GAO rules Trump broke the law

[eagle1462010]

Up In Arms: Ukrainian Aircraft-Engine Plant Caught Up In U.S.-China Rivalry

Plenty Of U.S. Leverage

Despite the importance of the company to Ukraine's defense industry, no laws prevent him from selling his stake, Alexander Paraschiy, an industry analyst at Kyiv-based Concorde Capital, wrote in a note last year.

Bolton, though, is hoping Kyiv will block the sale, and Washington has plenty of leverage to apply. The United States has been by far Ukraine's biggest supporter since Russia annexed its Crimean Peninsula in 2014 and backed separatist formations in parts of eastern Ukraine.

The United States has given Ukraine more than $3 billion in aid, including $1.5 billion of military goods over the past five years and has promised to increase the annual allotment.

Ukraine's Antimonopoly committee is currently reviewing the proposed Motor Sich sale.

"I do think a government operating in its own sovereign sphere has the right to protect its defense industries and to look out for the well-being of the Ukrainian people. So, I think President Zelenskiy's new government obviously has that as its highest priority, and he's going to make sure before some transaction is allowed to go through that it is really the Ukrainian people who benefit," Bolton told RFE/RL.

The United States is advising Ukraine on the reform of its military, a necessary step before it would be eligible to join NATO, which Kyiv has said is its goal.

"If this deal [to the Chinese] happens, we will never be in NATO," said Denys Hurak, a former Ukroboronprom executive.

 

[colfax_m]

You think it’s against the law to threaten to withhold aid?

According to you people only if a Republican does it, perfectly fine for a Democrat to do this.

Trump did more than threaten to withhold aid.

No quid pro quo is why Trump held the funds..

Quid Pro Quo Joe got his demands met, so he didn't have to have the loans guarantees held.

“no quid pro quo” is why Trump held the funds?

that makes zero sense.

QPQ means "this for that". There was no this, and there was no that. No crime, no foul, no harm, no anything. Call it a big nothingburger.
Trump could have held the funds for many reasons or no reasons, its not a crime.

So y’all going to pretend to have no idea why he held the funds up? Mulvaney admitted why he did it. To get Ukraine to do his little investigation.

 

[eagle1462010]

According to you people only if a Republican does it, perfectly fine for a Democrat to do this.

Trump did more than threaten to withhold aid.

No quid pro quo is why Trump held the funds..

Quid Pro Quo Joe got his demands met, so he didn't have to have the loans guarantees held.

“no quid pro quo” is why Trump held the funds?

that makes zero sense.

You are dumber than a rock with lips!

Trump held the funds but got nothing in return and released them prior to the requirements of the law. How libtards conjure up a crime out of that is beyond comprehension.

Trump released the funds the day after the whistleblower account was made known to Congress. Not all the money was released because he waited too long and they couldn’t disburse the funds in such a short time frame.

And since when does the fact that a corrupt scheme fails mean that the scheme isn’t corrupt?

Trump wasn't obligated to give them anything.............Ask OBAMA ABOUT THAT.

Congress and the Senate appropriated lethal weapons under Obama.........to Ukraine and OBAMA DIDN'T GIVE IT TO UKRAINE......

Where was the IMPEACHMENT THEN...oh that's right.......didn't happen.

 

[eagle1462010]

According to you people only if a Republican does it, perfectly fine for a Democrat to do this.

Trump did more than threaten to withhold aid.

No quid pro quo is why Trump held the funds..

Quid Pro Quo Joe got his demands met, so he didn't have to have the loans guarantees held.

“no quid pro quo” is why Trump held the funds?

that makes zero sense.

QPQ means "this for that". There was no this, and there was no that. No crime, no foul, no harm, no anything. Call it a big nothingburger.
Trump could have held the funds for many reasons or no reasons, its not a crime.

So y’all going to pretend to have no idea why he held the funds up? Mulvaney admitted why he did it. To get Ukraine to do his little investigation.

Just as companies under Obama were asked to be investigated..............Trump has the same right......\

It's NOT A CRIME BRO.............and if it is a so called crime........lol...........Then the DNC needs to all go to PRISON for what they did there............Including Quid Pro Quo Joe....................who absolutely ABUSED HIS POWER for family personal gain.

Joe Biden and his son should be charged under the RICO ACT...........and FOR MONEY LAUNDERING.

 

[joaquinmiller]

This is the lefts star witness..............watch him get his ass handed to him......LOL



Now it's...it's......it's........the GAO saying he did it.......

I SMELL DESPERATION

That's no way to talk about Trump's bagman. He paid good money to be an Ambassador.

 

[colfax_m]

Trump did more than threaten to withhold aid.

No quid pro quo is why Trump held the funds..

Quid Pro Quo Joe got his demands met, so he didn't have to have the loans guarantees held.

“no quid pro quo” is why Trump held the funds?

that makes zero sense.

You are dumber than a rock with lips!

Trump held the funds but got nothing in return and released them prior to the requirements of the law. How libtards conjure up a crime out of that is beyond comprehension.

Trump released the funds the day after the whistleblower account was made known to Congress. Not all the money was released because he waited too long and they couldn’t disburse the funds in such a short time frame.

And since when does the fact that a corrupt scheme fails mean that the scheme isn’t corrupt?

Trump wasn't obligated to give them anything.............Ask OBAMA ABOUT THAT.

Congress and the Senate appropriated lethal weapons under Obama.........to Ukraine and OBAMA DIDN'T GIVE IT TO UKRAINE......

Where was the IMPEACHMENT THEN...oh that's right.......didn't happen.

Show me the congressional appropriation that Obama refused to fulfill.

 

[colfax_m]

Trump did more than threaten to withhold aid.

No quid pro quo is why Trump held the funds..

Quid Pro Quo Joe got his demands met, so he didn't have to have the loans guarantees held.

“no quid pro quo” is why Trump held the funds?

that makes zero sense.

QPQ means "this for that". There was no this, and there was no that. No crime, no foul, no harm, no anything. Call it a big nothingburger.
Trump could have held the funds for many reasons or no reasons, its not a crime.

So y’all going to pretend to have no idea why he held the funds up? Mulvaney admitted why he did it. To get Ukraine to do his little investigation.

Just as companies under Obama were asked to be investigated..............Trump has the same right......\

It's NOT A CRIME BRO.............and if it is a so called crime........lol...........Then the DNC needs to all go to PRISON for what they did there............Including Quid Pro Quo Joe....................who absolutely ABUSED HIS POWER for family personal gain.

Joe Biden and his son should be charged under the RICO ACT...........and FOR MONEY LAUNDERING.

What companies did Obama demand investigations of?

 

[joaquinmiller]

They said they held the money up because they wanted Zelensky to fulfill Impeached Trump's "favor" to look into the DNC server.

Why do all you commies deflect instead of answering a simple question? Does the truth scare you that much?

.

LOL

Deflection??

Just how fucking insane are you, con?

You said Impeached Trump didn't hold up the funds and I pointed out how his own administration confessed they did.

You're brain-dead to call that, "deflection."

it was delivered within the parameters of the law. That means there was no violation. Commie propaganda notwithstanding.

.

Dumbfuck, his own administration confessed he held up the funds.

And, it was still delivered within the parameters of the law. So there was no violation.

.

$35 million in Pentagon aid hasn't reached Ukraine, despite White House assurances

 

[eagle1462010]

This is the lefts star witness..............watch him get his ass handed to him......LOL



Now it's...it's......it's........the GAO saying he did it.......

I SMELL DESPERATION

That's no way to talk about Trump's bagman. He paid good money to be an Ambassador.

Yeah he did...........and he also paid to be a Hillary Clinton donor...........His wife is a die hard Dem supporter........and he ditched Trump during the election until he and his wife went OH SHIT......looks like Trump is going to Win.......and so they then donated to Trump

They PAY to WHOEVER is in power.........and he got that position via political donations...........

If Hillary had one could I say ..........that guy is the BAGMAN of HILLARY......because they gave her campaign money also.....

LOL

 

[joaquinmiller]

A major defense point made by the Trump echo chamber has been to claim no codified law was broken. That defense talking point no longer has any weight or viability.

Pelosi's strategy for delaying the delivery of the impeachment articles has paid off for Democrats. It gave time for witnesses, possible defendants and their legal advisors to evaluate their options causing new evidence to be released.

Bingo.

Article I

Using the powers of his high office, President Trump solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election. He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly announce investigations that would benefit his reelection, harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and influence the 2020 United States Presidential election to his advantage. President Trump also sought to pressure the Government of Ukraine to take these steps by conditioning official United States Government acts of significant value to Ukraine on its public announcement of the investigations. President Trump engaged in this scheme or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of personal political benefit. In so doing, President Trump used the powers of the Presidency in a manner that compromised the national security of the United States and undermined the integrity of the United States democratic process. He thus ignored and injured the interests of the Nation.

President Trump engaged in this scheme or course of conduct through the following means:

(1) President Trump — acting both directly and through his agents within and outside the United States Government — corruptly solicited the Government of Ukraine to publicly announce investigations into —

(A) a political opponent, former Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.; and

(B) a discredited theory promoted by Russia alleging that Ukraine — rather than Russia — interfered in the 2016 United States Presidential election.

(2) With the same corrupt motives, President Trump — acting both directly and through his agents
.........................................................................................................................

All the Trumper arguments are falling apart one by one.

(Yawn)...good for you. This does nothing to prove that the GAO's OPINION, countered by the OMB's, is anything more than OPINION...and when you use terms like 'scheme' you display your bias. The House Democrats completely FAILED to present any crime, evidence, or witness before it voted to Impeach the President.

Of course it's there opinion you idiot, an opinion based on the law. Just like SC rulings are opinion based on the law.

You folks are twisting yourselves in knots defending Duplicitous Don and one by one the excuses are getting crushed.

The Constitution specifically vests Congress with the power of the purse, providing that “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” U.S. Const. art. I, § 9, cl. 7. The Constitution also vests all legislative powers in Congress and sets forth the procedures of bicameralism and presentment, through which the President may accept or veto a bill passed by both Houses of Congress, and Congress may subsequently override a presidential veto. Id., art. I, § 7, cl. 2, 3. The President is not vested with the power to ignore or amend any such duly enacted law. See Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417, 438 (1998) (the Constitution does not authorize the President “to enact, to amend, or to repeal statutes”). Instead, he must “faithfully execute” the law as Congress enacts it. U.S. Const., art. II, § 3. An appropriations act is a law like any other; therefore, unless Congress has enacted a law providing otherwise, the President must take care to ensure that appropriations are prudently obligated during their period of availability. See B-329092, Dec. 12, 2017 (the ICA operates on the premise that the President is required to obligate funds appropriated by Congress, unless otherwise authorized to withhold). In fact, Congress was concerned about the failure to prudently obligate according to its Congressional prerogatives when it enacted and later amended the ICA. See generally, H.R. Rep. No. 100-313, at 66–67 (1987); see also S. Rep. No. 93-688, at 75 (1974) (explaining that the objective was to assure that “the practice of reserving funds does not become a vehicle for furthering Administration policies and priorities at the expense of those decided by Congress”). The Constitution grants the President no unilateral authority to withhold funds from obligation. See B-135564, July 26, 1973. Instead, Congress has vested the President with strictly circumscribed authority to impound, or withhold, budget authority only in limited circumstances as expressly provided in the ICA. See 2 U.S.C. §§ 681–688. The ICA separates impoundments into two exclusive categories—deferrals and rescissions. The President may temporarily withhold funds from obligation—but not beyond the end of the fiscal year in which the President transmits the special message—by proposing a “deferral.”4 2 U.S.C. § 684. The President may also seek the permanent cancellation of funds for fiscal policy or other reasons, including the termination of programs for which Congress has provided budget authority, by proposing a “rescission.”5 2 U.S.C. § 683.

https://www.gao.gov/assets/710/703909.pdf

This part totally derails anything you had.

