Shortly before becoming House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) made an interesting statement in an interview with the New York Times that the Constitution makes her to be President Donald Trump’s equal. While President Donald Trump is criticized for misconstruing his inherent powers (often for good reason), Pelosi also appears to need a basic constitutional primer on the office.
The Times piece is a largely celebratory story about Pelosi as an “icon of female power.” However, Pelosi was asked “if she considers herself Mr. Trump’s equal.” She responded “The Constitution does.”
No it doesn’t. The Constitution makes the Legislative Branch the equally to the Executive Branch. Indeed, I have testified repeatedly before Congress in the hopes of reminding members of that fact. Members have allowed the expansion of presidential powers for years — ignoring their constitutional duties to protect the inherent powers under Article I. Pelosi played a major role in that erosion under the Obama Administration.
Now back to the Speakership. A speaker is not the equal to a president because a speaker is not the head of one of the branches. She is at most the head of one of the house of the Legislative Branch and even that can be contested as overblown since her powers are limited under House rules.
The fact that a Speaker is second in line to the President under the Presidential Succession Act also does not make her a constitutional equal — any more than cabinet members are the equal to the president because they are also in the line of succession.
Pelosi is the equal to the iconic Sam Rayburn who was the last person to take the office of Speaker twice. That will have to be enough for now. If Pelosi wants to be the equal to the President, they would require running for President after 2020 or succeeding to his position due to his death or removal — assuming Pence is not available.
The three co-equal components of government are Congress, the Senate and the Presidency.
The Supreme Court exists merely to assure that the actions of the legislative and executive branches comport with the Constitution.
The Supreme Court possess no authority to legislate, modify legislation or execute legislation.
Rulings by the judicial branch may only verbalize rulings by the Constitution.
The judicial branch is criminal when it defines limitations and restrictions on the legislative or executive branch without the “manifest
tenor” of the Constitution as a basis.
The judicial branch may not interfere with the execution of the legislative and executive branches which solely possess their respective
powers.
Pelosi is one 435th of a largely intractable body.
Pelosi is going to be mortally embarrassed by O’crazyo Cortez on wet t-shirt night in Congress.
C-span is about to get a lot hotter!
in this video she is very comely. let your hair down more often baby. nice figure!
She hasn’t aged well. She’s never married or borne any children. Every occupational effort over a period of 7 years proved to be a dead end. Such a waste.
“Empty suit.”
Unless, of course, the suit is of the bathing kind.
She’s going to present a real dilemma for voting men.
It will be very interesting to see the result of this political experiment.
Go back to your own uber-machismo brain dead country. Women here are not defined in the same sad light as cows or maybe your only accomplishment involves a stud fee?…..
You’d have to go back 8 or 9 generations in my family tree ‘ere you’d find a majority not born in this country, and even then what you’d find would mostly be people born in the imperial metropole. My brain-dead country is the one I’m living in, and the town in which I spent most of my years is the town my great-grandfather was born in.
That aside, what people do in this life is love and work. You have an occupational life and you have a domestic life. At age 29, she’s not succeeded at building either. Too bad, but that’s her reality. Regrettably, she’s been elected to Congress, which will prove in her case to be a sidetrack.
We don’t have a functioning Constitution at this time. In reality, at this time I would say Pelosi carries far more power than Trump. Trump is a latecomer as deep state lackeys go. Pelosi has been in the game far longer. Here is a left wing perspective on Dems/Repubs and the deep state war party. It’s a perspective we rarely get to hear in the US.
https://youtu.be/AguwSKFPTEw
uh yes we have a functioning Constitution, as much as any written organic law functions, the US one does
Trump is no deep state lackey. He is clearly a class traitor much as like FDR was. He has really got a lot of hassle from the “Deep State” obviously so
Ocasio Cortez, insignficant
RT was better with the cute redhead leftist, abby ? forget her name
MK,
I wish (and I mean that sincerely)! We have at least two citizens (that we know of) under indefinite detention w/out trial. Actually let me just link to a person who has laid out the problem really well. He’s a libertarian. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-01-02/break-cycle-2019-say-no-governments-cruelty-brutality-and-abuse.
If you look at Trump’s actions and appts. there isn’t any class traitorship in sight. Really, these are GS people and many are left over war mongers from the Bush administration. He’s a corporatist through and through.
i watched that and Mr Haiphong talks about the war machine as antagonistic to socialism. That shows a certain level of ahistorical confusion on his part. War and socialism usually go quite well together.
Also, if he is against war and American imperialism, than Donald Trump should be his friend, as he is pulling us out of Syria, antagonizing the generals, and de-escalating tensions on the Korean peninsula.
