GAO rules Trump broke the law

[martybegan]

No, I said what I said you milquetoast SJW twatwaddle.

How many of their "opinions" have actually led to prosecutions.

They are supposed to be the accounting machine for Congress until some morons expanded their scope outside their area of expertise.

And yet you're the guy who didn't know it was part of the GAO's mission to render legal opinions on appropriation matters. Maybe you don't know the definition of ignorant.

You do have your party-line insults down - I'll give you that.

The GAO has always been number crunchers. The new "mandate" is outside their scope and expertise.

Here is some observations on their "opinion" from someone who knows what they are talking about.

Four Observations Concerning the GAO Decision

But GAO has not come close to resolving these factual issues or analyzing the complex legal issues in this situation. And it was truly reckless for GAO to suggest otherwise. They offered only a threadbare constitutional analysis, during this heated and polarized time, hours before the impeachment trial began.

Yes. Brilliantly. Like this:

If Trump's underlings delayed making a timely transfer of funds to Ukraine, as required by the relevant appropriations act, then it is they who are legally responsible (though the president always bears political responsibility for the actions of all his subordinates in the executive branch).

Documents, which the Senate will likely refuse to consider, show:

According to a rough transcript released by the White House, the July 25 call between Trump and Zelenskiy took place between 9:03 and 9:33 a.m.

At 11:04 a.m., an official with the White House's budget office, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Mike Duffey, sent an email to Deputy Secretary of Defense David Norquist, the chief of staff to Defense Secretary Mark Esper and the Pentagon's chief financial officer telling them to withhold the aid to Ukraine, the documents showed.

"Based on guidance I have received and in light of the Administration’s plan to review assistance to Ukraine, including the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, please hold off on any additional DoD obligations of these funds, pending direction from that process," the email from Duffey said, according to the documents.

White House official ordered aid to Ukraine be withheld 91 minutes after Trump call with Ukraine president, documents show

The blogger ignores that the OMB was acting at the express direction of unnamed persons. That's pretty fucking convenient, if you want to shift blame to OMB. He does conclude he will have to think more about Trump's failure to make the requisite notification to Congress over the hold on aid.

By and large, he's just bullshitting:

Second, did GAO provide any evidence to show that President Trump personally directed his subordinates to withhold the funds? I hesitate before concluding that the President ordered his subordinates to violate the law, when there is a dispute about what exactly the law requires.

Here, he's astutely avoiding mention of witnesses and documents blocked from the inquiry. How that's an argument against the GAO is a mystery.

This is his purported third point:

Third, did GAO provide any evidence to show that President Trump directed his subordinates to deliberately violate the ICA? This question is premised on a disputed legal issue: was the withholding of certain funds, for some period of time, a violation of the ICA. I don't have nearly enough expertise in budgetary law to opine on this question.

Four, did GAO find that President Trump violated the Constitution's Take Care Clause? No. The decision states, "Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law."


Did you even read the article you linked?

Yes, and mostly its about GAO not providing any actual evidence, just assumptions. What the guy is doing is pointing the holes in GAO's legal opinion.

He's just filling space. He doesn't have a point worth making.

Lol, after you spent all that time quoting and referencing snippets, you read the whole thing and found you didn't agree with it and thus "filling space"

Go back to your hackery, Hacky McHack-hack.

 

[martybegan]

Clinton perjured himself

He did so while cooperating with the investigation. Something Trump refuses to do. Are you in favor of Trump testifying under oath? Or Bolton? Or Mulvaney? Or Giuliani? Or Parnas? Or Duffy? Or Perry?

Talk about deflection. Clinton committed perjury.

Trump hurt your feeeewwwings, you delicate wibble snowflake.

He did so while cooperating with the investigation. Something Trump refuses to do. Are you in favor of Trump testifying under oath? Or Bolton? Or Mulvaney? Or Giuliani? Or Parnas? Or Duffy? Or Perry? How about turning over documents?

Schiff: Intel Community Withholding Docs Relevant To Senate Trial Is ‘Deeply Concerning
Schiff: Intel Community Withholding Docs Relevant To Senate Trial Is 'Deeply Concerning'

How is lying cooperating?

Sorry, you are still a butthurt little progressive fan-boi.

Did he or did he not agree to testify under oath and in fact give sworn testimony? What has Trump done that comes within a million miles of that level of cooperation?

And Clinton was then dumb enough to lie under said Oath. But he figured partisan hacks like you would give him a pass.

 

[martybegan]

No, I said what I said you milquetoast SJW twatwaddle.

How many of their "opinions" have actually led to prosecutions.

They are supposed to be the accounting machine for Congress until some morons expanded their scope outside their area of expertise.

And yet you're the guy who didn't know it was part of the GAO's mission to render legal opinions on appropriation matters. Maybe you don't know the definition of ignorant.

You do have your party-line insults down - I'll give you that.

The GAO has always been number crunchers. The new "mandate" is outside their scope and expertise.

Here is some observations on their "opinion" from someone who knows what they are talking about.

Four Observations Concerning the GAO Decision

But GAO has not come close to resolving these factual issues or analyzing the complex legal issues in this situation. And it was truly reckless for GAO to suggest otherwise. They offered only a threadbare constitutional analysis, during this heated and polarized time, hours before the impeachment trial began.

Yes. Brilliantly. Like this:

If Trump's underlings delayed making a timely transfer of funds to Ukraine, as required by the relevant appropriations act, then it is they who are legally responsible (though the president always bears political responsibility for the actions of all his subordinates in the executive branch).

Documents, which the Senate will likely refuse to consider, show:

According to a rough transcript released by the White House, the July 25 call between Trump and Zelenskiy took place between 9:03 and 9:33 a.m.

At 11:04 a.m., an official with the White House's budget office, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Mike Duffey, sent an email to Deputy Secretary of Defense David Norquist, the chief of staff to Defense Secretary Mark Esper and the Pentagon's chief financial officer telling them to withhold the aid to Ukraine, the documents showed.

"Based on guidance I have received and in light of the Administration’s plan to review assistance to Ukraine, including the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, please hold off on any additional DoD obligations of these funds, pending direction from that process," the email from Duffey said, according to the documents.

White House official ordered aid to Ukraine be withheld 91 minutes after Trump call with Ukraine president, documents show

The blogger ignores that the OMB was acting at the express direction of unnamed persons. That's pretty fucking convenient, if you want to shift blame to OMB. He does conclude he will have to think more about Trump's failure to make the requisite notification to Congress over the hold on aid.

By and large, he's just bullshitting:

Second, did GAO provide any evidence to show that President Trump personally directed his subordinates to withhold the funds? I hesitate before concluding that the President ordered his subordinates to violate the law, when there is a dispute about what exactly the law requires.

Here, he's astutely avoiding mention of witnesses and documents blocked from the inquiry. How that's an argument against the GAO is a mystery.

This is his purported third point:

Third, did GAO provide any evidence to show that President Trump directed his subordinates to deliberately violate the ICA? This question is premised on a disputed legal issue: was the withholding of certain funds, for some period of time, a violation of the ICA. I don't have nearly enough expertise in budgetary law to opine on this question.

Four, did GAO find that President Trump violated the Constitution's Take Care Clause? No. The decision states, "Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law."


Did you even read the article you linked?

Yes, and mostly its about GAO not providing any actual evidence, just assumptions. What the guy is doing is pointing the holes in GAO's legal opinion.

You mean he is trying but failing to poke holes.

He succeeded, where all you have is "ORANGE MAN BAD"

 

[joaquinmiller]

And yet you're the guy who didn't know it was part of the GAO's mission to render legal opinions on appropriation matters. Maybe you don't know the definition of ignorant.

You do have your party-line insults down - I'll give you that.

The GAO has always been number crunchers. The new "mandate" is outside their scope and expertise.

Here is some observations on their "opinion" from someone who knows what they are talking about.

Four Observations Concerning the GAO Decision

But GAO has not come close to resolving these factual issues or analyzing the complex legal issues in this situation. And it was truly reckless for GAO to suggest otherwise. They offered only a threadbare constitutional analysis, during this heated and polarized time, hours before the impeachment trial began.

