Pelosi officially disinvites President Trump from delivering State of the Union


It’s GAME ON as the battle over the State of the Union address intensifies to new heights. President Trump has been obstructed from appearing before a joint session of Congress.


It was only this morning that President Trump informed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in a letter of his intention to deliver his State of the Union address before a joint session of Congress as originally scheduled.



Within hours, Pelosi replied, officially disinviting President Trump from the previously scheduled event.



Now that both President Trump and Speaker Pelosi have officially dug in their heels, it’s anyone’s guess what will be the next move. President Trump has no constitutional obligation to deliver the address before a joint session. In fact, for much of the nation’s early history, the SOTU was delivered in the form of a letter. The advent of new technologies changed that, first with the widespread adoption of radios in American homes, followed by television.

President Trump has sole discretion as to the manner of delivering his State of the Union to Congress. He can do it by letter, as was the case for many years, or he can choose his own venue to deliver his remarks.

Many have suggested that the Senate Chamber would be an appropriate arena. The invitation would be solely within the purview of Majority Leader McConnell. Though the room is smaller, it can easily accommodate the entire Congress, Cabinet members, Joint Chiefs, and Supreme Court justices, though House members would have to be seated upstairs in the gallery.

There have been many other suggested options, invitations from various State Legislative Houses, public and private venues, to even at a location along our our southern border.

The choice is Trump’s. We suspect that the President will let Pelosi squirm for a day or two before revealing his next move.

Originally scheduled for next Tuesday, the 29th, we await President Trump’s final decision regarding the matter.


(3831 Posts)

7 thoughts on “Pelosi officially disinvites President Trump from delivering State of the Union

  1. iizthatiiz

    My preferred venue would be the Senate Chamber. It’s still Capitol Hill. He’s still delivering the remarks directly to Congress. Plenty of room on the Senate floor for Senators, Cabinet, Joint Chiefs, and Supremes. House members would be relegated to the gallery, with Pence and McConnell behind the President, and Nancy Pelosi no where in sight. She’s welcome to attend, but up in the peanut gallery with the rest of her caucus.

  2. Lana

    I would like to see him give it to the Senate too, with Pelosi in the peanut gallery with the rest of the irrelevant people! Rand Paul has already invited President Trump to give it in the Senate, although I’m not sure he has the authority to do that by himself. I doubt if Mitch would object, however.

    The Senate, for the next two years, will take on greater importance to the President than the House. Having SOTU there is symbolic, showing Pelosi that she is not as important as she thinks and certainly not equal to the President or even the Senate! She had the opportunity to be a real player in decisions, but now Trump will by-pass her as much as possible. With a little creative thinking, which he has, he will find this is possible surprisingly often. She has given up some psychological authority in trying to have a power play with the President. (Is she nuts???)

    The only other possible place to give it would be in the Oval office. It’s a matter of optics/psychology again. He obviously “owns” the White House and does not have to seek permission from anyone to act in the official capacity of President to give it there. We would also be reminded that he is the only one who CAN give a SOTU message there.

    Having it anywhere else would be like Pelosi has exiled him away from where official business is done. Can’t have that.

    He should just shrug as if it were unimportant and say, “Okay, Nancy, I’ll just give it in the Senate then.” And let it go at that. Because, really, it IS unimportant. Pelosi will have only a Pyrrhic victory and lose in the long run, but Trump will not lose at all.

    If she knows she will be relegated to the peanut gallery, she may decide to not go at all. No one will miss her much, and she will hate that. She will not be begged to change her mind because no one will care. RBG’s absence will get more talk than Nancy’s, everyone will talk about where SCOTUS goes from here without RBG, but asking the same question about the House under Pelosi’s leadership isn’t worth the yawn. She has given up her relevance and has only a gavel as the sign of her authority. She is losing control over her own Democrats and is caught in never-never land between them and her donors. It will be a long two years for her too, if she lasts that long as Speaker.

  3. Lana

    Where is the Open Thread? We could have an open thread for a week or a month until the postings are up again. There are too many things to discuss!

    For instance, I figured out another reason for prolonging the shut-down:
    There are a number of factors about when military tribunals can be used for civilians. An important reason for not using civilian courts is when a person cannot be reasonably given a fair and speedy trial in a civilian court for one reason or another. Treason charges are usually held in military courts, even for civilians. And when the criminal charges involve a foreign crime or government, they are often held in military courts.

    In Ex Parte Milligan, it says that military tribunals can be used when civilian courts are not open. This often happens during times of civil unrest that shuts down the infrastructure.

    But, in this shut down, federal courts have been closed.

    So, not only can President Trump do some reorganizing of government after it has been shut down over 30 days, but he also has another reason for referring some important cases to military tribunals. In case he needs another reason.

    1. RedDaveR

      There is an Open Thread Jan 22-24 but it is no longer listed under recent posts. It might be a good idea to put up one whenever the old thread disappears from recent posts.

  4. M.Minnesota

    This was just a repeat of the arrogant actions of Pelosi when she was Speaker during Sotero’s Administration. She threatened and/or did turn off the microphones and lights of Republicans trying to speak in the House of Representatives.

Leave a Reply