It’s Donald Trump who should get the Nobel Peace prize!
MK,
Actually he was trying to point out that the legacy parties are The War Party and we need a new movement for justice which is independent of the war party in any of its forms.
I certainly agree w/you that socialists have caused a lot of wars, just as capitalists have. Trump however is not ending wars, he’s just lying about doing that. (Remember, Obama got a peace prize for starting 7 wars!)
However, I do find it significant that even when Trump pretends he’s going to end a war, Democrats, mainstream Republicans and the media almost uniformly jump on him. I consider it a show, but it is nevertheless telling that that’s what they jump on him for! As the reporter said yesterday, exactly why are we in Syria and why is it a good idea to go to war w/Russia? I thought he asked some very good questions!
Why do you say he “pretends.” he did not “pretend” to engage in diplomacy with Russia and North Korea he did. He did not “pretend” to order the troops out of Syria he did.
Maybe it is you “pretending” that he is a pawn of the war powers too, and failing to see the blessing that he represents for us all in this nuclear age.
I credit peace activist and former CIA analyst Ray McGovern, who is a Green, for at least standing up and applauding Trump in public for diplomacy, even though he obviously does not support him. Take a hint from Ray on this one, maybe?
“Trump however is not ending wars, he’s just lying about doing that.”
I wonder what makes a person say he is “lying” about wanting to end wars that we have been involved in for years. That has been a position he has advocated for years and even announced a withdrawal from Syria. Apparently you believe in dictatorship since you believe that he can do these things all by himself.
America definitively has a Constitution – the best in the history of man. It has been suspended – abrogated – by an activist and collectivist Supreme Court. The modern centrally planned, means-of-production controlled, socially engineered, redistributionist, welfare state is wholly unconstitutional. It will take vigorous and profound discipline to re-implement its “manifest tenor” which generates freedom, free enterprise and self-reliance through the facilitation of a severely limited government.
Ben Franklin, we gave you “…a republic, if you can keep it.”
Franklin’s was a restricted-vote republic of undiluted Americans.
two does not equal one? THE HORROR! THE HORROR!
next up: Is the Declaration of Independence just enlistment propaganda, cooked up by Massa Tom to get poor Continentals to sign up for the army?
Mistah Kurtz takes the side of “Yes” in the debate.
The more interesting question is did the NYT correct her and educate it’s readers in the process?
Pelosi is in the prime of her senility.
Here is an interesting concept
Equal Branches of Government
Power of our Gov is distributed to three equal branches
Legislative. Judicial. Executive
.333. .333. .333 Equal Power
Actually divided between 545 individuals
Senate. House.
.1665. .1665. .333. .333
100. 435. 9. 1. Members
.001665. .00038. .037. .333.
.16%. .038%. 3.7%. 33.3% per individual
“Here is an interesting concept”
It is interesting but the branches of government are not equal as they each have different jobs, nor does one person in the legislature have an exact amount of power equal to another. They exist so that power is not so concentrated and the different branches can act as a check on the other branch.
Here is an interesting concept: Do not concentrate power, divide it up… federalism.
Who the hell are ‘you’???
Get your own name, loser!
I am running out of crack and David Brock isnt paying us with Crtsyal Meth anymore. What should I do, start using opiates? Will that help my melted brain at my young age of 18?
Oh God no, some demented loser obsessed with David Brock. How pathetic can you get!
How rich given you are obsessed with David Brock’s trolling program
Note to Peter Shill: take several hits of heroin and get back to us how it worked for you…..dumbass
Peter, don’t complain. Whoever he is he has improved the quality of your posts.
Allan, you were stupid enough to argue with him thinking it was me.
Actually Mr. Peter Shill I wasn’t sure one way or the other since you have changed your alias before. However, there was some merit in the statement if only to focus on where power lay. I thought that type of thinking represented a higher level of thinking than usually heard from you thus I wished to encourage that type of discussion rather than your usual stupidity that puts words together and says very little that can be believed or that will have value in the future.
Thoughts and prayers for those that have seen the end of Republican brand fascism. Now you all can blame the Democrats for the last two years of full control of Republican government. It must really mess with your minds that one part of the government will not be in a alternative reality. Good luck with the Trump-Putin ticket in 2020.
Is David Brock still alive or did his recent bathroom sex hookup increase the crack supply for his trolls?
👎🏽
Nancy Pelosi: Term Limits for Thee, but Not for Me
“the fact remains that they attempted to distinguish themselves from the “old Democrats” under Pelosi . . . and now the new House Democrats don’t look all that different from the old House Democrats. Pelosi’s still the speaker, Steny Hoyer’s still majority leader, and Jim Clyburn is still House whip — the same as when they relinquished power back in 2010.
