Nothing More Than OPINION

[GURPS]

“This bombshell legal opinion from the independent Government Accountability Office demonstrates, without a doubt, that the Trump administration illegally withheld security assistance from Ukraine,” Van Hollen told the Washington Post.

They key phrase in Van Hollen’s statement is that the GAO’s report is simply an “opinion.” Rachel Semmel, director of communications for the Office of Management and Budget, said the GAO’s decision has no legal baring on the Trump administration.

“We disagree with GAO’s opinion. OMB uses its apportionment authority to ensure taxpayer dollars are properly spent consistent with the President’s priorities and with the law,” Semmel said.

The GAO has a long history of attempting to stay relevant in the executive branch, even long before the current impeachment of President Trump. The GAO also has a record of flip-flops. They were forced to reverse a faulty opinion on legal grounds when they opposed the reimbursement of federal employee travel costs. They have consistently rushed to insert themselves into the impeachment discussion and the OMB is hopeful they will be forced to reverse their opinion again.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/01/1...-hold-on-ukrainian-aid-violated-federal-laws/

 

[transporter]

Ummm....just to point out the stunningly obvious comrade....

The GAO report is the LEGAL DECISION as stated by and signed by Thomas H. Armstrong General Counsel of the GAO...

That is quite a different thing than the political opinion of a director of communications who has zero legal background. https://www.linkedin.com/in/rachel-semmel-275239119

BTW comrade, here is the document: https://www.gao.gov/products/B-331564

Oh...and here is the text of the press release (I highlighted the pertinent word for you):

Press statement regarding GAO Decision B-331564, Office of Management and Budget--Withholding of Ukraine Security Assistance

The following is a statement from Thomas H. Armstrong, Esq., General Counsel, U.S. Government Accountability Office, regarding a legal decision issued on January 16, 2020:

“Today, GAO issued a legal decision concluding that the Office of Management and Budget violated the law when it withheld approximately $214 million appropriated to DOD for security assistance to Ukraine. The President has narrow, limited authority to withhold appropriations under the Impoundment Control Act of 1974. OMB told GAO that it withheld the funds to ensure that they were not spent “in a manner that could conflict with the President’s foreign policy.” The law does not permit OMB to withhold funds for policy reasons.”...https://www.gao.gov/products/B-331564

https://www.gao.gov/products/B-331564

So, once again, you post political propaganda and attempt to pass it off as fact.

 

[Kyle]

Ummm....just to point out the stunningly obvious comrade, I'm here to....

Early again this morning.

Your bile keeping you awake?

 

[kom526]

I'mma leave this here:

https://www.npr.org/2014/08/22/342335099/gao-bergdahl-exchange-violated-law

Obama violates law according to GAO.


No scandals though.

 

[CPUSA]

Ummm....just to point out the stunningly obvious comrade....

The GAO report is the LEGAL DECISION as stated by and signed by Thomas H. Armstrong General Counsel of the GAO...

That is quite a different thing than the political opinion of a director of communications who has zero legal background. https://www.linkedin.com/in/rachel-semmel-275239119

BTW comrade, here is the document: https://www.gao.gov/products/B-331564

Oh...and here is the text of the press release (I highlighted the pertinent word for you):

https://www.gao.gov/products/B-331564

So, once again, you post political propaganda and attempt to pass it off as fact.

 

[PsyOps]

Ummm....just to point out the stunningly obvious comrade....

None of it has legal merit unless formal charges are brought against Trump. Until then, it's nothing more than fodder for you Trump-haters to point and say "see, Trump is a criminal". You've been saying this since he was elected, and not one bit of it has stuck.

But, you are free to dream.

 

[Ken King]

Ummm....just to point out the stunningly obvious comrade....

The GAO report is the LEGAL DECISION as stated by and signed by Thomas H. Armstrong General Counsel of the GAO...

That is quite a different thing than the political opinion of a director of communications who has zero legal background. https://www.linkedin.com/in/rachel-semmel-275239119

BTW comrade, here is the document: https://www.gao.gov/products/B-331564

Oh...and here is the text of the press release (I highlighted the pertinent word for you):

https://www.gao.gov/products/B-331564

So, once again, you post political propaganda and attempt to pass it off as fact.

Well I guess, since you are all knowing, that you can show us where within the document you cite above that the GAO recommends action by the Justice Department for prosecution of the violation a law.

 

[Kyle]

Well I guess, since you are all knowing, ...

If he is he's cutting in on Chrissys action!

 

[Hijinx]

The only thing this proves to me is that the GAO is another federal agency filled with Deep State Obama operatives.

It's one helluva swamp that Trump has to flush , an almost impossible task as long as they have protection rom the Civil Service act.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

Funny.

GURPS wasn't arguing the validity of the GAO when it suited him. Like when Obama was President and he loved the GAO's opinion when they said that Obama's policies were unsustainable (a point NOT being argued by me).
https://forums.somd.com/threads/gao-report-obamas-policies-not-sustainable.265291/

Or even a few months ago when GURPS also started a thread highlighting the GAO's lawsuit against an "anti-Trump AG".
https://forums.somd.com/threads/ant...ttorneys-to-promote-a-climate-crusade.342866/

Suddenly, the GAO amounts to nothing and part of the deep state. You folks are funny. Not remotely consistent, but funny.

 

[GURPS]

where specifically did I say I was for or against the GAO

 

[Kyle]

where specifically did I say I was for or against the GAO

Chrissy knows what you are thinking!

