Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Impeachment Related: GAO Determines Trump Violated Impoundment Control Act

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Impeachment Related: GAO Determines Trump Violated Impoundment Control Act

    Breaking today: the Government Accountability Office has determined that Trump's decision to withhold Ukrainian security funds violated the Impoundment Control Act, established after Nixon's resignation.

    The full text doesn't appear to be online yet but Senator Van Hollen shared the first page:

    Screen Shot 2020-01-16 at 10.02.31 AM.jpg

    Violation of the ICA is #8 on JustSecurity's list of potential crimes and violations committed by Trump regarding the matters surrounding his impeachment.

    --Sam
    "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"


  • #2
    Natasha Bertrand has screenshots of the full GAO memo here.

    Source:

    CONCLUSION:

    OMB violated the ICA when it withheld DOD's USAI funds from obligation for policy reasons. This impoundment of budget activity was not a programmatic delay.

    OMB and State have failed, as of yet, to provide the information we need to fulfill our duties under the ICA regarding potential impoundment of FMF funds. We will continue to pursue this matter and will provide our decision to Congress after we have received the necessary information.

    We consider a reluctance to provide a fulsome response to have constitutional significance. GAO's role under the ICA--to provide information and legal analysis to Congress as it performs oversight of executive activity--is essential to ensuring respect for allegiance to Congress' constitutional power of the purse. All federal officials and employees take an oath to uphold and protect the Constitution and its core tenets, including the congressional power of the purse. We trust that State and OMB will provide the information needed.

    © Copyright Original Source

    "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

    Comment


    • #3
      Keep flinging poo. Something is eventually going to stick... That's the left's approach.
      That's what
      - She

      Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
      - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

      I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
      - Stephen R. Donaldson

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm going to request, for this thread, that comments at least include a substantive post concerning the merits of the GAO decision.

        You can snark but you gotta earn it.

        --Sam
        "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

        Comment


        • #5
          OMB Official Mark Sandy declared in sworn testimony:

          Source: https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2019/dec/05/did-trump-violate-impoundment-control-act/

          the OMB implemented the hold on aid to Ukraine through footnotes in a series of funding documents, known as apportionments, sent to the Defense Department. The footnote in the first document, sent July 25, said the Pentagon couldn’t spend the money until Aug. 5.
          A second line in the footnote said the "brief pause in obligations" would not prevent the Pentagon from disbursing the funds before they expired. That was meant to get "to the heart of that issue about ensuring that we don’t run afoul of the Impoundment Control Act, which means that you have to allow for the timely execution," Sandy said in his testimony.

          © Copyright Original Source



          So, Congress was notified, and the funds were released before expiring. So, no this was not running afoul of this Act.
          That's what
          - She

          Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
          - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

          I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
          - Stephen R. Donaldson

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
            OMB Official Mark Sandy declared in sworn testimony:

            Source: https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2019/dec/05/did-trump-violate-impoundment-control-act/

            the OMB implemented the hold on aid to Ukraine through footnotes in a series of funding documents, known as apportionments, sent to the Defense Department. The footnote in the first document, sent July 25, said the Pentagon couldn’t spend the money until Aug. 5.
            A second line in the footnote said the "brief pause in obligations" would not prevent the Pentagon from disbursing the funds before they expired. That was meant to get "to the heart of that issue about ensuring that we don’t run afoul of the Impoundment Control Act, which means that you have to allow for the timely execution," Sandy said in his testimony.

            © Copyright Original Source



            So, Congress was notified, and the funds were released before expiring. So, no this was not running afoul of this Act.
            Sandy's argument was that Congress was notified by virtue of footnotes being placed in funding documents instead of direct notification to Congress. As GAO determined today, that method was insufficient to comply with the law.

            Not all funds were released before the end of the fiscal year, requiring Congress to pass another law allowing the release of the remaining funds.

            So, yes, as GAO determines above, OMB violated the ICA, notwithstanding the after-the-fact legal justifications that OMB attempted to argue.

            --Sam
            "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

            Comment


            • #7
              Moreover:

              GAO's determination that OMB withheld funding for policy rather than programmatic reasons is important, both to the determination of a violation and to the issue of impeachment: the executive branch, after the President signs something into law, cannot withhold funding for policy purposes. The time to dispute funding policy is before the President agrees to it by signing a bill into law. Regarding impeachment, the policy reason for withholding the funds was Trump's attempt to make Zelensky announce investigations into Biden and the non-existent Ukraine DNC server -- "policy" that we know was being pursued as a matter of Trump's personal, rather than presidential, interest.

              --Sam
              "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Sam View Post
                Sandy's argument was that Congress was notified by virtue of footnotes being placed in funding documents instead of direct notification to Congress. As GAO determined today, that method was insufficient to comply with the law.
                That's for the Judicial Branch to determine, not the Legislative GAO. The GAO findings are like investigators findings. They are non-binding opinion.

