Steube says GOP would change House rules for Trump

[no_hypocrisy]

Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) said House Republicans would change House rules if need be to make former President Donald Trump the next House Speaker.

* * *

Rule 26 began trending online as users were considering whether Trump could be Speaker given his felony indictments. Rule 26, included in the House Republican Conference Rules, states that 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.”

In a Thursday interview with NewsMax, Steube brushed off the users’ concerns, saying “First of all, Trump wouldn’t be a member of the House. So at the current moment, the rules don’t apply to him.”

* * *

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/steube-says-gop-would-change-house-rules-for-trump/ar-AA1hMudW?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=1a79e57ecb5d4f48acca8685c4702e43&ei=14


Ooooooooo-kayyyyyy . . . . . Tell me how Republicans can change THEIR OWN RULE when the SOTH pro temps can only take votes on the next permanent SOTH. IOW, they CAN'T take a vote on any other matter and that includes Rule 26.


Am I missing anything?

[sarcasmo]

1. The current GOP are always thinking, the rules don't apply to them.

[bucolic_frolic]

2. Correct. So they have to elect the next speaker who will change the rules and resign

and then elect Trump, and they need majorities in the House for both votes. This is a fantasy.

[underpants]

3. How would they not get a majority?

This would be a do or die vote for every Republican.

[bucolic_frolic]

4. Making Trump Speaker is beyond toxic. It would end their party.

Not electing Trump will incur Trump's rath. I'd say they lack a good choice.

[Ray Bruns]

11. We've all heard that before and he hasn't made the GOP toxic yet.

[Hugin]

14. What they don't seem to understand is that Trump's wrath is a Potemkin village...

If more than half of them voted against Trump there’s no way he could primary even a fraction of them. Probably even far less than that. What has them cowed is what happened to Liz Cheney. That’s about the only success that MAGA had primaring anyone in a State that was ripe for it and it still cost them a fortune.

They can’t afford to replace that many.

But, given the cowardice of the entire Party I don’t see that realization of the impotence of Trump occurring to them.

[LiberalFighter]

21. He would likely have difficulty when there is a point that people will stop donating to him

and supporting him. Campaigns need money even in the primaries and Trump is not likely to be able to make contributions like he supposedly did before.

And now he has been indicted with 91 felonies and found guilty of fraud.

[hatrack]

5. Uh, duh - of course they would

What did anyone expect? "Rules"? What are these "rules" you speak of? Are they like "laws"?

[MiHale]

6. Rules and laws are, to a republican...

Only suggestions that they think is bad advice.

[malaise]

7. That ladder failed

That is all

[Irish_Dem]

8. They can do what they want. Who will stop them?

[Hugin]

10. This has been my question for awhile now...

The only plan I have seen floated so far is denial.

Every non-zero possibility needs a contingency. Letting them do what they want because it would be “politically damaging” is not a plan. As has been proven time and again with this crew. It only emboldens them.

[Irish_Dem]

12. There should be a plan yes.

But it is a complex treatment plan.

In some cases we cannot be an enabler and codependent, supporting the criminals/sociopaths.
So you give them enough rope to hang themselves. And let natural consequences do the job.

Other times require that we come down hard on them.

I don't know if there is a plan in place or not, but there should be.

When dealing with ruthless sociopaths, we need to think about how to handle them.

[BlueKota]

13. I don't think they can be stopped, unless our side starts ignoring the rules too.

[bringthePaine]

9. 👍nice summation

[Norbert]

15. Sure glad the GOP is the party of law and order.

[3Hotdogs]

16. What would be the effect if Anal Fistula were speaker? He wouldn't have time to be there.

2/3 the time, he would be in some court or another.

30% of the time, he'd be scrounging for cash at campaign rallies.


--- and then there's time needed to cheat at golf.

[Wonder Why]

23. Does it matter? They don't do anything useful anyway.

[Dave says]

17. Very easy

They elect the next speaker whose sole purpose is to get the rule changed and resign. Then Trump is nominated and elected. Easy, peasy.

My point is it’s possible. If the MAGAts want Trump as SOTH, they’ll get Trump as SOTH.

[tanyev]

18. I can't believe even Trump's biggest fans in the House would want to sit there and listen to him

air grievances every day for several hours a day. Because that is the only thing Donny would do if he were Speaker of the House. He'd demand that all the Republican House members be in their seats to fervently cheer him on whenever he went on one of his rants. He'd demand several of them give up their offices so he could have a luxury office suite (remodel paid for by taxpayers, natch). And he'd hand over all the actual presiding work to someone else so he could retire to his luxury office for TV and fast food.

This has got to be mostly an exercise in trying to prove who loves Donny the mostest.

[vlyons]

19. Trump has endorsed Jordan, because he doesn't want to be Speaker.

He wants to be POTUS, so he can pardon himself for his fed crimes.

[LaMouffette]

20. Oh, don't worry! They'll change BOTH rules so that the Orange Menace can both be Speaker

AND vote on all matters.

The rules do not apply to Republicans. Period.

The only silver lining I can see if the unspeakably terrifying occurs and they choose Trump for Speaker is that there will be a blue tsunami in 2024 that will give us a majority in the House, if not a super majority. I hope.

[SouthernDem4ever]

22. Just proves how sleazy the republicans are

They would rather have a criminal in charge. Sickening.

[onenote]

24. Rule 26 is not a "House" rule. It's a Republican party rule

It's not binding, it's not official, it can be changed at any time, for any reason or reason, or it can be waived or simply ignored.

It doesn't require a vote by the full House and thus it isn't House business. The Republicans can vote anyway, anywhere, anyhow they decide. Democrats have no say in the matter (just as Republicans would have no say in any internal Democratic conference rules the party establishes ). The rules governing what an interim speaker can do have zero application to this.

This has been explained multiple times, but it appears that it continues to be misunderstood.

[no_hypocrisy]

25. Thank you. Got it.

[LiberaBlueDem]

26. Closer and closer

We are getting real close to being a banana republic

With donald as the big banana

[Josiesdad]

27. Here is another way such a gambit could hurt the Republicans...

If Trump’s name is thrown into the ring as a possible Speaker of the House… It is concieveable that a motivated member might make a motion to have him disqualified from consideration based on §3 of the 14th amendment. I could see all the democrats and possibly McCarthy and his loyal cadre holding a grudge against Trump et al for the orchestrated way he took out McCarthy. If that were to pass by virtue of a simple majority in the House it would prevent him from assuming the post but since the controversy arises as a matter internal to the House of Representatives, it is not reviewable by the courts. However, the open question would then become… if the House determines that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of Speaker citing §3 does that (un-reviewable except by 2/3 majority of both chambers) determination carry forward and disqualify him from the Presidency as well? A strong argument could be made that it does but obviously this has never been tested.

So... If Staube wants to roll the dice he better get a wip count on this issue too.