Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Looks like you are wrong again, Pelosi has power over the CPB
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-HPRACTICE-115/pdf/GPO-HPRACTICE-115.pdf
§ 3. Removal From Office Both the Speaker and the House have the authority to remove the Clerk, Sergeant-at-Arms, or Chief Administrative Officer. Clause 1 of rule II; Manual § 640.
The Speaker of the House has the power. You just wont accept that she was the boss.That is not power over the CPB. At most, that's power over just one member. And even that power is to nominate or remove the House Sergeant-at-Arms.
Sucks to be you. Well over 1000 posts in this thread and you still haven't proven Pelosi was responsible for J6.
Pelosi can fire all fourOne member is responsible to the speaker.
One member is responsible to the majority leader
One member is responsible to the president.
One member can't vote.
Sure looks like the president has about as much input on the Capitol board as Nancy Pelosi.
Where is there any proof of what you say.You appear to be misinformed about the Speaker’s role and authority over Capitol security operations. Let’s clarify this directly: the Speaker of the House, while being a key figure in legislative leadership, does not command the Capitol Police or directly oversee the security operations at the Capitol. This is not a matter of opinion but of understanding how authority and governance are structured around Capitol security.
The Capitol Police are overseen by the Capitol Police Board, which indeed includes the House Sergeant at Arms. However, the Sergeant at Arms does not serve as the Speaker's personal representative nor acts under her direct command. The Sergeant at Arms, like his counterparts in the Senate and the Architect of the Capitol who together comprise the board, operates within a structure designed to maintain a separation from direct political influence, including that of the Speaker.
Furthermore, while laws governing security operations are indeed crafted by Congress, the implementation and operational command are distinct from legislative functions (got that?). The Speaker's role in legislative activities does not equate to operational control during emergencies or otherwise.
Your assertion that the Speaker has direct control through the Sergeant at Arms in an emergency conflates administrative oversight with operational command, a misunderstanding that leads to misplacing blame and responsibilities. This distinction is crucial and is designed to prevent the exact kind of political overreach you are implying. Therefore, it is inaccurate and misleading to claim that the Speaker has direct control over the Capitol Police or the security measures in place on January 6th.
Nope.Pelosi can fire all four
The Speaker of the House has the power. You just wont accept that she was the boss.
The Speaker can fire the whole board if she likes.
Pelosi can fire all four
It appears you may be right, partially. The president fires the Architect of the Capitol.Nope.
She could only fire one.
The majority leader can fire one.
The president can fire one.
The Capitol Police Board can fire one.
Prove she cantProve it...
What did i fail to provr?Why should I accept what you utterly failed to prove?
Why would you assume the speaker can fire the police chief?It appears you may be right, partially. The president fires the Architect of the Capitol.
I dont see anything that says the Speaker can not fire the police chief.
Prove she cant
What did i fail to provr?
Because the Speaker is the most powerful person in congress, the board can be fired, recommended to be fired, forced to resign, if the Speaker so chooses to exercise said power.Why would you assume the speaker can fire the police chief?
The police chief is appointed by the board. It’s logic that they’re dismissed by the board.
The speaker can only fire one member of the board. The board is 3 people. Technically they exert no more power than the majority leader and president.Because the Speaker is the most powerful person in congress, the board can be fired, recommended to be fired, forced to resign, if the Speaker so chooses to exercise said power.
The Speaker can force the firing, the resignation, of just about anyone, the Speaker is powerful.
And, not to fight or argue to disagree, other than using your logic, what do you have that supports your contention.
Because the Speaker is the most powerful person in congress, the board can be fired, recommended to be fired, forced to resign, if the Speaker so chooses to exercise said power.
The Speaker can force the firing, the resignation, of just about anyone, the Speaker is powerful.
And, not to fight or argue to disagree, other than using your logic, what do you have that supports your contention.
Because they are also ruled by the Precedents, House Rules, House practices.The speaker can only fire one member of the board. The board is 3 people. Technically they exert no more power than the majority leader and president.
Why do you insist that the speaker has more authority than they are granted by statute?
They’re ruled by house rules and laws. Precedent means nothing.Because they are also ruled by the Precedents, House Rules, House practices.
Why do you insist on ignoring everything that governs the Speaker.
I have not seen that the authority is not written into the statutes.
You are wrong there, precedents are as importantThey’re ruled by house rules and laws. Precedent means nothing.
The speaker manages the house Sargent at arms. That is one out of four members of the Capitol Police Board.
There are no laws or rules which gives the speaker any more authority than the majority leader.
What is the punishment for now following a “precedent”?You are wrong there, precedents are as important
