Posted on 01/16/2020 7:57:13 AM PST by Swordmaker
The Trump administration violated the law by withholding appropriated security assistance to Ukraine, the Government Accountability Office said Thursday in a report.
The independent watchdog said the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) withheld the appropriated funds last summer.
The report said U.S. law “does not permit the president to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law.”
“Therefore, we conclude that OMB violated the [Impound Control Act],” GAO said.
The withholding of the aid is central to the ongoing impeachment proceedings against President Trump.
--This breaking news report will be updated.
Let’s explore a hypothetical. The aid under question was passed by Congress prior to the Ukrainian presidential election. Suppose that election had gone to a candidate who was a pro-Russian? Suppose further that newly elected pro-Russian Ukrainian President threw in with Vladamir Putin and joined him in his plans to reconstruct the Russian Empire, turned and with Russia militarily attacked their neighbors. Tell me, would President Trump still be obligated to expend those foreign aid military funds, sending javelin missiles, and support the new Ukraine regime, or would he be justified in making the decision to hold that aid in light of the change in international conditions?
This is the reason the Constitution put Foreign Affairs decisions in the hands of a single President and not in the hands of a committee. The fact is that international conditions can change overnight while Congressional decision act with the with the speed of an idling glacier.
Similarly, any acts of the Executive Branch, including the asserting that Ukraine’s military had taken the steps necessary to root-out corruption in their procurement procedures to approve the transfer of this military aid, are constitutionally merely advisory to the President, because all Executive Branch Acts are in the President’s name. They are NOT independent decisions or acts. The President has final authority under the Constitution. As Harry Truman ultimately understood, “The Buck Stops Here.” Not in Congress, who merely appropriates spending; not in the Defense Department, who advises its Commander in Chief; and not in the Department of the Treasury which cuts the checks; it always resides in the President. READ THE CONSTITUTION. None of those others is even mentioned. . . They are there to help the President do his job, not to do his job for him.
Not only was it in his authority but the aid was not actually withheld it was granted within the time period required therefore he could not possibly have violated the law.
What law?
USC title, please.
What fu*king aid was withheld?
And no mention of Biden on tape bragging about withholding aud?
This is such bull sh*t!
Nonsense, because he didn’t withhold anything. He merely delayed it. He wasn’t the 1st president to do so, and he won’t be the last either.
So, when Obama didn’t execute immigration laws, which Congress passed ... and some president signed ... he didn’t violate the law?
I really don’t think the liberals understand what will happen if by some miracle they actually succeed in removing Trump from office.
If they can remove him, it will be obvious that are no longer living in a representative republic.
So it boils down to Trump trying to protect the American Taxpayers money from crooked politicians on the take.
It can’t possibly be true because I hear the president in all administrations make decisions to withhold aid all the time and they threaten to withhold aid all the time under all kinds of circumstances. If a coup occurs and an enemy government takes over, are they trying to say the president must still send the “allocated” aid?
Also we see the court rulings whereby they acknowledge presidents have always had the authority to re purpose even defense spending from its congressional allocations. For example the recent reallocations to the wall.
pjmedia.com
Five Times Obama Put Conditions on Foreign Aid and Democrats Didn’t Care
BY MATT MARGOLIS DECEMBER 10, 2019
The hypocrisy of the Democratic Party over this impeachment nonsense knows no bounds. Last week I noted five examples of Barack Obama obstructing justice that they had no problem with. Sadly, there’s plenty more hypocrisy to point out.
Democrats have been so desperate to paint Trump’s actions as unprecedented, they’ve even argued that any time conditions are put on foreign aid that’s tantamount to an illegal quid pro quo. When White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney noted that conditions are put on foreign aid “all the time,” the media and the Democrats blew up, claiming this was an admission of a corrupt quid pro quo because, obviously, any condition for aid can’t be anything but. Right?
Of course, everyone knows that Mick Mulvaney was substantively correct. Conditions are put on aid all the time. In fact, some 2020 Democrats are calling for conditions on aid to Israel. Where were the allegations of a quid pro quo? It has already been established that there are legitimate reasons to want to investigate Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election, and even the Democrats’ own witnesses in the impeachment inquiry have acknowledged that Hunter Biden’s role at Burisma raised legitimate questions.
So, let’s get back to the issue of conditional aid. Quid pro quo or standard operating procedure? Well, if Democrats want to argue that conditional aid is a quid pro quo by default, then I guess Barack Obama should have been impeached.
Here are five examples of Barack Obama placing conditions on foreign aid to align with his political agenda that Democrats didn’t have a problem with.
5. Colombia
Despite years of giving Colombia military and economic aid, in 2016, Obama made that aid conditional on the Colombian government negotiating a peace treaty with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), a terror-group backed by former Cuban President Fidel Castro. FARC has “slaughtered and tortured hundreds of thousands of civilians, pumped unfathomable amounts of cocaine into the United States, kidnapped and raped children, and much more.” Yet thanks to Obama’s pressure, nearly half a billion in American taxpayer dollars went toward putting FARC terrorists in the Colombian government without ever being held accountable for their crimes.-—snip——more at pjmedia.com
The report said U.S. law “does not permit the president to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law.”
____________________________________________________
Does this include enforcing Marijuana laws? Because neither Obummer nor Trump are enforce those laws which are still on the books.
That’s already been addressed and answered. Congress appropriated the funds for the fiscal year and they were obligated and disbursed by the end of the fiscal year. Again, “no there there,” but another nice try.
And so we have another example of how deep the slime is in the swamp.
Oh yeah, what else does one find in the swamp besides vicious critters?
MUD!
Too bad the GAO has 0 credibility and adds nothing to the equation.
That’s already been addressed and answered. Congress appropriated the funds for the fiscal year and they were obligated and disbursed by the end of the fiscal year. Again, “no there there,” but another nice try.
there was NO crime.
America is upside down because the DOJ and FIB
are absolutely corrupt, absolutely seditionist,
absolutely treasonous, and NEITHER will ever
be trusted again in our lifetimes.
More deep-state horse shit. It’s getting pretty deep in D.C.
Funny, I do not find the GAO ruled Biden broke laws when he threaten to with hold $1 Billion Dollars...… but, that’s just Joe.....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.