Image 01 Image 03

Trump On Possiblity of Running for House and Becoming Speaker: ‘That’s So Interesting’

Trump On Possiblity of Running for House and Becoming Speaker: ‘That’s So Interesting’

“become the Speaker of the House, lead the impeachment of Biden and start criminal investigations against Biden”

During a recent interview with Trump, conservative talk host Wayne Allyn Root suggested that he should run for a House seat in Florida, become Speaker of the House, and then lead an impeachment effort against Biden.

This is a hilarious idea not only because it could actually work, but because it would drive the left positively bonkers.

Trump was open to the suggestion, saying “that’s so interesting.”

Tal Axelrod reports at The Hill:

‘So interesting’: Trump pitched on idea to run for House, become Speaker

Former President Trump on Friday called a proposal that he run for the House in 2022 to try to win the speaker’s gavel “interesting,” though the chances of him actually doing so remain low.

Trump was asked about the proposal by far-right radio host Wayne Allyn Root on Friday after Steve Bannon, a former adviser to the ex-president, floated the idea.

“That’s so interesting,” Trump said.

“Yeah, you know it’s very interesting,” Trump added, saying that others had suggested he run for Senate. “But you know what, your idea might be better. It’s very interesting.”

The left wing outlet known as ‘Right Wing Watch’ uploaded the clip to Twitter. Watch:


Let’s take this idea a step further. During a State of the Union address, Trump would be standing behind Biden. Perhaps he could rip up a copy of Biden’s speech during the event, and then we can watch the same media types who cheered for Pelosi run for their fainting couches.

The left is apparently taking this seriously, as Newsweek even laid out what it would take for this to happen:

Even if Trump chose to run for a House seat in 2022, he would have to win that race and Republicans would have to take control of the House of Representatives for him to have a shot at becoming speaker of the legislative chamber. Currently, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, a California Republican, is seen as the frontrunner to become speaker if GOP candidates successfully flip the House in the midterm elections.

Notably, Trump also suggested in a Friday statement he does plan to run for the presidency again in the future. After Facebook announced Trump will remain suspended from the social media platform until 2023, the former president released a statement saying he’d no longer have Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg over for dinner at the White House.

It certainly is fun to think about.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


We’ll take ANY form of this incredible man he is willing to give us! Who has ever entered the Oval Office that actually fought for all of The People? In my lifetime, absolutely no one tops this man.
Is there a better way to PO rancid china and even better….. ALL of the left loonies.? AHAhahahaha!

    JusticeDelivered in reply to Jmaquis. | June 5, 2021 at 2:52 pm

    Not sure that it is possible to drive them any crazier, but it might cause them to start blowing gaskets, aneurisms, strokes, heart attacks,, or maybe lead to them having to be put in padded cells.

    fredx3 in reply to Jmaquis. | June 5, 2021 at 5:19 pm

    Why, he is godlike in his perfection! Every minute of his presence is like fine wine. He is a light bringer, an evolved being, the distillation of perfection and sentience! He is like a god. No…he is better than a god…no…he is God himself.
    Oh, come let us adore him
    Oh come let us adore him.

      Barry in reply to fredx3. | June 6, 2021 at 8:09 pm

      marxists like fredx3 are rather afraid of President Donald Trump.

      marxists like fredx3 murdered 150 million people. 150,000,000.

Morning Sunshine | June 5, 2021 at 10:09 am

oh, the fun idea. And can you imagine what Rush would have said about not only the idea, but the implementation of Trump as Speaker

The Speaker doesn’t have to be a sitting member of the House as far as I am aware. So he wouldn’t necessarily be required to win a campaign for a House seat.

IMO, this idea is not well thought out. Should r win a House majority in 2022, which is very likely, choosing DJT as Speaker simply to ‘own the d/progressive doesn’t make sense to me.

If he could attract and retain competent and loyal congressional staff, be committed to using the ‘pulpit’ of the Speaker’s office to advance the party agenda, meet the demands of fundraising and become much more disciplined in his messaging…. then sure.

The qualities that made him attractive as a Presidential candidate; willing to be combative, executive experience ECT don’t translate to the role of Speaker. IMO, he would be miserable as Speaker because of the different requirements of a legislative leadership position.

