Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Trump to Pelosi: ‘I Will be Honoring Your Invitation’ to Deliver State of the Union Next Week

Trump to Pelosi: ‘I Will be Honoring Your Invitation’ to Deliver State of the Union Next Week

Pelosi responded that he is not allowed in the House until the government has reopened.

President Donald Trump has informed Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) in a letter that he will honor her previous invitation to deliver the State of the Union in Congress on January 29.

He told Pelosi, “It would be so very sad for our Country if the State of the Union were not delivered on time, on schedule, and very importantly, on location!”

Pelosi shot back that she won’t allow Trump to deliver the address in the House.

Trump thanked Pelosi for sending letters to invite him to deliver the State of the Union and then another one that “expressed concerns regarding security” during the address due to the shutdown.

He reminded Pelosi that “[E]ven prior to asking, I was contacted by the Department of Homeland Security and the United States Secret Service to explain that there would be absolutely no problem regarding security with respect to the event” and that they have even made this known to the public.

Trump continued:

Accordingly, there are no security concerns regarding the State of the Union Address. Therefore, I will be honoring your invitation, and fulfilling my Constitutional duty, to deliver important information to the people and Congress of the United States of America regarding the State of our Union.

I look forward to seeing you on the evening on January 29th in the Chamber of the House of Representatives. It would be so very sad for our Country if the State of the Union were not delivered on time, on schedule, and very importantly, on location!

A few hours later, Pelosi told Trump that she will not allow him to deliver his address in the House:

I am writing to inform you that the House of Representatives will not consider a concurrent resolution authorizing the President’s State of the Union address in the House Chamber until government has opened.

Again, I look forward to welcoming you to the House on a mutually agreeable date for this address when government has been opened.”

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

I guess she will chain herself to the (school) House door. Shades of Southern Governors in the Civil Rights era

practicalconservative | January 23, 2019 at 12:54 pm

Nancy played her cards and she has just been Trumped

Rather it be in the Senate

Will the Dems boycott it?

Will Nazi refuse to sit behind the President?

I was kind looking forward to what the internet will do with the pictures of all of the faces she’ll be making while Trump speaks.

Wouldn’t surprise me if she shows up and then walks out at some point

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | January 23, 2019 at 1:50 pm

It’s DEM’s 1957 Little Rock stance all over again.

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | January 23, 2019 at 1:52 pm

Pelosi will be making more twitches than usual what with Shelia Jackson D-TX resignation of some positions over a female staffer’s sexual assault charges against her and new Dem members’ move to support The Wall.

Trump doesn’t get to decide. Congress must invite the President for him to give an address.

    Ragspierre in reply to Zachriel. | January 23, 2019 at 2:50 pm

    This is true.

    As a deep, dark hater of the quasi-monarchical display that is the modern SOTU show, I’d love to see the whole thing terminated. Duh Donald has a great opportunity to break an awful pattern here.

    Which, of course, he won’t.

    But imagine the Queen Of England barging into a session of parliament as if by right and demanding to give a speech!

    How our republic has declined…

      “But imagine the Queen Of England barging into a session of parliament as if by right and demanding to give a speech!”

      She can “barge” in anywhere she likes other than the House of Commons.

      You know less about English law than about the US Constitution, and you know little about the constitution.

        Barry: She can “barge” in anywhere she likes other than the House of Commons.

        Domus sua cuique est tutissimum refugium, that is, Every man’s home is his castle.

    gmac124 in reply to Zachriel. | January 23, 2019 at 3:26 pm

    The speaker invited the President and than recommended that he not accept the invitation but she did not rescind the invite. So in a nutshell yes it is up to the President to accept the invitation, which is what he did.

      gmac124: The speaker invited the President and than recommended that he not accept the invitation but she did not rescind the invite.

      The invitation requires a resolution from both the House and Senate. Such a resolution has not been passed. It’s their decision. In this case, the majority in the House elected Pelosi as Speaker, and she has such a resolution will not be forthcoming.

    Heidinbodi in reply to Zachriel. | January 23, 2019 at 3:36 pm

    The Constitution doesn’t say anything about Congress inviting the President to give the SotU. It does give him the power to convene Congress, though.

    Both Zacky and “lawyer” Rags are ignorant of the Constitution.

    Article 2 Section 3:

    [The President] may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper….

