Impeachment Related: GAO Determines Trump Violated Impoundment Control Act

[Sam]

So, the GOA failed. Is there any evidence that they tried to resist Trump's directive, assuming there was one, or that they informed him it would be a violation of law?

[insert something snarky here]

Yes; JustSecurity's review of redacted OMB communications make clear that DOD, OMB, and other agencies were aware that the delay in funding would wind up violating the ICA if carried on. At one point, an OMB official (maybe Sandy) tries to pin the impending violation on DOD, despite months of warning by Pentagon staff.

Saying the GAO failed in its determination is just another way of saying that Trump cannot violate the law, the law can only fail to meet Trump's needs.

--Sam

[Cow Poke]

Yes; JustSecurity's review of redacted OMB communications make clear that DOD, OMB, and other agencies were aware that the delay in funding would wind up violating the ICA if carried on. At one point, an OMB official (maybe Sandy) tries to pin the impending violation on DOD, despite months of warning by Pentagon staff.

Saying the GAO failed in its determination is just another way of saying that Trump cannot violate the law, the law can only fail to meet Trump's needs.

--Sam

I've just seen 'smoking gun' after 'smoking gun' after 'smoking gun', and it gets rather tiresome.

[Mountain Man]

I've just seen 'smoking gun' after 'smoking gun' after 'smoking gun', and it gets rather tiresome.

It's like sitting down to watch a fireworks show, and every shell is a dud.

[Sam]

I've just seen 'smoking gun' after 'smoking gun' after 'smoking gun', and it gets rather tiresome.

Well, I don't know what to tell you about that except maybe it's time to for introspection!

[Cow Poke]

Well, I don't know what to tell you about that except maybe it's time to for introspection!

Then hop to it, Sam!

[Cow Poke]

It's like sitting down to watch a fireworks show, and every shell is a dud.

But, don't forget ---- Schiff has a MOUNTAIN of evidence that he has yet to reveal!

[Sam]

Then hop to it, Sam!

OK, had our fun. Now it's time to earn it:

You said that the GAO failed in its decision and asked if there was evidence that government employees tried to resist Trump's order to hold the funds or warned that doing so would be a violation of the law. I pointed out that, yes, that did occur but Trump continued to order the funds frozen for what GAO calls a "policy" decision.

Now you've gotta outline why you think the GAO's decision was wrongly made -- why this hold was lawful or why violating the ICA doesn't matter.

--Sam

[Cow Poke]

OK, had our fun. Now it's time to earn it:

You said that the GAO failed in its decision and asked if there was evidence that government employees tried to resist Trump's order to hold the funds or warned that doing so would be a violation of the law. I pointed out that, yes, that did occur but Trump continued to order the funds frozen for what GAO calls a "policy" decision.

Now you've gotta outline why you think the GAO's decision was wrongly made -- why this hold was lawful or why violating the ICA doesn't matter.

--Sam

No, Sam, I don't. Let's get back to reality. Unless and until there is overwhelming support from the American people for removal, it simply isn't gonna happen.
And the Democrats simply repeating over and over "overwhelming" doesn't mean ANYTHING is overwhelming, except, perhaps, their own hypocrisy.

You can play "what if" til the cows come home, but the facts remain that
A) the Democrats have been wanting to get rid of Trump even before he was sworn in
2) they have announced way before this whole Ukraine thing that Trump should be impeached
C) they have weaponized impeachment as their means for getting rid of Trump
D) they ran a sham impeachment process on incredibly partisan lines
v) they rushed through it claiming "clear and present danger" insisting they couldn't possibly wait any longer
6) they presented their focus-group shaped articles to the Senate
7) and NOW they are insisting on a "fair trial".

You're really good with all that crap? Then today, Schumer - the ultimate hypocrite - demands a slow and methodical process in the Senate.

There has been so much stinking hypocrisy on the part of the Democrats in this sham impeachment process that, but - hey - if it gets rid of Trump, it's all good, eh?

[Sam]

Yes, you do. I don't mind off-topic and snark but it's got to be paired up with on-topic and substance for this thread. Not looking to see this derailed by people who don't actually care to discuss what the OP topic is.

If you've got substantive remarks to make in a discussion concerning the merits of the OP and/or the question you brought up concerning the administration's foreknowledge of the ICA's requirements, we can have that discussion.

If it's just going to be handwaving the topic of discussion away in favor of repeating all the reasons to be dismissive that haven't changed since Impeachment Day 1, there are plenty of other threads already in ruins for that.

Thanks,

--Sam

No, Sam, I don't. Let's get back to reality. Unless and until there is overwhelming support from the American people for removal, it simply isn't gonna happen.
And the Democrats simply repeating over and over "overwhelming" doesn't mean ANYTHING is overwhelming, except, perhaps, their own hypocrisy.

You can play "what if" til the cows come home, but the facts remain that
A) the Democrats have been wanting to get rid of Trump even before he was sworn in
2) they have announced way before this whole Ukraine thing that Trump should be impeached
C) they have weaponized impeachment as their means for getting rid of Trump
D) they ran a sham impeachment process on incredibly partisan lines
v) they rushed through it claiming "clear and present danger" insisting they couldn't possibly wait any longer
6) they presented their focus-group shaped articles to the Senate
7) and NOW they are insisting on a "fair trial".

You're really good with all that crap? Then today, Schumer - the ultimate hypocrite - demands a slow and methodical process in the Senate.

There has been so much stinking hypocrisy on the part of the Democrats in this sham impeachment process that, but - hey - if it gets rid of Trump, it's all good, eh?

[Cow Poke]

Yes, you do.

No, Sam, I don't.

[Sam]

No, Sam, I don't.

All right. Until you have something substantive to say regarding the OP, I have to ask that you refrain from posting in this thread, then.

--Sam

[Cow Poke]

All right. Until you have something substantive to say regarding the OP, I have to ask that you refrain from posting in this thread, then.

--Sam

Jawohl, mein Führer!

[oxmixmudd]

Keep flinging poo. Something is eventually going to stick... That's the left's approach.

Translation: please stop telling us about all the laws Trump is breaking. Dont you understand, we just dont care!

[Sparko]

So is there a link to the actual PDF document? I can't read your image in the OP. It gets smaller when clicked on. And the images in the twitter post you link to are likewise too small to read on my monitor.

[Sam]

So is there a link to the actual PDF document? I can't read your image in the OP. It gets smaller when clicked on. And the images in the twitter post you link to are likewise too small to read on my monitor.

Yes, Politico has a PDF available.