President Trump

Returntosender

Well-Known Member
77564B54-9056-41B6-950C-497B9BCEB012.jpeg
 

DriveInDriveOut

Inordinately Right
The GAO disagrees.
I read their opinion and it's just plain stupid.

Pages of beurocratic blabbering about procedural rules for Congressional appropriations explaining that Trump has to release the funds.

....and buried in one sentence on page three is this little gem:
"The appropriation made the funds available for obligation through September 30, 2019."


The funds were released September 11, 2019. No laws were broken. Nice try demwits.
 

El Correcto

god is dead
I read their opinion and it's just plain stupid.

Pages of beurocratic blabbering about procedural rules for Congressional appropriations explaining that Trump has to release the funds.

....and buried in one sentence on page three is this little gem:
"The appropriation made the funds available for obligation through September 30, 2019."


The funds were released September 11, 2019. No laws were broken. Nice try demwits.
Don’t care, trump bad. Get rekt kid.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
I read their opinion and it's just plain stupid.

Pages of beurocratic blabbering about procedural rules for Congressional appropriations explaining that Trump has to release the funds.

....and buried in one sentence on page three is this little gem:
"The appropriation made the funds available for obligation through September 30, 2019."


The funds were released September 11, 2019. No laws were broken. Nice try demwits.
And you want to say then that Trump therefore had the right to use the funding up to September 30th in order to extort a foreign government for personal gain? Are you dismissing everything else as “bureaucratic blabbering” and hanging your sorry defense on one line? Damn, son! Talk about grasping at straws!
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
"The President has narrow, limited authority to withhold appropriations under the Impoundment Control Act of 1974," Armstrong continued in a separate press statement. "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."

The problem appears to be that when Trump’s people explain what they were doing, they implicate the administration in wrongdoing.
 

DriveInDriveOut

Inordinately Right
And you want to say then that Trump therefore had the right to use the funding up to September 30th in order to extort a foreign government for personal gain? Are you dismissing everything else as “bureaucratic blabbering” and hanging your sorry defense on one line? Damn, son! Talk about grasping at straws!
Trump did not use the funds to extort a foreign government for personal gain. You're thinking of Joe Biden.
 

MrFedEx

Engorged Member
I read their opinion and it's just plain stupid.

Pages of beurocratic blabbering about procedural rules for Congressional appropriations explaining that Trump has to release the funds.

....and buried in one sentence on page three is this little gem:
"The appropriation made the funds available for obligation through September 30, 2019."


The funds were released September 11, 2019. No laws were broken. Nice try demwits.


The crime is in the extortion. It is irrelevant that they were eventually released. Of course you release the funds when you've been caught trying to gain from withholding them.

Laws were broken. Good try at defending your Orange Fool.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
And you want to say then that Trump therefore had the right to use the funding up to September 30th in order to extort a foreign government for personal gain? Are you dismissing everything else as “bureaucratic blabbering” and hanging your sorry defense on one line? Damn, son! Talk about grasping at straws!
Hanging your hat on another farce again?
 

DriveInDriveOut

Inordinately Right
"The President has narrow, limited authority to withhold appropriations under the Impoundment Control Act of 1974," Armstrong continued in a separate press statement. "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."

The problem appears to be that when Trump’s people explain what they were doing, they implicate the administration in wrongdoing.
The funds were released within the timetable Congress laid out. Maybe if Democrats weren't such idiots they would have waited 20 days and you would have an argument.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
Trump did not use the funds to extort a foreign government for personal gain. You're thinking of Joe Biden.
Yes, as a matter of fact the president did exactly that.
You’d be better off trying to go with, “Well, he did it but it’s not impeachable.”
That’s the more defensible line of crap.
 

El Correcto

god is dead
And you want to say then that Trump therefore had the right to use the funding up to September 30th in order to extort a foreign government for personal gain? Are you dismissing everything else as “bureaucratic blabbering” and hanging your sorry defense on one line? Damn, son! Talk about grasping at straws!
Grasping at straws is what democrats have been doing for the last 3 years.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
The crime is in the extortion. It is irrelevant that they were eventually released. Of course you release the funds when you've been caught trying to gain from withholding them.

Laws were broken. Good try at defending your Orange Fool.
It did make me mad when Trump told the Ukrainian president that he had to fire the prosecutor investigating the company that was paying Trump's son $83k a month or lose a billion in aid. Oh, wait....
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
Hanging your hat on another farce again?
Have you forgotten what I’ve always said about impeachment? I’ll slow down for you.

Impeachment is political.
This year is an election year.
What happens in the next two weeks will be campaign material.
Democrats want republicans in tough elections to be forced into making stupid, hyper partisan votes.
The House doesn’t seem to be in play.
The senate may be.

In the future, do ttku.
 

DriveInDriveOut

Inordinately Right
Yes, as a matter of fact the president did exactly that.
You’d be better off trying to go with, “Well, he did it but it’s not impeachable.”
That’s the more defensible line of crap.
No, as a matter of fact he did not.
You'd be better off just trying to go with, "well, orange man bad".
 
Top