an informal adviser.

The new speaker heard from evangelical Christians in the United States and Ukraine about the persecution of Ukrainian Christians by Russia. Over the next months, the other congressional leaders twice brought him to the White House to meet with Biden, where he got an earful about the importance of this moment in history from the president, McConnell and Schumer.

It was eye opening.

One Republican House member recalls: "I'll never forget Johnson one time said, 'I've gone from representing my district only to representing the entire [House] and the country.' For someone to go from where he was to where he is now as quickly as he did ... is remarkable."

Wonderful quote Lamplighter, thank you.

I may have to take back my word though after reading this:

Many Republicans dismissed what the intelligence showed or refused to attend briefings, causing alarmed Republicans to say that misinformation and Russian propaganda has seeped into the Republican Party. Evangelical Christians tried to bend Johnson's and his staff's ear, pointing to the influence of propaganda from the Russian Orthodox Church. Johnson met with Pavlo Unguryan, a Ukrainian evangelical leader, who had been pushing for U.S. support.

Johnson is a devout Southern Baptist and his faith "guides him in every major decision he makes," one Republican member said.

Johnson was given polling from the American Action Network, the policy arm of the Republican affiliated super PAC, that found a large majority of voters favor aid to Ukraine in battleground districts and that favoring Ukraine aid was not a principle deciding factor for Republican primary voters. The polling reassured Johnson there was little political risk to funding Ukraine, an important data point when working to persuade his GOP colleagues.

A steady stream of European leaders and ministers have knocked on Johnson's door in recent months, telling the congressman from Louisiana that his place among global statesmen is assured if he got this done.

British Foreign Secretary David Cameron applied some debonair wit. Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas, one of Ukraine's sharpest backers, told Johnson what it was like to live in a nation that borders Russia. Just last week, Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala met with Johnson and told him that the world's eyes were on him.

"I really do believe the intel and in the briefings that we've gotten," Johnson said last week. "I believe [Chinese President] Xi [Jinping] and Vladimir Putin and Iran really are an axis of evil. I think they're in coordination.

Forgot about that option. My brain was thinking about statesmanship for a moment, so forgive me.

Let me retune my TDS filters so it won't happen again.

Now that he did, she's going to be "responsible" and "listen to her constituents".

I don't know what tea leaves you're reading, but the opposite appears to be the truth.

#24

I thing you're paragraph is related to remarks Saturday while still in the Capitol Building. Mine was from Sunday, and as yet I've seen no walkback or denial of the intentions she unambiguously stated.

#28

I think this article clearly states the most probable reasons for Johnson coming to the decision of bucking the Putinites from his Freedom Caucus and Trump's public statements critical of US aid to Ukraine, again insinuating Europe hasn't done enough.

I think the most relevatory part of this story was the fact that Johnson himself - prior to his lightning ascension to Speaker - had never met the President; never been in a high level intelligence briefing; never even met the other Congressional leaders from either party; and didn't know the truth that it's Russia who is persecuting Ukrainian Christians, not the other way around being propagated in the Russian disinformation being touted by MTG and other Putinites dominating the current GOP discourse.

Now, it's obvious that the polling of Republicans on Ukraine added the final steel to his spine, but to me, I think the two most important reasons he finally did what he did is because 1) He had the ephiphany as SPOH his role as 2nd in the line of succession comes with the caveat he has to place the entire nation's wellbeing as his guiding star, not simply the GOP or even a smaller subset thereof; and 2) His son is about to enter the Naval Academy, and if Ukraine fails in its quest to evict Russia from its lands, Russia will most certainly start other hot conflicts in the region that stand a very high probability of drawing US forces into a hot war as a part of NATO's defense.

IOW, some issues simply transcend partisan politics, especially issues regarding national security and world order. With all of Johnson's most important boxes checked (religion, personal interest, favored polling, national security, and global order) he did what any national leader should do given similar circumstances.

#30

No, it wasn't. There were 3 separate bills: One for Ukraine, one for Israel and Gaza, and one for the Indo-Pacific.

Your assertion is wrong.

#32

Dude, YOU'RE WRONG. The votes were separate by design. Many GOP members voted for Israeli aid and against aid for Ukraine. Being for one didn't mean you had to be for the other. In Johnson's reoriented mind, all of the votes were directly related to his responsibility to protect America's defense and interest as the now 2nd in line of succession.

Stop while you're behind. You don't know what you're talking about.

And to be clear, some Democrats voted for Ukraine aid and voted against the Israeli/Palestinian package. So, no, all the funding was not "rolled into" the Ukraine bill. All of the bills stood or sunk on their own merit, wholly independent from each other.

I did read somewhere that all four bills were going to be combined when they went to the Senate.

In the Senate, but not the House which is what I've always been referring to>