By this point, you've likely already heard that Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia introduced a motion to vacate against House Speaker Mike Johnson yesterday. One of the most common responses I saw on social media following the announcement, even from conservatives, was some variation of "Here we go again." I'll confess that I probably used a bit more colorful language than that, but editorial standards prevent me from sharing it with you here. To be clear, MTG isn't forcing a vote on vacating the Speakership, or at least she isn't yet. She described it as "more of a warning than a pink slip." No matter what Greene's complaints about the Speaker might be, this disruptive action leads me to the title question. Rather than getting rid of Johnson in the middle of a frantic and critical House calendar, perhaps it's time to consider clearing out some of the deadwood in the House Freedom Caucus and ousting Greene herself. (Axios)

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) on Friday introduced a motion to vacate against House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), threatening a future vote to oust him.

Why it matters: Greene isn't yet forcing the vote to remove Johnson as speaker — but the move lays the groundwork for another historic showdown on the House floor.

• Johnson's predecessor, Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), became the first House speaker to be ousted after hardline Republicans triggered a motion to vacate against him last year.
• Greene said she would bring the vote to remove Johnson if he attempts to pass Ukraine aid, which she and other hardline Republicans fervently oppose.

What they're saying: "I filed a motion to vacate today, but it's more of a warning than a pink slip," Greene told reporters on the Capitol steps.

This makes very little sense and comes at a time when the GOP can ill afford any more internecine warfare. I had originally assumed that Greene was revolting against the passage of the spending bill yesterday, but that wasn't the case. Had it been, that would have been at least a bit more understandable. I don't know many fiscal conservatives who are fans of trillions of additional dollars in imaginary money heading out the door. But Greene claims that she did this as a warning to Johnson to not approve a vote on more funding for Ukraine. That's simply bizarre because it's been Johnson who has closed the door on the next round of Ukraine funding, insisting that the southern border crisis must be addressed first. He has held that line despite being under intense pressure from the White House, the Democrats, and even members of his own party. This is the thanks he gets for taking that stand?

Let's game out what would happen if Greene moved forward and forced a vote to vacate. It can only go one of two ways. Either it would pass or it would fail. Passage is hardly out of the question. The Democrats would love nothing better than to see the House GOP caucus thrown back into total disarray. Their scribes in the majority of the legacy media would eagerly welcome the chance to talk about dysfunctional Republicans rather than being forced to discuss Joe Biden's plunging poll numbers and the disastrous results of his policies as we move toward the November elections. And the announcement came on the same day we learned that Wisconsin Republican member Mike Gallagher will be retiring on April 19.  State law dictates that his seat will remain empty until the general election, whereas there could have been a special election if he left before April 9th. So the GOP majority will shrink to a single seat for the rest of the year.

Alternately, what would happen if the rest of the House GOP caucus somehow stuck together and narrowly rejected Green's call to vacate the Speakership? The answer is... nothing. We would find ourselves in precisely the same situation we are in today, except the media would still latch on to the aforementioned talking point about the Republicans being dysfunctional and barely able to keep the wheels on the clown car turning. We would also be facing the same, daunting number of heavy lifts that are facing us between now and the elections. No matter which way it plays out, Greene will have dropped a poison pill into the soup as her party prepares for one of the most critical elections any of us are likely to see in our lifetimes.

Sadly, the idea of removing Marjorie Taylor Greene from the House has to remain satirical. Members of the House are not subject to recall by the voters and there would need to be a two-thirds vote among the members to expel her. Greene has not committed any sort of technical foul that would justify expulsion. Also, with Gallagher heading for the exits, we couldn't afford to lose her anyway. But it wouldn't hurt for the rest of the caucus to "send her a message" similar to the one she is apparently trying to send to Mike Johnson.