    Taiwanese Lady in reply to CommoChief. | June 5, 2021 at 11:19 am

    His becoming Speaker “to get at Biden” would be just icing on the cake. But the important thing is the cake itself which for the Speaker is controlling the legislative agenda (i.e., the bills to be considered) and assigning Trump people to head up the committees.

    And for Trump his being Speaker means he can effectively campaign for 2024 while he is setting the agenda for the people.

      CommoChief in reply to Taiwanese Lady. | June 5, 2021 at 12:26 pm

      Well DJT wasn’t Speaker in 2016 and seemed to campaign very successfully so I don’t see how he needs the office.

      Frankly, he is not suited to the legislative give and take, coalition building and discipline required. That isn’t his forte. As a unitary executive DJT shines, as a legislative leader…. that’s a whole different skill set.

      Many of us demanded that Cheney be removed from a House leadership role for creating dissension within the caucus by placing her own interests and priorities ahead of and above a unified r caucus, I don’t see how DJT wouldn’t prove to do the same as Speaker.

      Would this infuriated the d/progressive and their media allies? Sure, but IMO neither he nor the party need the potential headaches and drama DJT would bring. The risk / reward ratio doesn’t make sense to me.

        Barry in reply to CommoChief. | June 6, 2021 at 8:11 pm

        “Frankly, he is not suited to…”

        Hmm, I’ve heard that before, from every leftwing kook and neverTrumper, regarding the presidency.

        Another thought for the trashcan.

    jlronning in reply to CommoChief. | June 5, 2021 at 7:37 pm

    You’re correct – Speaker does not have to be one of the congressmen. If R’s get majority, they can make him Speaker, he’d be in line to Presidency if “something happens” to Pres & VP.

Focus! Don’t even get started with this!

I prefer Trump remains the King maker and helps us rid the country of the scourge of RINOs.

What district would he run in? The Palm Beach district where he lives wouldn’t vote for him, and even if they did Palm Beach county itself has too long a history of vote fraud to let him win.

    buck61 in reply to randian. | June 5, 2021 at 12:42 pm

    Florida is adding a house seat in 2022, we’ll have to see how the new districts are drawn. Trump owns plenty of land in various parts of Florida and would not be that hard to get registered in a new district

if this happens, another black riot will happen. cuz whites ‘r bad.

    UserP in reply to anon. | June 5, 2021 at 11:47 am

    Anyone who doesn’t believe whites are bad needs to go have their head examined by Dr Aruna Khilanani, a New York based psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, who says whites are so bad they make her blood boil. In fact she told students she fantasizes daily about shooting and killing whites, shedding their blood. There is no exception, she says. ALL whites are bad.

I was under the impression that the Speaker of the House didn’t have to be a member of the House.

    Dusty Pitts in reply to Neo. | June 5, 2021 at 1:52 pm

    Correct. Yet even a hint that Trump opens a political campaign of any kind, even for a city council seat, would detonate heads between here and Lenin’s Tomb.

rustyshamrock | June 5, 2021 at 1:58 pm

“Nancy — You’re FIRED!”

Just imagine the solemn parade as they march the articles of impeachment from the House to the Senate.. Those somber Congressman, so sad..

Yeah.. I could go for that.

I sincerely hope he doesn’t run again. It isn’t just because he lost 2020 (you could improve your performance a next time) and it isn’t because of flaws in his presidency it is because he can’t win.

    r2468 in reply to Danny. | June 5, 2021 at 3:34 pm

    You mean because the Democrats will cheat again? He’s 2-0.. Trump won.

      Danny in reply to r2468. | June 5, 2021 at 5:03 pm

      He lost 2020 in a no voter fraud election. If there had been enough voter fraud to flip a single state he would have made the claim of voter fraud in court not demanded the election be overturned because rules weren’t fair (his actual argument).

      By the way why do you insist on Trump? As President his policies were those of a traditional Republican.

        Milhouse in reply to Danny. | June 6, 2021 at 9:33 am

        There’s no question that there was massive fraud. Exactly how much, and whether it changed the result, nobody will ever know.

        But to make that claim in court it’s not enough to show that there must have been massive fraud. You have to prove it on the retail level. You have to do it vote by vote, proving in each case that this specific vote should not have been cast, or should not have been counted, and that it was for your opponent. In the vast majority of cases this is impossible to do.

