Rep. 3-Names Will Find The Strawberries

Madge
(Undated File Photo)

Rep. 3-Names is in the news:

Rep.Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), tangled with two members of the Jan. 6 committee on the House floor Thursday, getting into an impromptu shouting match over Black Lives Matter and a wild conspiracy theory about space lasers starting California wildfires. 

Oh, dear.

Greene first pressed Raskin — who led the Democrats’ prosecution of Trump during his impeachment trial after the Jan. 6 attack — asking him when he would investigate the violence surrounding the Black Lives Matter protests, according to Raskin.

“Like with Kyle Rittenhouse who went and killed two Black Lives Matter protesters?” Raskin replied to her. “I’m sure there will be an opportunity for us to get to that.”

“This is a joke,” Greene said, her voice rising, referring to the Jan. 6 investigation and the Bannon contempt vote. “Why don’t you investigate something people actually care about?”

Cheney shot back that Greene was “a joke” and that she should be focusing on Jewish space lasers, a reference to a conspiracy theory Greene previously had promoted on Facebook blaming “space lasers” controlled by a powerful Jewish family for starting wildfires in California.

Liz is mostdef Darth’s little squirt. That was pretty good.

“I never said that! You’re done. You’re a joke!” Greene yelled at Cheney, according to CNN. “Why don’t you go investigate something that matters to the American people?”

Because the Insurrection doesn’t matter to any of the voices in her head? Sure, we’ll go with that.

This entry was posted in Insurrection, Liz Cheney, Marjorie Taylor Greene, The Big Lie. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Rep. 3-Names Will Find The Strawberries

  1. w3ski4me says:

    So the pressures are too much for her. Her cheese is rapidly slipping off of her cracker, or is it her cracker that is crumbling?
    Now she is getting loud, arguing, and outright disrupting groups. Too bad they don’t have a gag for her. I guess she figured her fame was slipping and added another outburst to her resume.
    She is going to need dealing with before she louses up the important stuff. How much more will they stand?
    w3ski

    Liked by 3 people

  2. jetsam359 says:

    “Or is it her cracker that is crumbling?” She is the cracker, but crumbled a long time ago. She’s married to Parry (sic) Greene who constantly complains about the crumbs he finds in their bed…

    Liked by 2 people

  3. roket says:

    I would dearly love to see her list of things that are more important to investigate.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Professor Pupdog says:

    Her report card is going to say, “Does not get along well with others.”

    Liked by 3 people

    • gtomkins says:

      In the school I went to (parochial of course), the teachers had a stamp they could use on your report card that had a big WTAO on it, “Wastes Time and Annoys Others”. One of my older brothers got that one all the time. I never did, and only in recent years have I sort of regretted that failure to achieve that distinction.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. R White says:

    Leave it to the dims thinking that if they just ignore horseface long enough, she’ll come to her senses and stop acting the fool. I guess it’s beneath nancysmash to verbally reprimand the silly c#nt on the house floor while reminding iMac that he needs to rein in his idiot caucus.

    Liked by 3 people

    • tengrain says:

      I dunno what the rules are, R White. I’m pretty sure that Nancy has done all she can when she removed 3-Names from all the committees. Whatever punishment is left (I think?) is up to K-Mac, and he ain’t touching her. He’s too scared of Trump.

      Rgds,

      TG

      PS, that said, I’d love to see the Sergeant At Arms eject her from the chamber. That would be pretty cool.

      Liked by 2 people

      • gtomkins says:

        It takes 2/3 to expel a member, so the simple majority isn’t going to be able to do that. The leadership could still try for expulsion, in order to shame the Rs by making them vote against expelling a member who has committed whatever list of atrocities you could come up with, but those folks aren’t really susceptible to shame, so not clear that would be worth it. A lot of what she does is presumably done with the specific intention of triggering a move to expel her, because she and her party don’t care about shame, and an unsuccessful attempt to expel her would give here a twofer: martyr because we’re trying to expel her, but winner because we fail in the attempt. A “martyr” who avoids actual martyrdom consequences is something she probably wants to become.

        There are other things beyond kicking her off committees that can and arguably should be done to her that only need a simple majority. The Constitution arguably protects a non-expelled member’s right to participate in floor votes, but would not seem to require that she be granted office space or staff, or to count as an R caucus member for the calculation of how much staff and how many committee assignments the Rs get. if current rules prohibit those steps, it only takes a simple majority to change them. Access to the Capitol and the floor is only something that could not be taken from her if floor votes can only be cast from the floor, but if that’s what the rules say now, a simple majority can also change the rules.

        Add in warrants for her arrest, for breach of the peace, I guess, and she has to hole up in Georgia, which I presume will not extradite her to DC, and cast floor votes by Zoom or whatever. Of course, she is pretty clearly overall, quite aside from her deportment, guilty of sedition because she claims publicly that Trump Really Won, but basically all R office holders are with her on that, so, gonna need a bigger boat to go down that path.

        Liked by 2 people

  6. osirisopto says:

    She’s never going to find the strawberries. They’re smarter than she is.

    Liked by 6 people

  7. Pingback: Mike'' s Blog site Assemble - The True USA

  8. Zorba says:

    Reblogged this on Politicians Are Poody Heads and commented:

    She gets crazier by the day.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. gtomkins says:

    Hey!

    Referring to people like Rep Greene using all three names is a sound practice, so don’t mock it. If Lee Oswald assassinates the president, or James Ray assassinates MLK, then the hundreds of innocent people who happen to share their names do not at all deserve even a second of suspicion from their fellow citizens that they are the ones who did these heinous acts. We call them Lee Harvey Oswald and James Earl Ray to avoid an injustice to all those people whose only crime is sharing two out of three names with notorious villains.

    There are plenty of people out there named Marjorie Greene who really do not deserve even a momentary thought in anyone’s mind that they might be the villain Marjorie Taylor Greene.

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.