Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference. Read more House Speaker Mike Johnson told The Independent that “nobody” is talking about military action in Greenland despite the fact that President Donald Trump’s administration has floated the possibility. Johnson spoke to reporters on Wednesday during his weekly press conference when The Independent asked if Congress would need to authorize military action in Greenland. “We are not at war with Greenland,” Johnson said. “We have no intention of being at war, we have no reason to be at war with Greenland.” Johnson mentioned that there are “geopolitical and strategic importance” of Greenland. Trump has had an ongoing interest in this territory since 2019 when his administration explored purchasing it. “They’re talking about diplomatic channels for this, okay?” Johnson said. He added that Trump appointed Jeff Landry, the Republican governor of Johnson’s home state of Louisiana, as envoy to Greenland. open image in gallery Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) told reporters that nobody is talking about war with Greenland, despite the Trump administration’s saber-rattling about it. (Getty) “There’s a lot of thoughtful discussion to be had there, and that’s what we expect is going to happen,” he said. “So all this stuff about military action and all that, I don’t think it’s, I don’t even think that’s a possibility. I don’t think anybody’s seriously considering that. And in Congress, we’re certainly not.” On Monday, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller spoke openly about using military force regarding Greenland. Miller told CNN’s Jake Tapper that “nobody is going to fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland.” The White House also backed up this stance.
open image in gallery
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said ‘If the president identifies a threat to national security for United States, every president retains option address through military means.’ (AFP/Getty)
“The president and his team are discussing a range of options for pursuing this important foreign policy goal; utilizing U. S military remains an option at Commander-in-Chief’s disposal,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt stated on Tuesday.
However, Secretary of State Marco Rubio attempted clarification during a Senate briefing on Wednesday.
“If the president identifies a threat to national security for United States, every president retains option address through military means,” he shared with reporters.
The discussions surrounding Greenland resurfaced after Trump ordered airstrikes in Venezuela leading up President Nicolás Maduro’s arrest.
This week leaders from France, Germany, Italy, Poland Spain and UK issued joint statement emphasizing that Greenland “belongs its people.” This statement followed Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen’s warning indicating taking control over Greenland would signify end NATO.
Addtionally The Independent questioned Johnson regarding Trump’s announcement stating Venezuela would give up 50 million barrels crude from oil-rich Latin American country while controlling funds.
The U. S Constitution dictates Congress holds “power purse,” controlling fund allocation process. >>“What happens next involves plans procedures place but impossible predict exactly unfolding,” Johnson noted. >
>“But details remain unclear; I certainly don’t have them,” he continued adding “House hasn’t been informed because believe situation still evolving.” >
Source link