        Only a tiny percentage of fraud can be detected and proved in this way, so overturning a result is only possible when the margin is small and the actual level of fraud is huge. If you lose an election by 100 votes, and there are actually thousands of fraudulent votes, you may be able to detect and prove 101 of them, and that they were for your opponent.

        One of the regular commenters here keeps saying that the burden is on those conducting an election to prove that the result was valid. Maybe that ought to be so, but it isn’t. Pretending it is doesn’t help anyone. The burden is on the challenger, and it is almost insurmountable.

        In fact the strongest evidence that the fraud happened is the very fact that the Democrats have deliberately made it easy to do and difficult to catch. If someone deliberately leaves a bank’s vault unlocked overnight, disarms the alarms and disables the cameras, and leaves a window open in the back, and also makes sure there is no record of what was in the vault at the close of business, that is enough to prove that there must have been a burglary overnight, even though you can never directly prove it.

        Barry in reply to Danny. | June 6, 2021 at 8:14 pm

        Oh look, the fraud called danny is back to tell us the election was squeaky clean.

        Why do I suspect danny girl plays in the sewer?

Trump becomes Speaker.

Then leads the impeachment of Biden. For corruption in his business dealings with Ukraine and China while VP.

Sounds too good to ever come true.

This is a great idea. He could leave all the work of being speaker to Kevin McCarthy to do. That way he would not be weighed down by the normal duties of the office. He would be free to fly around the country, trying to install MAGA people in every office. He would be free to appear on TV to oppose the Democrats in every way. The media would find it hard to ignore him. The impeachment of Biden AND then Kamala would be epic. Because it would leave him as PRESIDENT because the speaker of the house is third in line.

    CommoChief in reply to fredx3. | June 5, 2021 at 8:07 pm


    He do do that without being Speaker. If DJT is flying around hosting thousands at political rallies it will be covered.

henrybowman | June 5, 2021 at 5:55 pm

When Trump says “That’s interesting,” I hear the echo of my mother saying “Perhaps.”

By the way if Trump wants 2024 he needs to accept the results of 2020. Just ask president Hillary Clinton, or president Al Gore.

Ronald Raegan conceded that he lost the primary to president Ford and didn’t claim a rigged system-went on to win two genuine landslides.

Nixon actually had his election stolen-He did not make his next presidential run about his last instead he accepted the results and made a campaign about issues people cared about at the time.

The formula from changing from presidential loser to winner is not be a sore loser.

    CommoChief in reply to Danny. | June 5, 2021 at 8:14 pm


    If you mean accepting the reality that DJT is not the President and that Biden will be President until Jan of 2025 then sure. There are a few folks here that cling to a fantasy that DJT will be ‘installed’ as President in place of Biden.

    The results though…..let’s see how the audits play out. It won’t change the fact that Biden was sworn in and is the President but it might just show what level and methods of shenanigans were used in 2020. Those methods can then be addressed and mitigated before 2024.

      Danny in reply to CommoChief. | June 6, 2021 at 2:54 am

      What you said is besides the point, Raegan accepted the legitimacy of his failure to take over from Ford and the Republican Party rewarded him with the nomination and he won the general.

      In contrast Al Gore did more or less exactly the same thing Trump did where is he now? Is Hillary who also did exactly the same thing Trump did likely to get the 2024 nomination if say Biden dies?

      Even if he is right the less he talks about 2020 the better for everyone.

      To your point I support audits, I am in favor of debunking the (moronic) narrative that elections are rigged/fixed; it is a narrative that means stay home and let the Democrats win, and it gave them the senate which was a horrible result. So far there is no reason to believe any audits have turned up anything, and when recounts happened they didn’t change anything.

      If Trump wants to return to the presidency he needs to be more like Raegan, or if he was genuinely wronged by fraud (which I highly doubt) like Nixon and less like Hillary and Gore.

      Sorry that was a bit long but I think you would agree on at least part of it.

        CommoChief in reply to Danny. | June 6, 2021 at 9:20 am


        Overall I believe we agree her with one exception. An audit isn’t a recount. Simply running the ballots back through a tabulation machine is only one step in an election audit.

        First look at which voters cast ballots. What address was used? If a PO Box then that registration was invalid and so was their ballot.

        Same for multiple voters using the same address beyond a husband and wife and perhaps an adult child or one of the couple’s widowed parents. Numbers beyond that seem worth exploring.

