(01-29-2020, 09:41 PM)mikesez Wrote:

(01-29-2020, 07:26 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: 1st question, I don't know, does the OMB count? I'm not the expert on government bureaucracy that you appear to be.

2nd, it was released September 11th, so I imagine there were many things going on that day.

1) OMB is the executive branch. Congress was not notified.  They are supposed to be notified as soon as the original day for the money to be spent passes.  When Congress is notified, the news finds out too. I believe the aid was supposed to be spent in May.  Trump didn't want the hold to be in the news.

2) the whistleblower story hit the news September 9 or 10.  Classic "hand caught in the cookie jar" move.

Not true.  Under the Obama administration's interpretation of the ICA the funds aren't officially on hold until end of fiscal year.  So 10 01 19 would be the date that congressional notification would be required and designation of "temporary" or request for "recission"  

The ICA is for funding in general.  When it comes to foreign aid, as a subset of foreign policy the executive should have more latitude as part of foreign policy, so u could theoretically challenge the ICA on constitutional grounds.  

Most importantly, administrations run afoul of deadlines and statutes all the time.  Congress goes to court and seeks remedy.  Congress sometimes passes laws that are unconstitutional.  We go to court and seek remedy.  The idea that we jump to removal from office for clerical disputes is childish.  

The politico article hit on 8 29 19.  The funds were released on 9 11-12 19.   Republican Senators lobbied for release after the politico article and the president was convinced of Zellenskies sincerity to fight corruption.

---

(01-29-2020, 09:16 PM)Last42min Wrote: From a purely strategic standpoint, it would be wise for Republicans to have hearings to tie up Sanders and Warren as they move into the primary voting. Bernie is doing really well in the polls, and I think it would be better for the nation if Biden wins. I think Trump can beat either of them, but I really don't like Bernie's platform.

Thus the blood soaked calculus of primary politics.  Biden would be far better for the country but Sanders far better for republican chances of holding the senate and reelecting Trump.  

Sowell always talks about life being a series of trade offs.  Sanders is more dangerous but less "electible."

---