Govt watchdog says White House violated law by withholding Ukraine aid

Seems you have hurt fweeeelings over Trump.

Did he make you cry again?

 

You originally said that Clinton did not cooperate. I pointed out that he voluntarily testified.

Still not relevant to the topic of this thread.

 

I think you're wrong. The GAO has long been considered an important bi-partisan oversight agency of Congress. The "power of the purse" is a fundamental responsibility of Congress...NOT the Executive Branch, in which the OMB is a part. If that one goes to the Supreme Court, you lose - hands down.

 

Good argument! Loaded with facts, logic, reason and law!

 

Oh no.

I am very much having a Merry Impeachmas.

 

Merry Impeachmas, my friend!

What a joyous season!

 

Never said any such thing said he was found by the SP to have committed felony perjury and plead it down, which is a fact.

 

Honestly, not really, they make a lot of mistakes and put out some bad information. Every President gets dinged by the GAO somewhere at sometime. Happened to Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, so on and so forth.

They are starting to become a joke. Especially after all the nonsense they put out on ACA.

 

The crazy Socialist and Pocahontas are unelectable. Did not you get the memo?

 

Obama may have broken another law or agreement with Congress. I don't know. But, Obama is no longer President and two wrongs do NOT make a right. The issue before the Senate is not whether a previous President acted similarly, but whether the current president is guilty of the articles of impeachment presented today to the Senate.

 

Not cooperating? You mean by getting caught in all the lies and committing perjury? Was this before or after Hillary threw the vase that smashed him in the face and the Secret Service had to cover it up and give Bill some make up to cover up the marks she left on his eye?

When was that? Before or after Travel-gate? After.

Oh yea, he was really looking forward to testifying.

You crack me up.

 

Obama violated the Constitution of the United States no fewer than 10 times. But let's (The Democrats in our gov't) impeach Trump because we don't like him and he we think he is mean to us.

 

I think you may be thinking of the CBO (the Congressional Budget Office), which estimates the impact of legislation on the budget.

 

They like him, I guess, but that would stop in a second if he was seriously implicated in some corruption. And it's nothing at all like the slavish devotion of Trump's followers. The only thing even in the ballpark are the Bernie Bros, but even there most of his followers would jump to Warren if some serious scandal emerged.

 

Whether Obama violated the Constitution or not is your opinion. Obviously, it wasn't the opinion of the Republican majority in the House, which prevailed for six of his eight years. Are you asking for a "do-over?"

 

No, it is a fact.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/2017/01/20/10_ways_obama_violated_the_constitution_400607.html

Even the Supreme Court of The United States said he did:

https://gosar.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=2325

https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/12/obama-violate-constitution-top-ten-2015/

They even have a top 10 list:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/realsp...nstitutional-violations-of-2013/#44e7b3957667

Forget party. Who cares what party he belonged to. If Obama was not given such a wide margin he would have been impeached and thrown out of office for a whole ton of offenses. Instead of running that gambit though, the voters decided to take away all of his power (well most of it, he still killed Americans and illegally funded terrorists) and leave him with a Republican run House and Senate.

 

I think both, actually.

 

You cited the same opinion article by Shapiro three times, published in three different journals (RCP, National Review and Forbes). The other link was valid...the Obama loss in the NLRB v. Noel Canning, wherein the Supreme Court ruled against Obama's actions. He compiled with the Court's ruling.

 

Actually...no...since they have different responsibilities and purposes.

 

Ah, I see the issue. Egoboy was referencing trump's claim that he is immune from criminal prosecution while president when he said that he hoped that opinion would get reviewed. I thought he was referencing the related, but different, trump claim that he is immune from the criminal investigation while president.

And thus, when you said you hoped that standard did not exist with Clinton, I thought you meant that you wished Clinton had cooperated. Hence, my response.

My apologies for the misunderstanding.

But allow me to ask, do you agree with trump's pleading that presidents are immune from criminal investigations and prosecutions while in office?

 

The GAO is a congressional organization, of course they are going to side with congress.

They went after Obama a couple times, but they have no authority over the executive branch.

 

They have influence with Congress, since they work for them. Congress has impeachment powers over the President.

 

Ok, but Impeachment is no longer with congress, it is in the senate.

Real thin ice considering the money was released before the deadline.

We will see how it plays out

 

You don't seem to be aware that the Senate is part of Congress. Please, at least read the Constitution before discussing Constitutional issues.

 

So, you agree that Democrats are "rabid partisan hacks hell bent unseating a duly elected President purely based on hate?" Good to know.