Yes. Brilliantly. Like this:

If Trump's underlings delayed making a timely transfer of funds to Ukraine, as required by the relevant appropriations act, then it is they who are legally responsible (though the president always bears political responsibility for the actions of all his subordinates in the executive branch).

Documents, which the Senate will likely refuse to consider, show:

According to a rough transcript released by the White House, the July 25 call between Trump and Zelenskiy took place between 9:03 and 9:33 a.m.

At 11:04 a.m., an official with the White House's budget office, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Mike Duffey, sent an email to Deputy Secretary of Defense David Norquist, the chief of staff to Defense Secretary Mark Esper and the Pentagon's chief financial officer telling them to withhold the aid to Ukraine, the documents showed.

"Based on guidance I have received and in light of the Administration’s plan to review assistance to Ukraine, including the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, please hold off on any additional DoD obligations of these funds, pending direction from that process," the email from Duffey said, according to the documents.

White House official ordered aid to Ukraine be withheld 91 minutes after Trump call with Ukraine president, documents show

The blogger ignores that the OMB was acting at the express direction of unnamed persons. That's pretty fucking convenient, if you want to shift blame to OMB. He does conclude he will have to think more about Trump's failure to make the requisite notification to Congress over the hold on aid.

By and large, he's just bullshitting:

Second, did GAO provide any evidence to show that President Trump personally directed his subordinates to withhold the funds? I hesitate before concluding that the President ordered his subordinates to violate the law, when there is a dispute about what exactly the law requires.

Here, he's astutely avoiding mention of witnesses and documents blocked from the inquiry. How that's an argument against the GAO is a mystery.

This is his purported third point:

Third, did GAO provide any evidence to show that President Trump directed his subordinates to deliberately violate the ICA? This question is premised on a disputed legal issue: was the withholding of certain funds, for some period of time, a violation of the ICA. I don't have nearly enough expertise in budgetary law to opine on this question.

Four, did GAO find that President Trump violated the Constitution's Take Care Clause? No. The decision states, "Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law."


Did you even read the article you linked?

Yes, and mostly its about GAO not providing any actual evidence, just assumptions. What the guy is doing is pointing the holes in GAO's legal opinion.

He's just filling space. He doesn't have a point worth making.

Lol, after you spent all that time quoting and referencing snippets, you read the whole thing and found you didn't agree with it and thus "filling space"

Go back to your hackery, Hacky McHack-hack.

It certainly didn't do what you wanted it to do. My 'filling space' conclusion was - as you noted - based on reading it, quoting it, and referencing snippets. You? Just a printed fart.

 

[Coyote]

Colfax lost another debate. Shocking. Trump will be acquitted as the impeachment was a political scam perpetrated by the Democrats.

Trump will be acquitted for one reason only: the Republicans, ahead of trial, decided that.

Who ever heard of a trial conducted like that?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Colfax lost another debate. Shocking. Trump will be acquitted as the impeachment was a political scam perpetrated by the Democrats.

Trump will be acquitted for one reason only: the Republicans, ahead of trial, decided that.

Who ever heard of a trial conducted like that?

Trump was impeached for one reason only. The Democrats. Who ever heard of an impeachment like that where one persons actually switched parties LOL.

 

[Coyote]

The whistle blower is not the accuser. He is a messenger. Everything in the report was independently confirmed. There is no need for him to be facing Trump.

Right. The whistleblower is just the messenger. Of what? The accusations. Accusations that Trump was this dangerous power-mad dictator so bad that he had to blow the whistle. If he isn't accusing Trump of anything, then why the need for total anonymity and protection? Most everything in the report is hearsay confirmed only by more hearsay from biased anti-Trump democrats. Adam Schiff practically had his tongue up all their asses. They hardly needed to even testify because Adam Schiff spoke for all of them putting words in their mouths. Let's get the whistleblower on the stand and start a real hearing now.

The whistle blower's identity is protected under LAW. Everything he reported has been independently verified through sworn testimony. Trump can face THOSE who testified and who's information is more than direct.

You know darn well if his identity is revealed, he will lose his job, possibly his life, his family will be threatened, all because he reported, legally, under whistle blower laws, actions he saw as misconduct - that were affirmed by those higher up.

What will that do to whistle blower protections later on - who would take that risk to report wrong doing? Think for a moment - you won't always have a Republican president. What if it's a corrupt Democrat being reported on?

That is what is so damn short sighted about this. There is no NEED for the whistle blower to testify other than to vilify him or her, and ruin their life.

 

[Coyote]

Colfax lost another debate. Shocking. Trump will be acquitted as the impeachment was a political scam perpetrated by the Democrats.

Trump will be acquitted for one reason only: the Republicans, ahead of trial, decided that.

Who ever heard of a trial conducted like that?

Trump was impeached for one reason only. The Democrats. Who ever heard of an impeachment like that where one persons actually switched parties LOL.

Blah blah blah. It's what you guys did to Clinton.

 

[colfax_m]

Colfax lost another debate. Shocking. Trump will be acquitted as the impeachment was a political scam perpetrated by the Democrats.

Trump will be acquitted for one reason only: the Republicans, ahead of trial, decided that.

Who ever heard of a trial conducted like that?

Republicans are violating their oath and they know it. Has nothing to do with facts. It's just partisanship.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Colfax lost another debate. Shocking. Trump will be acquitted as the impeachment was a political scam perpetrated by the Democrats.

Trump will be acquitted for one reason only: the Republicans, ahead of trial, decided that.

Who ever heard of a trial conducted like that?

Trump was impeached for one reason only. The Democrats. Who ever heard of an impeachment like that where one persons actually switched parties LOL.

Blah blah blah. It's what you guys did to Clinton.

You guys? Firstly I am an Independent, secondly I was 18 when that happened, thirdly Clinton did lie under oath. Still should not have been impeached. Trump was impeached on an opinion.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Colfax lost another debate. Shocking. Trump will be acquitted as the impeachment was a political scam perpetrated by the Democrats.

Trump will be acquitted for one reason only: the Republicans, ahead of trial, decided that.

Who ever heard of a trial conducted like that?

Republicans are violating their oath and they know it. Has nothing to do with facts. It's just partisanship.

Democrats are violating their oath and they know it. It has nothing to do with facts. It’s just partisanship.

 

[Faun]

Colfax lost another debate. Shocking. Trump will be acquitted as the impeachment was a political scam perpetrated by the Democrats.

Trump will be acquitted for one reason only: the Republicans, ahead of trial, decided that.

Who ever heard of a trial conducted like that?

Trump was impeached for one reason only. The Democrats. Who ever heard of an impeachment like that where one persons actually switched parties LOL.

Blah blah blah. It's what you guys did to Clinton.

You guys? Firstly I am an Independent, secondly I was 18 when that happened, thirdly Clinton did lie under oath. Still should not have been impeached. Trump was impeached on an opinion.

Uh, no, Impeached Trump was impeached for soliciting foreign aid for his campaign for re-election.

"Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it..." - Impeached Trump​

Perfect!

 

[Coyote]

Colfax lost another debate. Shocking. Trump will be acquitted as the impeachment was a political scam perpetrated by the Democrats.

Trump will be acquitted for one reason only: the Republicans, ahead of trial, decided that.

Who ever heard of a trial conducted like that?

Trump was impeached for one reason only. The Democrats. Who ever heard of an impeachment like that where one persons actually switched parties LOL.

Blah blah blah. It's what you guys did to Clinton.

You guys? Firstly I am an Independent, secondly I was 18 when that happened, thirdly Clinton did lie under oath. Still should not have been impeached. Trump was impeached on an opinion.

Point taken. IMO - Clinton was a scoundrel, but what he did was not impeachable. He deserved to be disbarred. But what ever happened to Congressional censure as an option?

I don't see Trump's situation as equivalent and it's not just because I dislike Trump. IMO - and my opinion only - given the testimony we've heard, the many connections and contradictions, there is in my mind a serious abuse of power. What's unfortunate is this is obscured by the fact that the Dems have had it out for Trump from the beginning, but that doesn't mean this particular thing is not a serious issue.

Using presidential power for personal political gain, disregarding national interests, is very serious and it shouldn't be partisan.

 

[Coyote]

Colfax lost another debate. Shocking. Trump will be acquitted as the impeachment was a political scam perpetrated by the Democrats.

Trump will be acquitted for one reason only: the Republicans, ahead of trial, decided that.

Who ever heard of a trial conducted like that?

Republicans are violating their oath and they know it. Has nothing to do with facts. It's just partisanship.

Democrats are violating their oath and they know it. It has nothing to do with facts. It’s just partisanship.

What oath are they violating?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Colfax lost another debate. Shocking. Trump will be acquitted as the impeachment was a political scam perpetrated by the Democrats.

Trump will be acquitted for one reason only: the Republicans, ahead of trial, decided that.

Who ever heard of a trial conducted like that?

Trump was impeached for one reason only. The Democrats. Who ever heard of an impeachment like that where one persons actually switched parties LOL.

Blah blah blah. It's what you guys did to Clinton.

You guys? Firstly I am an Independent, secondly I was 18 when that happened, thirdly Clinton did lie under oath. Still should not have been impeached. Trump was impeached on an opinion.

Uh, no, Impeached Trump was impeached for soliciting foreign aid for his campaign for re-election.

"Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it..." - Impeached Trump​

Perfect!

Yes he said our country has been through a lot. Can you help us. The fact that we disagree shows it’s an opinions. We agree that WJC lied under oath as he did have relations with Monica.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Colfax lost another debate. Shocking. Trump will be acquitted as the impeachment was a political scam perpetrated by the Democrats.

Trump will be acquitted for one reason only: the Republicans, ahead of trial, decided that.

Who ever heard of a trial conducted like that?

Trump was impeached for one reason only. The Democrats. Who ever heard of an impeachment like that where one persons actually switched parties LOL.

Blah blah blah. It's what you guys did to Clinton.

You guys? Firstly I am an Independent, secondly I was 18 when that happened, thirdly Clinton did lie under oath. Still should not have been impeached. Trump was impeached on an opinion.

Point taken. IMO - Clinton was a scoundrel, but what he did was not impeachable. He deserved to be disbarred. But what ever happened to Congressional censure as an option?

I don't see Trump's situation as equivalent and it's not just because I dislike Trump. IMO - and my opinion only - given the testimony we've heard, the many connections and contradictions, there is in my mind a serious abuse of power. What's unfortunate is this is obscured by the fact that the Dems have had it out for Trump from the beginning, but that doesn't mean this particular thing is not a serious issue.

Using presidential power for personal political gain, disregarding national interests, is very serious and it shouldn't be partisan.

I disagree and henceforth Trump was impeached on an opinion. Clinton did lie and stupidly. He likes women, what guy doesn’t...sans Mayor Pete. Stupid to impeach WJC and stupid to impeach Trump because while we fight on this board you and I are overall rational people and cannot see eye to eye on this impeachment we do see eye to eye on WJC’s.

 

[Faun]

Trump will be acquitted for one reason only: the Republicans, ahead of trial, decided that.

Who ever heard of a trial conducted like that?

Trump was impeached for one reason only. The Democrats. Who ever heard of an impeachment like that where one persons actually switched parties LOL.

Blah blah blah. It's what you guys did to Clinton.

You guys? Firstly I am an Independent, secondly I was 18 when that happened, thirdly Clinton did lie under oath. Still should not have been impeached. Trump was impeached on an opinion.

Uh, no, Impeached Trump was impeached for soliciting foreign aid for his campaign for re-election.

"Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it..." - Impeached Trump​

Perfect!

Yes he said our country has been through a lot. Can you help us. The fact that we disagree shows it’s an opinions. We agree that WJC lied under oath as he did have relations with Monica.

LOL

He asked a foreign national to investigate his political rival.

That's an impeachable offense. I don't give a shit about Clinton, that's old news and irrelevant.

 

[Faun]

Trump will be acquitted for one reason only: the Republicans, ahead of trial, decided that.

Who ever heard of a trial conducted like that?

Trump was impeached for one reason only. The Democrats. Who ever heard of an impeachment like that where one persons actually switched parties LOL.

Blah blah blah. It's what you guys did to Clinton.

You guys? Firstly I am an Independent, secondly I was 18 when that happened, thirdly Clinton did lie under oath. Still should not have been impeached. Trump was impeached on an opinion.

Point taken. IMO - Clinton was a scoundrel, but what he did was not impeachable. He deserved to be disbarred. But what ever happened to Congressional censure as an option?

I don't see Trump's situation as equivalent and it's not just because I dislike Trump. IMO - and my opinion only - given the testimony we've heard, the many connections and contradictions, there is in my mind a serious abuse of power. What's unfortunate is this is obscured by the fact that the Dems have had it out for Trump from the beginning, but that doesn't mean this particular thing is not a serious issue.

Using presidential power for personal political gain, disregarding national interests, is very serious and it shouldn't be partisan.

I disagree and henceforth Trump was impeached on an opinion. Clinton did lie and stupidly. He likes women, what guy doesn’t...sans Mayor Pete. Stupid to impeach WJC and stupid to impeach Trump because while we fight on this board you and I are overall rational people and cannot see eye to eye on this impeachment we do see eye to eye on WJC’s.

"I disagree and henceforth Trump was impeached on an opinion."

Uh, no, Impeached Trump was impeached for soliciting foreign aid for his campaign for re-election...

"Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it..." - Impeached Trump ​

 

[Coyote]

Trump will be acquitted for one reason only: the Republicans, ahead of trial, decided that.

Who ever heard of a trial conducted like that?

Trump was impeached for one reason only. The Democrats. Who ever heard of an impeachment like that where one persons actually switched parties LOL.

Blah blah blah. It's what you guys did to Clinton.

You guys? Firstly I am an Independent, secondly I was 18 when that happened, thirdly Clinton did lie under oath. Still should not have been impeached. Trump was impeached on an opinion.

Point taken. IMO - Clinton was a scoundrel, but what he did was not impeachable. He deserved to be disbarred. But what ever happened to Congressional censure as an option?

I don't see Trump's situation as equivalent and it's not just because I dislike Trump. IMO - and my opinion only - given the testimony we've heard, the many connections and contradictions, there is in my mind a serious abuse of power. What's unfortunate is this is obscured by the fact that the Dems have had it out for Trump from the beginning, but that doesn't mean this particular thing is not a serious issue.

Using presidential power for personal political gain, disregarding national interests, is very serious and it shouldn't be partisan.

I disagree and henceforth Trump was impeached on an opinion. Clinton did lie and stupidly. He likes women, what guy doesn’t...sans Mayor Pete. Stupid to impeach WJC and stupid to impeach Trump because while we fight on this board you and I are overall rational people and cannot see eye to eye on this impeachment we do see eye to eye on WJC’s.

If it isn't impeachable....let's go a step down. Was what he did wrong? If so - what should have been done?

And - add to that...how far should executive power go? Since Bush, going on into Obama, and now with Trump, the power of the unitary executive has spiraled out of control and the clashes with congress over testimony and documents seem to me indicative of this. They are co-equal. Isn't it beyond time for Congress to reclaim some of its authority?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Trump was impeached for one reason only. The Democrats. Who ever heard of an impeachment like that where one persons actually switched parties LOL.

Blah blah blah. It's what you guys did to Clinton.

You guys? Firstly I am an Independent, secondly I was 18 when that happened, thirdly Clinton did lie under oath. Still should not have been impeached. Trump was impeached on an opinion.

Uh, no, Impeached Trump was impeached for soliciting foreign aid for his campaign for re-election.

"Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it..." - Impeached Trump​

Perfect!

Yes he said our country has been through a lot. Can you help us. The fact that we disagree shows it’s an opinions. We agree that WJC lied under oath as he did have relations with Monica.

LOL

He asked a foreign national to investigate his political rival.

That's an impeachable offense. I don't give a shit about Clinton, that's old news and irrelevant.

Rival? He was a rival in 2016 and that is what he was curious about. Did it on an open phone call. Never said me or I .