‘He Can’t Do That!’ Pelosi Loses Her Mind Over Trump Considering White House As Venue For His Convention Speech

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has her panties in a major bunch after President Trump suggested he might give his presidential nomination acceptance speech at the White House. Pelosi insists there is NO WAY this will happen.

From The Daily Mail:

‘You don’t have political events at the White House,’ Pelosi said in an interview with MSNBC Wednesday. ‘You can’t do it.’

‘Yeah, it’s very wrong,’ the House Speaker told MSNBC host Andrea Mitchell. ‘For the president of the United States to degrade once again the White House as he has done over and over again by saying he’s going to completely politicize it, is something that should be rejected right out of hand.’

‘Again, it’s notion-mongering, not serious thinking,’ she said, suggesting the move is another attempt to distract from the coronavirus pandemic.

‘It won’t happen, let’s put it that way,’ she argued. ‘Whether it’s legally wrong or ethically out of the question, it shouldn’t have even been something that was expressed.’

Trump initially suggested the idea in an interview on Fox & Friends Wednesday morning. The White House is one of several possibilities his team is considering.

From Fox News:

Earlier in the day, during an interview on “Fox & Friends,” Trump confirmed that his re-election campaign was exploring several options for the site of his Republican National Convention nomination acceptance speech later this month, including the South Lawn.

“We’re thinking about it,” Trump said. “It would be the easiest from the standpoint of security. You know these, they move with a lot of people, it’s a very expensive operation militarily. And law enforcement-wise. The Secret Service is fantastic. But it’s a big deal.”

The possibility that Trump may deliver one of his most high-profile speeches at the White House has raised questions over whether it’s a violation of the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal government employees from participating in partisan political activity — although the president and vice president are exempt.

It seems to me that the Democrats do not want Trump to give a speech ANYWHERE. First, people freak out about him having a convention in North Carolina and the governor there put up roadblocks. Then he rescheduled for Florida and had to cancel because of the high number of cases there. There was no way, given the optics, he could have gone forward with it there. Now, Trump is suggesting staying put right where he is and the Democrats still have a problem with it.

Maybe he should give his speech from Biden’s basement bunker! Democrats seem okay with Biden being kept there.

Would a speech accepting the nomination from the White House be unusual? Yes, but these are unusual times. It’s not like Trump would even be suggesting this if we weren’t in the middle of this pandemic.

Also, I’m no lawyer, but I don’t see what the BFD is about him giving a speech at the White House. And according to Fox News, this would not be a violation of the Hatch Act.

Of course, Republicans around Trump are pansies and are not backing the president. You have to give it to the Dems on their unity. This constant fracture and disagreement is just not something you see with the Democrats. The Daily Mail reported on a few senators who spoke out against Trump’s idea.

Republican Senator John Cornyn, of Texas, called it ‘problematic.’ And Senator John Thune questioned the legality of holding political events at the White House.

‘Is that even legal?’ he asked when reporters brought up the president’s suggestion to the South Dakota Senator.

‘I assume that’s not something that you can do,’ he continued. ‘I assume there’s some Hatch Act issues, or something.’

Senator Ron Johnson, a Republican from Wisconsin, suggested that other plans should be made.

‘Probably not allowed,’ he told reporters at the Capitol. ‘Probably shouldn’t do it.’

After all this uproar, maybe we’ll end up seeing another Trump speech this year at Mount Rushmore or some other place of national, historical significance.