    And who defines extraordinary? He does.

      Barry in reply to SDN. | January 23, 2019 at 8:19 pm

      “Both Zacky and “lawyer” Rags”

      Noting for the millionth time, “Ragspierre” always side with the commie progs.

      I’ll also note, he cannot respond to the constitution as written, he has to use the prog trick of going “Nazi, Nazi, Nazi”.

Pretty sure Trump can go right ahead and call a joint session of congress.

Then do it again, and again and again and again.

Don’t let them leave…lol.

“I am writing to inform you that the House of Representatives will not consider a concurrent resolution authorizing the president’s State of the Union address in the House Chamber until government has opened.” — Speaker Pelosi

    gmac124 in reply to Zachriel. | January 23, 2019 at 3:32 pm

    Trump called Nancy’s bluff and forced her to actually rescind the invite. The question is who has the better hand now? So far Nancy has been outplayed.

    Article 2 Section 3:

    [The President] may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper….

    And who defines extraordinary? He does.

Why does the House think they have to “authorize” it? Art. II Sec 3 just says “he [the President] may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them…”

I don’t see anything in there requiring Congress’s approval. He just convenes them.

    Ragspierre in reply to Heidinbodi. | January 23, 2019 at 3:53 pm

    See above.

    The House controls its own, and the executive does NOT order what the House may do.

    Heidinbodi: I don’t see anything in there requiring Congress’s approval. He just convenes them.

    A State of the Union is not “extraordinary” by any means. Nor does convening Congress mean the President can order them to do his bidding. Congress is a separate and co-equal branch of government.

Humphrey's Executor | January 23, 2019 at 4:04 pm

This is shaping up to be the greatest parliamentary drama since Cromwell dissolved the Rump Parliament.

    THANK you for referencing Cromwell’s speech on the dissolution of Parliament in 1653. It has long been one of my favorites (even beating out my favorite Churchill quotations), and it perfectly describes how most of us on the right today feel about the elected members of our current government. I wish everyone would post this speech all over the Internet and send copies to all members of the House and Senate, as well as local and state politicians.

    Here’s Cromwell, sounding a bit like an antique version of Trump:

    “It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.

    “Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter’d your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?

    “Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defil’d this sacred place, and turn’d the Lord’s temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices? Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress’d, are yourselves gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors.

    “In the name of God, go!”

Just as someone who doesn’t understand all the legal ramifications or who gets to do what to whom within the government – it looks to me like Trump told her to put up or shut up.

I’m not a Trump fan, don’t like him and never did but I can appreciate a smart move. She said no – thus making the AOC Spice Girls Freshman members of the House, and the base happy. She said no and probably did not make the old guard happy as well as millions of citizens. She helped him put her in a no win situation.

Of course the media will spin themselves dizzy trying to help her but after the last few weeks there are fewer people who much give a damn what the MSM has to say. JMO

This tread is a fascinating study in situational ethics.

Almost nobody here would be advocating for a Deemocrat POTOUS to exert the imperial arrogance of ORDERING the Congress to convene and sit for him/her to deliver ANY speech on ANY occasion.

Quite the opposite.

Showing that it’s all a mater of your tribal affiliation, and NOT of what’s right, legal, principled, or Constitutional.

    Swing and a miss from liar lawyer Rags: We’re saying he CAN, regardless of opinion, and that’s his call.

    Article 2 Section 3:

    [The President] may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper….

    And who defines extraordinary? He does.

    “it’s all a mater of your tribal affiliation”

    Your “tribal affiliation” is with Zachriel, a commie prog.

Watch and see what idiot?
Trump can choose to deliver the SOU somewhere else which will not make your avoidance of the wording of the constitution any less than it is.

Truth: Since 1790, no House speaker has refused to allow the President to address a joint session of Congress for the State of the Union. True, there have been a number of years in there where the President has *chosen* not to deliver the SOTU in the House chambers, but no Speaker has been so petty and infantile to deny this before.

Until now.

(I honestly expect him to give the SOTU in the Senate, where the peanut gallery… I mean the visitor gallery can be limited to invited Presidential guests instead of shrieking twits.)

All Trump has to do is send a letter to Congress and schedule a speech to the nation and bill it as his “State of the Union Address”. No joy for the hag and he still gets to lay out his agenda.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend