this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
266 points (96.2% liked)

politics

19087 readers
4454 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Kevin McCarthy’s speakership ended as it began—in chaos. Unprepared to build coalitions, unwilling to stand firm against the crazies in his own caucus, and, ultimately, unable to count votes at the moment when vote counting mattered most, the California Republican was deposed on Tuesday amid a cacophony of threats, insults, accusations, and whining.

So how did House Republicans propose to address the most serious leadership crisis they have experienced since their ill-conceived attempt to remove Bill Clinton blew up a quarter century ago on scandal-plagued House Speaker Newt Gingrich and his hapless successor, adulterous Louisiana Republican Robert Livingston?

As of Thursday morning, two people—House majority leader Steve Scalise and House Judiciary Committee chairman Jim Jordan—have declared their candidacy for the speakership. But some House Republicans are pushing an even more chaotic prospect: Speaker of the House Donald Trump.

Within hours of the House’s 216-210 vote to vacate McCarthy’s speakership, Texas Republican Troy Nehls declared, “This week, when the US House of Representatives reconvenes, my first order of business will be to nominate Donald J Trump for speaker of the US House of Representatives. President Trump, the greatest president of my lifetime, has a proven record of putting America first and will make the House great again.”

Even by the unusually high levels of political obsequiousness that are observed when Republican members of Congress start talking about Trump, Nehls’s announcement stood out by blending desperate hints of tragedy and farce. So, of course, Georgia Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene decided to outdo him, posting a picture on Wednesday of Trump wearing an outsize “Make America Great Again” cap and wielding the House gavel. “This is my choice for speaker of the House!” announced Greene.

Other House Republicans jumped into the “Trump for speaker” clown car, and by Tuesday night, Fox News host Sean Hannity was reporting, “Sources telling me at this hour some House Republicans have been in contact with and have started an effort to draft former president Donald Trump to be the next Speaker, and I have been told that President Trump might be open to helping the Republican Party, at least in the short term, if necessary.”

Trump dubbed the prospect “interesting.”

“Lots of people have been calling me about speaker, all I can say is we’ll do whatever is best for the country and for the Republican Party,” Trump said Wednesday morning. Pressed to clarify whether he might actually serve as speaker for the remainder of the 118th Congress, Trump said he was “totally focused” on his 2024 presidential bid. But then he added, “If I can help them during the process, I’ll do it.”

Was Trump saying he’d take a temporary speakership? Maybe. Maybe not.

It didn’t matter to Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy. Somewhere in the word salad that was served up by the former president, Ramaswamy—who has urged House Republicans to ask themselves, “Is chaos really such a bad thing?”—heard what he wanted to hear. Of the prospect that Trump might be given the gavel and control of the House, Ramaswamy declared on Wednesday, “This isn’t crazy. We need to shake things up in there.”

Actually, it is crazy, for a variety of reasons. But one reason is particularly worthy of consideration.

While it’s true that someone who is not a member of the House can serve as speaker, Trump is currently barred from holding the position. Who says? The House Republican Conference.

According to the Conference Rules of the 118th Congress, “If a member of Elected Republican Leadership…publicly announces his or her intention to seek other elected office in Federal, state, or local government, that Member shall resign from such leadership position.”

Trump is an announced presidential candidate. So he is precluded by his own party’s rule from serving as speaker.

all 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 109 points 1 year ago (4 children)

This article is dumb. Why act like the "rules for the, but not for me" fascists will miraculously start following their own rules, when they regularly don't even follow any rules or laws?

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's like that made up rule for scotus nominations that they requested Obama to follow then later did whatever they pleased with Trump..

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Exactly. If he wants it, they'll give it to him, legal or not.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That will last maybe until the first point of order at the longest. Meanwhile our government will shut down..

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

GOPniks bankrupting the government is like a yearly thing now, isn't it?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A party based on disruption, destruction and mayhem having no interest in actually governing and instead plunging the nation into chaos?

Yup. Completely expected.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Party That Believes Government Doesn't Work Ensures Government Doesn't Work.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

“Party that tried insurrection thwarted by parliamentary rules” isn’t as catchy

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Seriously.

If Trump has the votes they'll make the exception. Of fucking course they would. The author really thought they were cooking with that shit? Please.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Pumpkin head does not qualify:

“A member of the Republican Leadership shall step aside if indicted for a felony for which a sentence of two or more years’ imprisonment may be imposed,” the Republican Conference Rules of the 118th Congress state.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Bold of you to assume that they follow their own rules.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Oh they won't, but it's a beautiful thing for Democrats to say that Republicans broke their own rules for this.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Does he even know what the speaker does? Seems like if he got the position he would just sit dumbfounded and make shit up as he goes.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Wouldn't surprise me if the point of the fascists doing this is to put him in the line of succession, then do as much stochastic terrorism as possible in the hopes one of their trumpanzees murders our elected President and VP.

You just know someone like Marj would love it.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

They don't need the fascist nutjob mob, they just need to have enough members to win impeachment votes. Impeach the president, then the VP shortly afterwards, for the "high crime and misdemeanor" of being a Democrat. Done.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

Seems like if he got the position he would just sit dumbfounded and make shit up as he goes.

So same as him being president?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Ramaswamy—who has urged House Republicans to ask themselves, “Is chaos really such a bad thing?”

Sure. Ask yourselves that. And then answer yes, because fucking of course.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

Is chaos bad inherently? Not really

Is chaos in the government bad? Yes. Your job is order. (notably the opposite of chaos)

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

The Manly Manperor of Mankind does not approve of Chaos.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago

Ok love the term "shoals of stupidity" but obviously if there was actually the votes to do this, that many people could just change the rules to make it allowed.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

No Person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice- President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Someone ran spell check on the chiron. "Fromer President Trump...."

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yaknow, Fox News does have a lot in common with phishing emails… 🤔

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I read that as "yak now" and it still works

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

…or forever hold your peace

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Is there some angle here for helping with his indictments?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Isn't there something about criminally indicted fellows (91 times) not to mention he sent the defecating squad to hang his vicepresident in that very same building. 2023 really upped the ante.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

The conference rules are the same rules that included the shit one vote to vacate rule that mckarthy agreed to. They can change that if they want to.