Nancy Pelosi will become Speaker of the House for the second time today. I know there were (and perhaps ARE) some grumbles about Pelosi, but look… the lady gets sh-t done. Just look at how she regained the speakership – she negotiated and parlayed and hustled, because she understands how things work. She has an impressive amount of institutional knowledge about how power is structured in Washington. Anyway, to celebrate the new Congress and the Democratic majority in the House, Pelosi gave an interview to the Today Show. And she threw down some interesting pieces of news. As it turns out, the new Speaker of the House believes that presidents can be indicted, and she’s not ruling out impeachment. YAY.
Nancy Pelosi, who is poised to be the next House speaker, said that it remains open for discussion whether the Justice Department could indict a sitting president. Ahead of the new Democratic majority taking control of the House on Thursday, the California Democratic representative was asked whether special counsel Robert Mueller should honor the Department of Justice’s opinion that a sitting US president should not be indicted.
“I do not think that that is conclusive. No, I do not,” Pelosi said in an interview with NBC anchor Savannah Guthrie that aired Thursday on “Today.” Asked if Mueller could legally indict a sitting president, Pelosi said: “Let’s just see what Mueller does. Let’s spend our time on getting results for the American people.”
The Office of Legal Counsel’s guidance, issued in 2000, says, “The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.”
“It’s not the law,” Pelosi told Guthrie. “Everything indicates that a president can be indicted after he is no longer president of the United States.” Guthrie asked, “What about a sitting president?”
“Well, a sitting president when he is no longer president of the United States,” Pelosi answered.
Guthrie pressed again, asking, “A president who’s in office? Could Robert Mueller come back and say I am seeking an indictment?”“I think that is an open discussion,” Pelosi said. “I think that’s an open discussion in terms of the law.”
Pelosi also said in the exclusive interview, which aired Thursday, that impeachment “would be” very divisive, adding: “We shouldn’t be impeaching for a political reason, and we shouldn’t avoid impeachment for a political reason.”
Wait, what? “We shouldn’t be impeaching for a political reason, and we shouldn’t avoid impeachment for a political reason.” Nancy Pelosi, Queen of Riddles. Speaker Pelosi, The Riddler. We shouldn’t impeach Donald Trump because of politics but we shouldn’t NOT impeach Trump because of politics. We can indict a president but not a sitting president but we could probably indict a sitting president. I will untangle this riddle, I promise.
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.
here’s my interpretation:
you impeach based on the law, not your political preference. you can’t just impeach a president b/c you don’t like them – you have to have reason. but you don’t avoid impeachment proceedings b/c you don’t want negative political consequences. like – if the president breaks the law, you move to impeach even if it means losing political capitol for your party.
Yes, absolutely
That was my impression as well.
Yup, exactly. And that’s how it should be. She shouldn’t rule out impeachment because Mueller still hasn’t finished his investigation (and who knows what else Trump may do over the next two years that would warrant impeachment.) We just don’t know yet what Mueller knows. We cant say “impeach!!!!” just because we don’t like the president and we cant say “don’t impeach” because we are afraid it will hurt us (Dems) in 2020. Pelosi and her people will move based on the facts.
Nailed it.
Yes. Impeach or don’t impeach, but for the right reasons (and the right image, but that’s understood). So happy she’s coming back as Speaker.
yep
The Democratic House will investigate and hold hearings—drip, drip drip.
This was my interpretation as well. I agree 100%.
If you replace ‘political’ with ‘strategic’ it makes perfect sense (to me, anyway)
You impeach based on facts – not your political affiliation.
Pelosi is the Riddler to the fat Orange Penguin sitting in the Oval. Too bad Fat Penguin can’t wield an umbrella like ol Burgess Meredith. Nor toilet paper stuck to his shoe. Pelosi has her ass-kickin 👠 ready to whack Emperor Zero.
9 am Pacific, the House flips and the adults will be entertaining at the party. Get yer alcoholic beverage of choice and some popcorn!
The Fat Orange Penguin will come to bitterly regret running for the Presidency when he’s rotting in a jail cell.
I know we all think impeachment will make us all feel better after being treated like shiz for two years but Dems don’t have time to waste on impeachment, it’s time to focus on 2020. NOW. Or else the best case scenario is we’re stuck with President Pizza is for Straight People for 4 years.
Impeachment is never a waste of time when there are impeachable offenses AND they rise to the level of getting even this miserable Republican-dominated Senate to convict.
The focus needs to be every single day now, because the emergency is every single day now.
I agree, Murphy. Democrats need to focus on winning electoral votes in red states. They need to show they are willing to take a hard line on illegal immigration while supporting legal entry and they need to show that they understand the working poor are still hurting.
I’d take indictments and conviction over impeachment – that goes for the entire family and the extended ones (Kushner, his family, Mel’s folks if they did something).
