Per the fiscal year and law, Trump had until 10/1/2020 to release the funds to Ukraine. If the president was prompted by the whistle blower complaint to go ahead and release the funds, the in the very act of tattling on the president, the whistle blower prevented Trump from violating the law which governs the release of those funds.
I find this a true LOL moment!!
My personal belief is that Mr Vindman is the actual whistle blower; he's the guy who felt that the "favor" asked for "us" was a demand. Thank you Mr Vindman, you sorry POS (piece of stupidity.)
nwtk2007 wrote:
Per the fiscal year and law, Trump had until 10/1/2020 to release the funds to Ukraine. If the president was prompted by the whistle blower complaint to go ahead and release the funds, the in the very act of tattling on the president, the whistle blower prevented Trump from violating the law which governs the release of those funds.
I find this a true LOL moment!!
My personal belief is that Mr Vindman is the actual whistle blower; he's the guy who felt that the "favor" asked for "us" was a demand. Thank you Mr Vindman, you sorry POS (piece of stupidity.)
Per the fiscal year and law, Trump had until 10/1/... (
show quote)
Oh..my...god, did you put much thought into this?
This law was violated when the order to withhold funds came through, and continued when OMB and other concerned people were warning about this violating the impoundment act. The law was broken by Barr when he ordered the Intelligence head and IC IG to not follow the law and release their findings on the whistleblower report to congress. The law does not require this to be done within a set period unless the attorney general or white house says not to...the law was broken.
This logic is the same as "the law was not broken by a hit man who said he would k**l your wife if he gave the money back and didn't go through with it".
And rather than go on and on about the incomplete story, wake up and pay attention to what Parnas, who has direct knowledge of much of who was involved in withholding aid and support from the Ukraine. Your arguments based on the older more limited knowledge is very lame.
woodguru wrote:
This logic is the same as "the law was not broken by a hit man who said he would k**l your wife if he gave the money back and didn't go through with it".
And rather than go on and on about the incomplete story, wake up and pay attention to what Parnas, who has direct knowledge of much of who was involved in withholding aid and support from the Ukraine. Your arguments based on the older more limited knowledge is very lame.
The funding can be delayed for many reasons as long as Congress is notified. If Congress wasn't notified, that isn't on the president although apparently they were notified in foot noted documents. Read the article, they obviously know more than you and it's your buddies at politifact.
This is from the end of the article you didn't read: "It might be argued that the law would not actually be broken until Oct. 1, the beginning of the (2020) fiscal year," he said. "But the DOD and OMB career people know what time is necessary to actually t***sfer the funds, and had legitimate concerns about violating the law."
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.