Tear away their fig leaf. Do the Republican House members who claim to have "concerns"
about the process used to remove MTG from House committees, because it is supposedly such a bad precedent for members of a majority party to oust a member of a minority party from House committees, believe that it was wrong for Minority Leader McCarthy to not remove MTG himself? Each and every Republican who attempts to use a "process argument" to defend their vote to not strip MTG of committee assignments needs to answer that question directly. It is only because McCarthy failed to act himself that MTG's committee assignments reached the full House for a vote.
There are only two basic positions that Republican members of the House can take regarding any vote to allow MTG to serve on House Committees. They are 1) Nothing that she has done or said justifies her being removed from committees or 2) Having the whole House strip her assignments was a dangerous precedent that had to be opposed.
Without commenting on the merit of the latter position (Hint: there is none) it begs the followup question from anyone who asserts that view. Yes or No, should your own Party leadership have stripped MTG of her committee assignments, like Steve King was handled previously, before it ever came before the full House?