So if Trump shows up, do Democrats try to block his entry to the chamber by force, or do they just boycott and he deliver the speech in front of Republican Congressmen only?
Politics just gets more and more childish by the day.
KarlGauss: There is an argument for appealing to Trump’s base. But you don’t do that by giving into their guy, giving them a win. You appeal to them orthogonality, hitting on the issues they care about while not mentioning Trump at all.
This is also clearly Trump’s own fault. He’s the one who shut down the government, meaning the government is too busy trying to get started again to do any extra formalities. That’s what Pelossi said. She didn’t attack Trump or disallow him because he’s evil. She simply stated it as the natural consequences for his actions.
When playing with bullies, you don’t try to appease them. That just makes you look weak. If anything, standing up to Trump would make those who value Trump’s “strength” think better of her–if they were at all consistent.
We can’t run on doing what will make the diehard supporters happy: that’s “hurting the libs.”
“The Democrats” don’t have to do anything. The Office of the Sgt. At Arms will do what it has to do. It’s not like “the Democrats” will be waiting inside the chamber to physically keep him out with shoves and kicks, if that’s what you mean “by force.” This isn’t fucking Vince McMahon trying to fight his way past security at WrestleMania.
The POTUS doesn’t have unfettered access to the Congressional floor.
Everyone is asking if Speaker Nancy Pelosi can delay Trump’s address. First, we have to educate ourselves on the State of the Union and the U.S. Constitution.
Article II, Section 3 of the constitution, requires the President to periodically “give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.”
The Speaker is the political and parliamentary leader of the House of Representatives, and is simultaneously the House’s presiding officer, de facto leader of the body’s majority party, and the institution’s administrative head.”
This is telling us that the Speaker of the House controls the date, time and place when the President can address Congress. Usually, this time is giving on the 3rd week of January. So basically Nancy can disinvite the President from Congress to give the SOTU.
Who says walls don’t work?
You could do what Westminster has done and build it into the traditional formalities. Our State Opening of Parliament always includes a ceremonial slamming of the House of Commons door in the face of the messenger sent to call them in to hear the Queen’s Speech, and a ritual of knocking to ask for admittance - just to remind the monarch who’s boss.
Good lord, that’s, like, negative pornography.
Pelosi probably should have checked with someone before suggesting that the Secret Service and DHS had “security concerns”:
A more likely reason is that Pelosi’s not willing to give the Nazi-lover Trump a platform to spew racist garbage about illegal immigrants and lies about Democrats who know better than him, but she has too much class to say so in public.
Well, there you go, that certainly settles that!
It would barely move the needle on the scale of pettiness in which Trump wallows on an almost daily basis. To even mention it as such is like whining about a bread crumb in a shit-filled pigsty.
The Orange Monster[ul]
[li] has organizations found guilty of financial frauds[/li][li] has set a record for lying to the American people, now averaging almost 20 lies per day according to Internet fact-checkers.[/li][li] leers at 13-year old girls, is on blackmail tapes with Russian whores, and has even been credibly accused of child rape[/li][li] is devastating the U.S. government just to avoid “losing face”[/li][li] increasingly appears to be engaged in actual treason[/ul][/li]Nancy Pelosi[ul]
[li] makes up an excuse so she and colleagues needn’t listen to the Orange Monster.[/ul][/li]“See? Both sides do it!”
I guess in “Home of the Haggis” Rupert Murdoch didn’t mention that
You think lying about her motives and making up false “security concerns” is “classy”?
Isn’t Inauguration Day Jan 20th?
Firstly, we don’t bother with the US’s SOTU speech over here. Right now we’ve a big enough clusterfuck in Westminster.
Secondly, we know that Murdoch’s priority is Murdoch.
Having the President live with the consequences of his shutdown is a reasonable thing. I don’t think that’s measure on any kind of classy/non-classy scale. I don’t think a speech is an essential government service.
She should have, but not Nielsen, because Nielsen is just a lying flunky. There’s no reason to privilege her claims over Pelosi’s, and good reason not to–namely, that Pelosi isn’t beholden to the liar in chief.
She should have checked with someone, and I bet she did. What makes you think she didn’t?
Pornectomy? Pornatrophy? Dyspornia? Yeah, it’s not good.
Quartz, the Constitution just says that the State of the Union is “from time to time”, but the tradition is that it’s done every year. The event we’re talking about is (putatively) happening in a couple of weeks. There will also bee a State of the Union in a couple of years, and one next year, but those aren’t what’s being talked about.
As for alternate venues, lots of luck to Trump in getting one of those lined up on such short notice.
Maybe from the local McDonald’s?