The President may temporarily withhold funds from obligation—but not beyond the end of the fiscal year in which the President transmits the special message—by proposing a “deferral.”4 2 U.S.C. § 684


Please do not post in red. That is reserved for moderators. Admiral Rockwell Tory

You're not claiming Trump transmitted the requisite special message, are you?

 

[joaquinmiller]

This is the lefts star witness..............watch him get his ass handed to him......LOL



Now it's...it's......it's........the GAO saying he did it.......

I SMELL DESPERATION

That's no way to talk about Trump's bagman. He paid good money to be an Ambassador.

Yeah he did...........and he also paid to be a Hillary Clinton donor...........His wife is a die hard Dem supporter........and he ditched Trump during the election until he and his wife went OH SHIT......looks like Trump is going to Win.......and so they then donated to Trump

They PAY to WHOEVER is in power.........and he got that position via political donations...........

If Hillary had one could I say ..........that guy is the BAGMAN of HILLARY......because they gave her campaign money also.....

LOL

And if your Aunt Mary had balls....

 

[kyzr]

According to you people only if a Republican does it, perfectly fine for a Democrat to do this.

Trump did more than threaten to withhold aid.

No quid pro quo is why Trump held the funds..

Quid Pro Quo Joe got his demands met, so he didn't have to have the loans guarantees held.

“no quid pro quo” is why Trump held the funds?

that makes zero sense.

QPQ means "this for that". There was no this, and there was no that. No crime, no foul, no harm, no anything. Call it a big nothingburger.
Trump could have held the funds for many reasons or no reasons, its not a crime.

So y’all going to pretend to have no idea why he held the funds up? Mulvaney admitted why he did it. To get Ukraine to do his little investigation.

Here is Mulvaney's "official" reason why he held up the funds:
Mulvaney brashly admits quid pro quo over Ukraine aid as key details emerge -- and then denies doing so - CNNPolitics
"The only reasons we were holding the money was because of concern about lack of support from other nations and concerns over corruption," Mulvaney said in a written statement, adding, "There never was any condition on the flow of the aid related to the matter of the DNC server."

Not a crime, period.

 

[eagle1462010]

H.Res.162 - 114th Congress (2015-2016): Calling on the President to provide Ukraine with military assistance to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Obama pressed on many fronts to arm Ukraine
Defying Obama, Many in Congress Press to Arm Ukraine
The Senate has included provisions in its military policy bill to arm Ukraine with antiarmor systems, mortars, grenade launchers and ammunition to aid in its fight against Russian-backed separatists. It would also prevent the administration from spending more than one half of $300 million in aid for Ukraine unless 20 percent is earmarked for offensive weapons. The House has passed a similar measure.

So far, the Obama administration has refused to provide lethal aid, fearing that it would only escalate the bloodshed and give President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia a pretext for further incursions.

 

[eagle1462010]

No quid pro quo is why Trump held the funds..

Quid Pro Quo Joe got his demands met, so he didn't have to have the loans guarantees held.

“no quid pro quo” is why Trump held the funds?

that makes zero sense.

QPQ means "this for that". There was no this, and there was no that. No crime, no foul, no harm, no anything. Call it a big nothingburger.
Trump could have held the funds for many reasons or no reasons, its not a crime.

So y’all going to pretend to have no idea why he held the funds up? Mulvaney admitted why he did it. To get Ukraine to do his little investigation.

Just as companies under Obama were asked to be investigated..............Trump has the same right......\

It's NOT A CRIME BRO.............and if it is a so called crime........lol...........Then the DNC needs to all go to PRISON for what they did there............Including Quid Pro Quo Joe....................who absolutely ABUSED HIS POWER for family personal gain.

Joe Biden and his son should be charged under the RICO ACT...........and FOR MONEY LAUNDERING.

What companies did Obama demand investigations of?

Biden was the point man there you moron.................imagine that..........and he took advantage of it now didn't he.....

