You've said that much. Show me the part of the Constitution that authorizes Congress to appropriate money for such a "discretionary" or "contingency" fund from which the President can spend any way he wants to.
>The fool is the one who insists that it does but fails to back up
> their argument by providing the portion of the Constitution which proves it.
Kindly post the reply where I said anything close to that. I can wait.
Um, you're really batting a thousand today. Look, I asked you for the portion of the Constitution authorizing expenditures on disaster relief for foreign nations. In response, you called me a fool for not believing that the President has a "discretionary" fund to spend any old way he feels like. You NEVER provided the portion of the Constitution authorizing such a thing. I simply pointed out that the fool is the one who can't back up their statement saying the Constitution authorizes a thing without providing the portion wherein the authorization is made.
You are the one asking for the portion of the Constitution that authorizes it; I pointed out to you that there are plenty of things that we have and do that the Constitution doesn't name specifically.
Evidently you'd rather have the issue than face reality.