Govt watchdog says White House violated law by withholding Ukraine aid

Let me tell you something I learned from 33 years in Government during multiple administrations. The GAO writes reports that say whatever Congress wants them to say. They are masters of exaggeration and hyperbole. Your use of large/bold font notwithstanding.

 

When someone ask for my thoughts they get my thoughts. And I have to say you are hardly a master of repartee.

 

So, "Congress" wanted the GAO to conclude that Bonespurs broke the law?

Interesting.

I might be willing to listen to the argument that they justify their existence (to some degree) by making impractical reaches, but not he assertion that they were trying to "please Congress" here.

 

That's very hurtful. I was using the art of sarcasm to point out the obvious flaws in your post. I am sorry if it made you lash out at me.

Shouldn't your "thoughts" be based upon facts, reason and law?

 

Probably so. But after 3 years of reading anti-Trump diatribes on PF and elsewhere I have become convinced a reasoned debate on issues is next to impossible.

 

Okie dokie.

Crisis averted.

That cuts both ways, friend.

 

Not surprising...they report to Congress and are the Congressional watchdog. You seem to be complaining about Congressional oversight? Maybe 33 years in the Deep State conditioned that opinion?

 

I don't complain about it. Just pointing out the reality that oversight is often a form of Kabuki Theater. My high grade was a GS-15, i.e., a little short of a deep state level position.

 

I was an appointee. I think the "deep state" stuff is grossly overstated.

 

Tisk, tisk...33 years in the federal government qualifies you...not the GS level.

 

So according to you every Government employee is a member of the deep state regardless of grade or position after a certain period of time?

 

Just joking. I think it's a "self-identification" thing. There is no formal membership. No dues. No requirements. If you feel you're a member, you're a member. If not, you're not.The "Deep State" idea largely grew out of sociology and public administration. When I was in school, it was called "Groupthink" and/or "bureaucratic politics." That led to the idea, in and out of government, of organizational theory and the dangers of "stovepipe thinking" (each separate sub organization having their own goals and "way of thinking" that often conflicted with other organizations. The studies done after 9/11 showed that this also applied to intelligence (the FBI had one way of thinking, the CIA another, the NSA another, etc., etc.). That led to the reorganization of intelligence, under the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), and much more interaction and cooperation between agencies to become less organization oriented and more nationally oriented. And...that, in turn, led to the anti-federalists and Alt Right (and the extreme left as well), idea of an evil, conspiratorial, Deep State...when it actually was a more effective way of organization. Because it is more effective, is precisely the reason the political extremes (the anti-government people on the left and right) label it as a danger. Potential enemies...such as China, Russia, whomever sees us as competition and want a more ineffective U.S. government, naturally support the idea as well. Also, the IT advances contributed and raised the potential conflict between a more effective government and it's impact on individual rights...primarily related to privacy. It's sort of an axiom that increases in security inevitably tread in some way on individual liberty and freedom. And, that thought may translate into urban vs. rural political thought as well, etc., etc.

 

Retarded. Utterly retarded and a political attack.

In 1978, Menachem Begin walked out of the Camp David Peace Accords with Anwar Sadat. I remember this very clearly.In fact, Prime Minister Begin did not even want to attend the peace talks in the first place.

And both of these were handled in the exact same way by President Carter. He threatened Israel with the withdrawal of US aid and support unless they attended the meetings, and at a minimum negotiated in good faith.

In 2015, President Obama withheld aid to Egypt. Our Presidents have done this countless times over the decades. Yet somehow it is illegal this time? This is why I am largely laughing at this. And even more so when many of the same people who in a previous impeachment stated that what a Prior President did was not, even though it was a Felony.

If that is indeed the case, then we are eliminating most of the negotiation power of any President.

 

That never happened. Either in this thread or in this universe.

 

He was required to notify Cingress of the pause and provide a policy justification.

He did neither.

 

He was not impeached because of he violated the law on notifying Congress about the pause nor because he refused to provide a policy justification for the pause.

 

So what's the big deal here, it is an administrative charge against the Executive Branch which will pay a fine.

 

After the decision was made based on lots of factors, they got it. No extortion, no bribe, no quid pro quo. And execution of foreign policy by the President. There was not a crime involved stop trying to compare it to one.

 

I saying what the Constitution and the courts have said, plenary power. Congress nor the Judicial branch conduct foreign policy. Funds are held routinely on the orders of the President, but this money was released. End of story. When the courts overturn US vs Curtis-Wright let me know.

 

You're joking, right? What "factors?" It was two days after Congress notified the WH of the WB complaint and asked for an explanation.

 

I think you are misinterpreting the U.S. v. Curtiss-Wright decision and explained why. When you can contradict my interpretation, I'd be happy to continue the discussion.

 

What? There’s video of it.

 

They got him this time.

 

In a vacuum, one devoid of context, this violation of the law is not a big deal.

But trump was impeached because of conduct directly related to this violation of the law.

 

No, there is no video of Biden bragging about "breaking the law."