It's a Santa-Claus like power he has.

 

[Hijinx]

If Trump broke the law by holding back Ukraine check, then Biden actually confessed to breaking the law.
He flat out stated that he held a check until he got what he wanted.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

If Trump broke the law by holding back Ukraine check, then Biden actually confessed to breaking the law.
He flat out stated that he held a check until he got what he wanted.

No. Trump withheld aide funding appropriated by Congress.

Biden withheld loan guarantees legally allowed to be withheld when it's consistent with foreign policy. Which it was.

This is something that has been pointed out on multiple occasions.

Good point.

Since it was the US's (and EU's, IMF's, etc.) policy to rid Ukraine of corruption at the time, Biden did nothing wrong when he withheld loan guarantees at the behest of official US policy. Right?

Because in that case, Biden was furthering US policy. A "normal" thing....

It wasn't aid. It was loan guarantees.

Proof that if you repeat the same things over and over and over, people start to believe it's actually true.

Joe didn't get Hunter his job. Hunter worked for a law firm hired by Burisma. Burisma then brought him on as head of their legal unit. Not entirely surprising for a lawyer.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5980032-Burisma-Announces-Hunter-Biden-s-Appointment-to.html

Joe Biden (and many others in the west including the EU and IMF) called for Shokin to be removed from office. Why? Because he didn't investigate corruption. If Joe didn't want Burisma or his son investigated, why get rid of the guy who wasn't interested in investigating corruption?

Not to mention the Burisma investigation was not even ongoing when Hunter joined.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...e-probe-casts-doubt-on-giuliani-s-biden-claim

Ukraine's Parliament fired Shokin. By a wide margin too. Is it your contention that Biden had access to the entire Parliament and forced their vote?
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blo...es-honest-deputy-before-parliament-sacks-him/

In fact, rooting out corruption was a policy objective under the Obama administration. It was an objective for the EU and IMF also.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...ent-donald-trump-ukraine-biden-whistleblower/

...Again. Not aid. Loan guarantees. And Biden's position was a policy decision by the President at the time.

I know these seem like meaningless details, but they matter. Continually repeating the same misinformation doesn't make it any more or less true and certainly doesn't make it remotely similar to the position Trump is in.

It sucks, sure, but it is what it is.

...Joe didn't withhold aid as you said. It was loan guarantees. Different animal.

Biden was passing along the words of the Obama administration and were threatening to withhold loan guarantees. Not military aid. Two different things...

 

[Hijinx]

Semantics, Technicalities, A Billion dollars is a Billion dollars and Biden is a corrupot POS.
If you want to believe he isn't that's fine. Wrong but fine ,you believe what you want.
Biden , Pelosi, Romney, Kerry all knew where the money was going and all figured a way to get a piece of the action.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

Semantics, Technicalities, A Billion dollars is a Billion dollars and Biden is a corrupot POS.
If you want to believe he isn't that's fine. Wrong but fine ,you believe what you want.
Biden , Pelosi, Romney, Kerry all knew where the money was going and all figured a way to get a piece of the action.

I believe Biden is just as much a POS as Trump and Obama. I believe not a single one of those people actually care about the Constitution nor what it means for this country and its citizens.

But that doesn't have any bearings on the facts of the matter and doesn't change the fact that, legally speaking, what Trump did was illegal, and what Biden did was not.

 

[Yooper]

The GAO report is the LEGAL DECISION as stated by and signed by Thomas H. Armstrong General Counsel of the GAO...

Sorry to ruin your narrative, but it's a legal opinion. "Legal decision"? Hardly, as this isn't a criminal court case.

Having worked on stuff like this (i.e., foreign aid, military assistance) opinions like this, though annoying, aren't unexpected.

If you're a bean-counter, you're certain to find the GAO statement compelling. If you're strategy/policy-oriented you'll find GAO statements like this myopic (even pretentious).

--- End of line (MCP)

 

[Gilligan]

I believe Biden is just as much a POS as Trump and Obama. I believe not a single one of those people actually care about the Constitution nor what it means for this country and its citizens.

But that doesn't have any bearings on the facts of the matter and doesn't change the fact that, legally speaking, what Trump did was illegal, and what Biden did was not.

Nice try, eel boy.

 

[Yooper]

I believe Biden is just as much a POS as Trump and Obama. I believe not a single one of those people actually care about the Constitution nor what it means for this country and its citizens.

As your comment pretty much covers the entire political spectrum who fits your bill as someone who doesn't abuse the (constitutional) system? Is there anyone? If so, why?

I'm genuinely curious as my take is that I'm not sure there is anyone who a) has the personal integrity to meet your criteria and b) could overcome a system where competing interests are a feature not a bug (i.e., a democracy).

--- End of line (MCP)

 

[Gilligan]

As your comment pretty much covers the entire political spectrum who fits your bill as someone who doesn't abuse the (constitutional) system? Is there anyone? If so, why?

I'm genuinely curious as my take is that I'm not sure there is anyone who a) has the personal integrity to meet your criteria and b) could overcome a system where competing interests are a feature not a bug (i.e., a democracy).

--- End of line (MCP)

Chrissy throws that type of broad brush "balanced" comment out from time to time as camouflage, hoping it diverts attention from his otherwise consistently far left lib-prog spew. "Look!..squirrel!". Nobody buys it.