                Not all funds were released before the end of the fiscal year, requiring Congress to pass another law allowing the release of the remaining funds.
                Nope. Not all the funds were SPENT before the end of the FY, but that's not against the act.

                So, yes, as GAO determines above, OMB violated the ICA, notwithstanding the after-the-fact legal justifications that OMB attempted to argue.

                --Sam
                And the GAO is a Legislative Branch entity with no teeth. Until a Judicial Branch entity says it was a violation of the law, this is just another poop fling.
                That's what
                - She

                Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                - Stephen R. Donaldson

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                  Keep flinging poo. Something is eventually going to stick... That's the left's approach.
                  Yes, it's just that nothing will stick with the likes of you. That's the rights approach when it comes to the law.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by JimL View Post
                    Yes, it's just that nothing will stick with the likes of you. That's the rights approach when it comes to the law.
                    No, dumbass. A Legislative entity can not determine the legality of an action that potentially meets the law. It is the opinion of the GAO that the footnotes were insufficient. And there is no precedent for charging someone with violating the Act. Several SCOTUS cases deal with particular aspects, but no decision on whether it is within the POTUS' power to delay funding based on perceived illegal activity.
                    That's what
                    - She

                    Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                    - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                    I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                    - Stephen R. Donaldson

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                      That's for the Judicial Branch to determine, not the Legislative GAO. The GAO findings are like investigators findings. They are non-binding opinion.



                      Nope. Not all the funds were SPENT before the end of the FY, but that's not against the act.



                      And the GAO is a Legislative Branch entity with no teeth. Until a Judicial Branch entity says it was a violation of the law, this is just another poop fling.

                      It's not for the judicial branch to determine; the judicial branch can certainly make a ruling on the matter, if a valid claim is brought to it. But, absent that, the GAO is making a determination that the executive branch violated the ICA. You have not provided any sort of rebuttal to that assessment except to 1) say footnotes count, even though OMB implemented the footnote option explicitly to avoid directly informing Congress of the hold according to law and 2) some trash-talking about GAO.

                      That is unpersuasive and very obviously made with partisan intent.

                      Millions of dollars of the Ukraine security funding was not dispersed in time to meet the requirements of the ICA. That's not a matter of argument, it's a statement of fact.

                      Source: $35 million in Pentagon aid hasn’t reached Ukraine, despite White House assurances. Molly O'Toole, Sarah D. Wire. Los Angeles Times. 2019.11.19

                      Congress had approved the one-year funds — $250 million in military aid from the Pentagon and an additional $141 million in assistance from the State Department — with bipartisan support last fall. Because of a congressionally mandated 15-day waiting period, the administration’s delay left lawmakers less than a week to secure the money before the legal authority to spend it expired at the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30.

                      Knowing that the hundreds of millions couldn’t all be allocated in such a short time, Congress gave the Pentagon an additional year to spend its share.


                      Pentagon officials said then that the spending would be disbursed within weeks. But $35.2 million — earmarked for grenade launchers, secure communications and naval combat craft — has not left the U.S. Treasury, according to lawmakers and the Pentagon document tracking spending.


                      Pentagon spokeswoman Lt. Col. Carla Gleason confirmed that $36 million had yet to be provided to Ukraine but declined to say why, instead reiterating that the aid would be obligated “over the next several weeks.”

                      © Copyright Original Source



                      --Sam
                      "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Obviously, if Congress determines that Trump violated a law in order to pursue a personal or political goal, it can go to the Judiciary and sue. It can also impeach the President for violating the law as part of a larger effort to abuse his power.
                        "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by JimL View Post
                          Yes, it's just that nothing will stick with the likes of you. That's the rights approach when it comes to the law.
                          Here again, I'm not going to try and keep people from snarking but you've got to earn it -- if you've got a snappy/snarky retort on this thread, please make sure you're pairing it with a substantive commentary on the merits of the GAO report.

                          --Sam
                          "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Sam View Post
                            I'm going to request, for this thread, that comments at least include a substantive post concerning the merits of the GAO decision.

                            You can snark but you gotta earn it.

                            --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]
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Sam View Post
                              Here again, I'm not going to try and keep people from snarking but you've got to earn it -- if you've got a snappy/snarky retort on this thread, please make sure you're pairing it with a substantive commentary on the merits of the GAO report.

                              --Sam
                              Interesting. Not a bad idea.
                              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                              16 responses
                              184 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post One Bad Pig  
                              Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                              53 responses
                              417 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Mountain Man  
                              Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                              25 responses
                              114 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                              33 responses
                              198 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Roy
                              by Roy
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                              88 responses
                              400 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post JimL
                              by JimL
                               
                              Working...
                              X