In an otherwise reasonable editorial in today's WSJ, it states: "Democrats are already branding Mr. Johnson a MAGA ideologue, which is unfair." To which I ask: Why? For somebody who essentially has "MAGA" tattooed on his forehead, I can't think of a fairer brand for the new Speaker.
In an otherwise reasonable editorial in today's WSJ, it states: "Democrats are already branding Mr. Johnson a MAGA ideologue, which is unfair." To which I ask: Why? For somebody who essentially has "MAGA" tattooed on his forehead, I can't think of a fairer brand for the new Speaker.
In an otherwise reasonable editorial in today's WSJ, it states: "Democrats are already branding Mr. Johnson a MAGA ideologue, which is unfair." To which I ask: Why? For somebody who essentially has "MAGA" tattooed on his forehead, I can't think of a fairer brand for the new Speaker.
The WSJ Opinion page had a reasonable editorial? They must be slipping. Everyone knows the Murdoch’s WSJ Opinion page is an arm of FOX.
Aren't his *allies* calling him "Maga Mike Johnson"?