<p><img class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-8292" src="https://punchingbagpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Screen-Shot-2019-01-23-at-1.59.19-PM-300x191.png" alt="" /><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;">President Trump on Wednesday told House Speaker Nancy Pelosi he would be <em><strong>delivering the State of the Union address on January 29th in the House, as scheduled</strong></em>.</span></p>
<p>“It would be so very sad for our country if the State of the Union were not delivered on time, on schedule, and very importantly, on location!” wrote Trump.</p>
<p>On January 3rd, <em><strong>Pelosi sent Trump a formal invitation to deliver his State of the Union address in the House Chamber</strong></em>. On January 16th, she sent a second letter urging him to postpone the speech based on security concerns related to the government shutdown.</p>
<p>In his response to Pelosi, Trump said the Secret Service and Department of Homeland Security had both promised there would be no issues holding the event as planned (even though both agencies are operating without funding).</p>
<p>Later yesterday, Speaker Pelosi <em><strong>responded by &#8220;uninviting&#8221; Trump,</strong></em> stating “I am writing to inform you that the House of Representatives will not consider a concurrent resolution authorizing the President’s State of the Union address in the House Chamber until government has opened.”</p>
<p>This has been an ongoing tit-for-tat. Naturally, President Trump had been expecting this response and has alternate plans already being prepared.</p>
<p><em><strong>However, in a </strong><strong>late breaking</strong><strong> announcement, Trump has said he will wait until the shutdown is over.</strong> </em></p>
<p class="p1"><span class="s1">Trump revoked Pelosi’s access to military aircraft, which effectively canceled her planned trips to Afghanistan and Brussels.</span></p>
<p>More than anything else, the drama over Trump’s upcoming speech is part of a personal war between the president and Pelosi &#8211; who is determined not to give Trump a single dollar for the border wall.</p>
<p class="p1"><span class="s1">Last week, she refused to consider a proposal for border wall funding that included several concessions Democrats had long fought for &#8211; including protections for DACA recipients, a three-year guarantee for immigrants with Temporary Protected Status, and additional immigration judges. </span></p>
<p>“Unless the government is reopened, it’s highly unlikely the State of the Union is going to take place on the floor of the United States House of Representatives,” warned New York Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D).</p>
<p>Before Trump can speak in front of a joint session of Congress, a resolution will need to be approved by both chambers specifying the date and time of the event.</p>
<p>Pelosi could block Trump from speaking in the House if she refuses to hold a vote on the resolution.</p>
<p>Such a move would be &#8220;remarkably petty of the Speaker,&#8221; said White House counselor Kellyanne Conway.</p>
<p>If Trump is prevented from speaking in the House, he is expected to deliver the address from the Oval Office, the Senate floor, or possibly even the US/Mexico border.</p>
<p>Trump has also spoken with lawmakers from Michigan and North Carolina who have offered to host the event.</p>
<p><strong>Editor&#8217;s note:</strong> Because of extreme bias in the mainstream media, most people don&#8217;t realize that the Democrat reasoning for rejecting the wall has no basis in policy, it is strictly a political maneuver designed to hurt Trump. On the other side, Trump has real, logical, professionally certified reasoning in his quest for the wall. We have said many times that security professionals respect walls as part of a basic security plan. Without a physical barrier, a security package is without a basic component.</p>
<p>The political reality is that without a wall, all border security becomes subject to the political whims of the funding committees in Congress, and can be removed easily. No way that is a good situation.</p>