Oh, and House Democrats plan on bringing back earmarks.
A Democratic House leader on Tuesday predicted Congress will bring back earmarks early next year . . .
Incoming House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) made the earmark forecast at a reporter briefing. He said they are a key part of Congress’ constitutional authority to tell the executive branch exactly where federal money should go.
“I am for what the Constitution says: Congress has the authority and responsibility to do: to raise and spend money,” he said.
https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/nancy-pelosi-term-limits-for-thee-but-not-for-me/
Such vivid ignorance should not be missed.
Republican brand fascism.
To make that point clear, please identify what actions by Republicans over the last 2 years equate to their brand of fascism.
Oh, that was not fascism, trust me that was not fascism.
You’ll know it’s fascism when there are massive reeducation camps, oh say, kind of like the ones the Chicoms have now in Xinjiang, and they are filled with former admins, bureaucrats, and other socially useless parasites, retraining themselves for something positive instead of just getting paid to whine and tear down the nation to suit the tastes of the global oligarchs and their running dogs in academia and the press.
for now, you’re safe, because conservatives are still deluded by all this individualism stuff. but, they can rediscover how to come together, given sufficient pressure. So, keep up the hostilities, and they will figure it out, soon enough. then, the disorganized sticks, will indeed become a bundle of rods, and you will have it!
https://www.usacoinbook.com/us-coins/1937-mercury-dime.jpg
Well if Trump can tell whoopers of lies, why not Pelosi? I mean look at the number of people that believe Trump’s lies? Maybe Nancy is looking for the same sort of following.
I don’t think anyone is saying she can’t tell lies. And when she does, she deserves every bit of calling out for those lies.
“Why they are nothing but a pack of cards! “
Not equal.
No it means some comments are the results of a programmers dictated talking points, no human presence required and lest your programmer objects may I remind that presence is required before claiming ad hominem while as is is more than suffiient for ad machina
some of THESE are unaccountably out of order
Sam:
Unsupportable assertion.There are no world approval ratings for Pelosi versus Trump. At home, she trails Trump by 9 points in approval ratings. Half the Dems didn’t support her bid to be Speaker. Quit making stuff up.
Only 15. Hardly half.
Quit Making Stuff Up.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/14/politics/nancy-pelosi-democratic-party-speaker/index.html
Maybe you ought to get a computer, David.
But he is a published mathematician, a former faculty professor and a scholar!!!
😉
Anonymous;
As Bugs Bunny would say, “Crazy – ain’t it?”
Do you ever think for yourself or is regurgitating talking points of the parties ruling class the limit. But when you have a mind of sand what else can one expect keeping in mind your programmer is in complete control and there is no other human presence.
Regardless of the Constitution, and with all of her flaws, the world has far more respect for Speaker Pelosi than for Mr Trump.
Yup.
Sam playing God speaking for the World and once again only regurgitating party programming. Ad Machina.
Like the world has respect for Angela Merkel, Theresa May and Macron all whose popularity in their own countries fall lower than that of Trump. Samantha, it sounds like you are breaking wind again.
I respect her ample bosom and fullsome charm. Honestly, I like the lady, in spite of her majorly flawed politics. She has a nice way of talking that’s easy on the ears.
Don’t compare her to the hateful harridan Hillary. Pelosi doesn’t deserve that.
As usual, Paul Krugman is sensible.
In Krugman’s own words he’s “right about everything.” Here his pompous ass exposed:
https://mises.org/library/fact-checking-paul-krugmans-claim-be-right-about-everything
Much like you except for that Nobel prize.
YNOT, still running around and saying nothing. When is a useful thought going to arise from your keyboard?
Even committed psychiatric patients have psychopathic leaders they think are “sensible”. David, you fit the mold.
Some are paranoid.
Yes, you have those distinct elements.
While you are barking at the moon.
Another miscalculation. The states are funded for their National Guards about 95%. None of them will not get paid and worse the states will lose that money since they aren’t covered under exceptions.
California’s was 328 million last year. and even though it has been funded the paying out is restricted same as it is for the actives. Another Pelosi Eff Up
Speaker Pelosi needs to read the Constitution to understand what’s in it.
Tom Nash – I think the Botox has seized her brain.
Tom, most Democrats rely on their ignorance of the Constitution when opening their mouths.
Not only that she once again broke her oath of office first by taking it and then by administering it. ‘for purposes of evasion’ comes to mind as does ‘support and defend the Constitution’
Then giving the oath to an openly anti constitutional socialist who was too stupid to register – Bernie style – as an independent.
