The “Trump for Speaker” Campaign Shipwrecks on the Shoals of Stupidity
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.
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?
It's like that made up rule for scotus nominations that they requested Obama to follow then later did whatever they pleased with Trump..
Exactly. If he wants it, they'll give it to him, legal or not.
That will last maybe until the first point of order at the longest. Meanwhile our government will shut down..
GOPniks bankrupting the government is like a yearly thing now, isn't it?
A party based on disruption, destruction and mayhem having no interest in actually governing and instead plunging the nation into chaos?
Yup. Completely expected.
Party That Believes Government Doesn't Work Ensures Government Doesn't Work.
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.
“Party that tried insurrection thwarted by parliamentary rules” isn’t as catchy
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.
Bold of you to assume that they follow their own rules.
Oh they won't, but it's a beautiful thing for Democrats to say that Republicans broke their own rules for this.
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.
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.
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.
So same as him being president?
Sure. Ask yourselves that. And then answer yes, because fucking of course.
Is chaos bad inherently? Not really
Is chaos in the government bad? Yes. Your job is order. (notably the opposite of chaos)
The Manly Manperor of Mankind does not approve of Chaos.
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.
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.
Someone ran spell check on the chiron. "Fromer President Trump...."
Yaknow, Fox News does have a lot in common with phishing emails… 🤔
I read that as "yak now" and it still works
…or forever hold your peace
Is there some angle here for helping with his indictments?
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.
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.
Honestly I'd love to see it lol would be funny
This is how we ended up with President Trump. Politics is not "funny". There was an insurrection. People died.
It really wouldn't. It would be a train wreck, not just for Trump but also the nation.
This is what I thought about him being president, and I regretted it.