FACEPALM: Nancy Pelosi Makes It Clear – People Who Want Trump Impeached Are the True “Patriots”

Beyond a shadow of a doubt, President Trump has NOT committed anything close to an impeachable offense.

No if’s, and’s, or but’s.

Free Trump/Melania Commemorative Coin! (Get yours today)

And yet, while at Georgetown Law School, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said Americans who want 45 impeached are the real “patriots.”

You can’t make this stuff up.

MODERATOR: “So, one of the topics that a lot of people are interested in is impeachment.

PELOSI: “Oh, because it’s a law school?

MODERATOR: “Because it’s a law school.

PELOSI: “Because they’re patriots? Because they’re Americans?

FACEPALM!

TrendingPolitics.com: All The Top Trump News WITHOUT The Liberal Censorship

RealClearPolitics has more on Nancy, who says “nothing is off the table” when it comes to subpoenas…

QUESTION: In the fight with the White House over the document requests, some of your members are frustrated has said that Congress should use inherent contempt powers specifically to fine individuals who are in defiance of subpoenas. The use of imposing fines on people who are defying congressional subpoenas?

HOUSE SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI: Well, that is a path. That would be inherent contempt. The contempt civil contempt, criminal contempt, and inherent contempt. And if they fail to–to a path I’m not saying an intent but I’m saying again then I mentioned to Katie that this is one of the possibilities that is out there. I am not saying that we are going down that path, I’m just saying it is not to be excluded. Nothing is to be off the table. So in inherent contempt you send a subpoena, they don’t honor it then hold them in contempt and if they do not comply then you can fine them. And then you can hold them accountable for the money that you fine them.

Trump knows exactly what to do with all the illegal aliens who have been detained by border patrol in an attempt to sneak into the country.

VOTER POLL: Do you oppose AOC’s Green New Deal?

He wants to drop them off in “sanctuary cities” and see how things work out.

Makes sense, right? Democrats love them some sanctuary cities, so why not take in more illegals?

But, of course, because it was a suggestion by Trump, Democrats are actually pretty ticked off with the idea.

Speaker Pelosi went as far as saying 45’s words are “unworthy of the presidency.”

From The Hill:

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Friday took a swipe at a Trump White House proposal to retaliate against political enemies by releasing detained migrants in “sanctuary cities” in Democratic strongholds, calling the half-hatched plan “disrespectful” and “unworthy of the presidency.”

One of the congressional districts identified by the Trump administration was Pelosi’s liberal San Francisco district, according to The Washington Post.

“I don’t know anything about it, but again, it’s just another notion that is unworthy of the presidency of the United States and disrespectful of the challenges that we face as a county, as a people, to address who we are: a nation of immigrants,” Pelosi told reporters as House Democrats closed out their three-day policy retreat in Virginia.

Trump’s tweets:

VOTER POLL: Do you oppose AOC’s Green New Deal?

Due to the fact that Democrats are unwilling to change our very dangerous immigration laws, we are indeed, as reported, giving strong considerations to placing Illegal Immigrants in Sanctuary Cities only….

….The Radical Left always seems to have an Open Borders, Open Arms policy – so this should make them very happy!

The bottom line is that Trump is exposing how ridiculous illegal immigration in America has become. The country is overrun with illegals as it is, so more will only serve to make things worse in the long run.

More people equals more government. Dems know that, which is why they fight for open borders.

Pelosi wants to lower the voting age to 16. She says it’s imperative to “capture kids” while they are young.

Think about that for a second. What’s next?

If the voting age is eventually lowered to 16 when children are still highly politically ignorant, will 14 or 12 or 10 be that far off?

From Free Beacon:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) on Thursday said she has “always been for lowering the voting age to 16.”

[…]

Pelosi suggested it was important to get high schoolers involved in civics when they’re a captive audience.

Pelosi: “I myself, personally, not speaking for my caucus, I myself have always been for lowering the voting age to 16. I think it’s really important to capture kids when they’re in high school, when they’re interested in all of this, when they’re learning about government.

WATCH:

Oh, Nancy. What a card.