Even that is a frail reed but what isn’t is the military now has enough to go martial law and move on them anytime they wish to do so. Tribunal, conviction and disposal from public office if not full ejection from the country.
Right now it’s a question of at one point does the Commander In Chief give the order? Or at what point does the military act not on it’s own but with constitutional authority.?
Equality is just an equivalence relation. It depends on what one cares to discuss.
But here Jonathan Turley has what I understand to be the right of it.
Besides, she wields a gigantic gavel and The Donald doesn’t get even a toy one.
Explain why some elected with a few thousand votes makes ANY representative higher in the succession than a Senator who has the votes of an entire state or for that matter why any cabinet secretary with no votes at all is in that chain. Reps only work for a very few people. They don’t even represent as Senators used to the entire state. Governors have more right. Pelosi on top of that is an oath breaker.
As I read the constitution, the Speaker of the House need not even be a representative. Any common felon will suffice.
That applies even more so to selecting nominees for the Supreme Court and the lower courts. When you consider the raw power or the entire nation they are given. The only criteria is nominated by the President and Confirmed by the Senate. Age, Gender, education, citizenship, physical condition, and religion is strictly a forbidden subject.
One can be a 12 year old hermophrodite from Mars. There is a great deal of trust heaped on one then 100. While we’ve seen the best of the best result we have also seen step two turn into a clown show. Worse the clowns now teel qualified for higher office solely on the basis of limited education and severely limited experience.
I’m of the opinion that those in the legal profession should be denied consideration as they have far too much of a vested interest and much of their interest is making the system too complicated for the body politic to discern . Thus they serve themselves
And yet the standards for a juror are ‘reasonable and prudent.’
But giving literal unknowns that power and with it the power to become solo dictators has provento be completely unacceptable .At the least they shoud be limited to recommending but not legislating nor dictating.
As for most votes OUR President received 55% to the losers 45% in a system that denies a tyranny of a few States while Pelosi has never received sufficient votes to be a Senator so short of the Grassley or President pro tempore theory of selection by a majority of 51% requires a majority of 50 and 1/2 states
While Speaker as was said has no real qualification required except like the referred to but meaningless popularity poll requires no ability other than acting ability or the ability to sell committee seats and chairs and then buy votes. Worse than the lower tier judicial appointments except for their life time appointments without supervision, let or hindrance.
This was supposed to communicate something?
If we’re strictly going off of votes, trump, who got less votes and a lower percentage of votes in 2016 than Romney I’m 2012 shouldn’t even be president. Not that that’s the only reason he shouldn’t be president (i’d say suggesting Putin should be able to interrogate Americans he selects is an “incredible offer” among a litany of high crimes and misdemeanors Mueller is investigating him for qualify) but your logic.
It was decided that rather than having the president select his own successor who wasn’t voted on at all by the people (I.e. Secretary of State), after his running mate, the speaker of the house (who is selected by the majority of house reps [or has been for the past century]) then the senate president pro temp- who is just the longest serving senate member in the majority party. So strictly based off votes, Pelosi is a greater reflection of the people’s will than Chuck Grassley, given that she was selected by representatives from 220 districts all of whom were just elected or re-elected, where as grassley is just the oldest guy from a majority of unpopular guys doing a 6 year term.
By your standards, Mitch McConnell is a great reflection of the people, given that he was selected in the upper chamber of Congress by representatives of all 50 states.
Grassley has been re-elected to the Senate 6-7 times, mostly by margins of 60-70%.
It’s unlikely that either Grassley or his constituents are concerned about your convoluted and dismissive “analysis” of who is “a great reflection”.
I just don’t like her. She is obstinate, and a Demo party animal. The rest of the American population can go pound sand. Nancy has only the party in mind. She ranks down there with Hillary with me, and I haven’t liked Hillary since 1993.
Go pound sand. 🙁
I haven’t liked trump since ever. He is obstinate (forcing a government shutdown he claimed he’d own, even over deals brokered by a republican led house and senate, and an agreement formed by his own Vice President), and a Russian party animal (regurgitating Putin talking points and propaganda on Belarus and the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan). Bone spur has only himself in mind. He ranks down there with Benedict Arnold with me. Does this mean you will go pound sand?
Benedict arnold was a great English patriot. perspective is everything
“Benedict arnold was a ***great*** English patriot”
Why? What made him great?
He was born an English subject. He first fought in the war for America and that made him a traitor to the Crown. But then he turned coat and served the Crown as a very effective double agent. Which made him a patriot to the nation of which he was a member at birth. It’s all perspective.
If the war had failed then George Washington might have been considered to be spat upon as Robert E Lee is now.
I try and see both sides of the coin.