LMAO............wrong person is on trial here............Let me repeat.........RICO ACT.

 

[mudwhistle]

Gov’t Watchdog Office: OMB Broke Law With Trump-Ordered Ukraine Aid Freeze
Gov't Watchdog Office: OMB Broke Law With Trump-Ordered Ukraine Aid Freeze

The U.S. Government Accountability Office, a government watchdog agency that advises Congress, concluded Thursday that the hold President Trump ordered his Office of Management and Budget to place on Ukraine military assistance violated the law.

“Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law,” a GAO opinion said. “OMB withheld funds for a policy reason, which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA). The withholding was not a programmatic delay. Therefore, we conclude that OMB violated the ICA.”

The opinion outlined the reasons holds can be legally placed on congressionally authorized funding, and said the rational given for freezing the Ukraine aid did not fit within those reasons.

“The burden to justify a withholding of budget authority rests with the executive branch. Here, OMB has failed to meet this burden. We conclude that OMB violated the ICA when it withheld USAI funds for a policy reason,” the GAO said.
....................................................................................................................
So much for the Trumper assertion Trump broke no laws.

Fake news

https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...os_decision_about_trumps_ukraine_funding.html

 

[eagle1462010]

If you Ukraine wants to be with NATO........and the EU.........that MUST END............

But Ukraine has been selling to China for quite some time.........AGAIN........NADDA ON THE NEWS on this part of the equation. NOTHING.

 

[colfax_m]

Trump did more than threaten to withhold aid.

No quid pro quo is why Trump held the funds..

Quid Pro Quo Joe got his demands met, so he didn't have to have the loans guarantees held.

“no quid pro quo” is why Trump held the funds?

that makes zero sense.

QPQ means "this for that". There was no this, and there was no that. No crime, no foul, no harm, no anything. Call it a big nothingburger.
Trump could have held the funds for many reasons or no reasons, its not a crime.

So y’all going to pretend to have no idea why he held the funds up? Mulvaney admitted why he did it. To get Ukraine to do his little investigation.

Here is Mulvaney's "official" reason why he held up the funds:
Mulvaney brashly admits quid pro quo over Ukraine aid as key details emerge -- and then denies doing so - CNNPolitics
"The only reasons we were holding the money was because of concern about lack of support from other nations and concerns over corruption," Mulvaney said in a written statement, adding, "There never was any condition on the flow of the aid related to the matter of the DNC server."

Not a crime, period.

Thanks. Mulvaney has to walk back his oopsie. That’s not an official reason. That’s just what he is saying to cover for his boss.

Put him under oath and ask him. You can’t trust this administration without it. They feel no obligation to be truthful to the American people.

 

[eagle1462010]

Well thank you UKRAINE and RUSSIA.........

Seems China has now figured out how to make the better jet engines, which were part of the tech from Ukraine.......and the Engine Sales.............

China STEALING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY after buying from abroad....then making it themselves.........

 

[eagle1462010]

Ukraine Helps China Make Rhenium Superalloy for High Tech Warplanes

Popular Science’s September-9 article “China’s J-20 stealth fighter may be getting a new engine” that I reblogged on September 12 says that there is recently a new J-20 prototype no. 2021 installed with a new WS-10X engine better stealth with 14-15 ton vector thrust that enables J-20 to conduct supersonic supercruise without using fuel-thirsty afterburners.

According to the article, China is able to make such good aircraft engines as it has made breakthrough in rhenium-nickel superalloy technology. The article says, “Previously, the development of Chinese engines like the WS-10 were delayed as they suffered from quality control issues regarding single crystal turbine blades. China’s mastery of the rhenium superalloy (and by the private sector, no less) won’t just help China build current fighter engines, but also quickly research more capable, higher tech models.”

In Russian-Ukraine system, those technologies have already been applied for more than one or several decades. They have played a great boosting role in improving China’s aircraft engines.”

 

[miketx]

This is weak. And who is governing and watching over the GAO?

Let the Trumper rationalizations begin!

prove something scumbag.