What I am getting from this is : (1) it’s inevitable that impeachment proceedings are on the foreseeable horizon. and (2) She’s shutting down in advance Republicans who will whine away that Trump’s getting impeached bc Dems hate him. He will have gotten impeached for causing serious offence against the office, irrespective of his political affiliation. Yes, Nancy! I’m with you on this 1000%.
I’m feeling some optimism, for the first time in a long time. Really disgusting how the Republicans let Trump do anything. Hopefully that will change now. Trump is probably really anxious right now
I don’t think it’s a riddle at all – politics shouldn’t be the motivation for impeachment, nor should politics prevent Congress from doing the “right thing.” Makes total sense.
Now the party starts and I am so happy Nancy, the most hated woman in the Republican circle, is now one of the most powerful people in America.
She gets things done and has a good heart to boot. More women should see her as an inspiration.
I totally agree Maya. I’m thrilled Nancy’s in the big chair. She has killer political skills as well as the all-important, experience for the job. Now is not the time for a newby to be Speaker. America needs Nancy!
Mueller does not believe the current guidelines allow him to indict a sitting president and his is the opinion that matters.
As for impeachment, Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator in a crime for which the other conspirator is going to jail. It will be utterly shameful if Congress fails to do their duty in holding him accountable. All politics aside, he broke the damn law to illegally influence a national election. That is a serious crime.
My Pelosi interpretation: If a sitting president breaks the law, that is a non-partisan and legally valid reason to impeach. After he or she is removed from office an indictment can be issued… and also a pardon. Just ask Nixon.
I completely agree with her. If (WHEN) Mueller spills the dirt, the only reason to NOT impeach would be politics! It would be pandering to a crazy, extremist base, which by the way, is a MINORITY. I for one and tired of yielding to an extremist minority.
Pelosi is saying impeachment should never be politicized. And even if it is the right thing to do, she knows the GOP will absolutely politicize it. So, with that obstacle, it won’t work as a remedy. I agree with the commenter above who said it’s time to forget impeachment and focus all efforts on 2020 elections nationwide. Personally, I think they will indict him and force his resignation.
+1
President Pelosi has a nice ring to it. She is next in line if pres or Vp arent able…is that correct? ( Canadian here)
That is correct. While DOJ guidelines say a sitting president can’t be indicted, such consideration is not given to the Vice President. I think it is possible Pence could go down before Trump does.
Like Agnew. But the Speaker of the House does not become VP. The President gets to name a new VP and Congress confirms.
The VP needs to be confirmed by the Senate and if Trump goes down before that happens, Pelosi is in the big house.
Not necessarily. That scenario only comes into play if the President and Vice President are removed simultaneously without the opportunity for an appointment and congressional approval. See: Nixon, Agnew, Ford.
If the VP position becomes vacant, the president nominates the replacement and both houses of Congress vote to confirm. Only a simple majority is needed. It can happen very quickly. As Lightpurple says – see Nixon, Agnew, Ford, Rockefeller. I think Nixon nominated Ford within days of Agnew resigning, and Ford was confirmed, by overwhelming majorities in both houses, after just a few weeks. When Ford became president, it took a little longer to nominate and confirm his VP, several months of background checks and hearings. Still, in both cases, the Speaker did not become acting VP – the office was simply vacant until congress voted.
Substitute each major party’s name in her statement and it makes complete sense. The decision to or not to impeach should not hinge on partisan politics. And she is right.
I understood what she meant. She is saying you can’t try to impeach for political gain (like say how the GOP did with Clinton), but you also can’t avoid or overlook the need to impeach just because it isnt politically convenient.
Whatever, I like her. She has her problems like any politician, but I can appreciate the game she’s serving here. Now what we need is for the newbie liberal Democrats not to blow this right out of the gate by getting caught up in petty arguments over budgeting rules.
Just happens that those budgeting rules are going to going to derail the progressive agenda and do the Republicans’ dirty work for them.
I feel like the people protesting about PAYGO look incredibly stupid. Do they not know we currently have CUTGO in place? Passing PAYGO would replace that system, and the democratic agenda will be better served for it.
Kaiser, I’m counting on you, because I don’t understand this at all!
If Bill Clinton could be called to testify in front of a grand jury and congress discussed impeachment, even though it didn’t go ahead, surely there must be some grounds for doing the same with Trump?? The thought of another 2 years of him at the helm is quite depressing.
Are any of you following the PayGo dispute? It seems like it has massive ramifications for Medicare for all and free college
I’ve read a little bit about it. The issue is that right now, we are in a CUTGO system put in place by the GOP. We need to pass PAYGO immediately to end that old system.
We are so far away from having a unified vision for medicare-for-all and free college. We can’t put the cart before the horse. Long term goals shouldn’t decimate urgent, short term needs.