        Next would be a comparison of postal address changes and the voter registration list for the other State to determine if John Smith was registered in multiple States and cast ballots in multiple States.

        The address items listed here are the low hanging fruit. Beyond that is comparison of mail ballot rejection rates for 2020 v historical. If substantially different in a few precincts then further inquiry is warranted. At minimum those precincts should be closely monitored in the future for training and compliance with the State ballot handling and recording standards.

        Lots more areas of potential shenanigans to explore. None of which will result in Biden being removed and replaced with DJT. However, if enough ballots are demonstrated to be questionable in key States then the legitimacy of his Presidency will be undercut.

        More importantly, IMO, ballot security and election integrity reforms can be put in place by the State legislature to mitigate any of the issues discovered. That will go a long way to preventing a repeat of 2020 where actions by some election officials created doubt as to the outcome.

    Milhouse in reply to Danny. | June 6, 2021 at 9:48 am

    Danny, I don’t accept your premise. Gore’s and Clinton’s refusal to accept their defeats was not at all a factor in their failure to win the next time. Had they conceded their losses they would have been in no better position.

    Reagan conceded his 1976 loss because he had no reason not to. There was no reason to believe he had been cheated. I do not accept that, had he contested the result, this would have hampered him at all in 1980.

    Likewise, had Nixon challenged the result in 1960 I do not believe this woudl have harmed him at all in 1968. Now if he’d made his 1968 campaign all about how he’d been cheated 8 years earlier, that might not have been a good idea. A lot of voters would have been more interested in the future than in the past. But I don’t think a mere refusal to accept his previous loss would have been a significant factor.

      Danny in reply to Milhouse. | June 8, 2021 at 9:06 pm

      I disagree, I do not think Al Gore or Hillary Clinton’s show of election rejection was a good look and I don’t think Democrats thought that was behavior worthy of someone who was going to be given another chance.

      Conversely yes Raegan had no reason to think his 76 loss was the result of being cheated. That is exactly how we felt about Hillary Clinton, how Republicans felt about Gore, and how Democrats feel about Trump 2020.

      Your Nixon reaction is also very flawed because like Hillary and Gore before him Donald Trump always brings up 2020, and he always claims it was rigged he made major speeches about how he was cheated. There is no reason to think he will ever drop it. Nixon in contrast did not mention his loss, and he did not attack the legitimacy of the Kennedy administration.

      If Trump wants to win again he needs to learn to be more like Nixon and Raegan and less like Hillary and Gore, I’m not even talking about policy.

If it were possible to impeach and convict both Biden and Harris, then I’d have no problem with the Republican House majority electing Trump speaker immediately before the senate vote on conviction, so he could immediately jump into the presidency.

But convicting them is impossible, since there aren’t enough Dem senators up for election in 2022 to give the Rs a 2/3 majority. And Trump would be a disaster as an actual speaker. He’s completely unsuited to that job. Not only would he mess it up, he’d also be miserable.

Still, it’s a great idea to troll the Dems with. So long as it remains just a troll.

    Barry in reply to Milhouse. | June 6, 2021 at 8:18 pm

    “And Trump would be a disaster…”

    Same thing you said about him being president.

    Funny that.

      Milhouse in reply to Barry. | June 8, 2021 at 12:12 pm

      And you think he would be a good speaker?! You think he has any of the skills necessary to do that job?!

    Owego in reply to Milhouse. | June 8, 2021 at 1:40 pm

    Agree completely with the “disaster” comment in your 2nd para; Trump was/is the ultimate executive. He has a vision, knows what he wants to accomplish (goals); has the authority to choose staff- hire and fire at will – that shares the vision; is perfectly comfortable explaining it to anyone willing to listen; and suffers fools poorly. He isn’t poetic – think Churchill, Moynihan ; and, simultaneously, he misunderstood (didn’t we all) the treachery of the deep state. He grossly underestimated its self-preservation instincts and uncontrollable hatred of anyone who disagreed with it, overestimated its loyalty to the country, and commitments to their oaths of office. He would be profoundly unhappy as a cajoler, a schmoozer, and a salesman whether to House members, even members of his own party (who wouldn’t love to be a fly on the wall in a room with him and Liz Cheney), or to any in the public except his followers.

    All that said, we need him and, with him, must find a prominent role for him in the country’s politics.