Echoes Of Clinton Impeachment In House Democrats Resolution | Morning Joe

Another lie Ron. There's no resemblance to the Clinton impeachment at all.

The House Democrats release resolution detailing next steps in impeachment inquiry. Now this will happen today and the republicans will get their wish Steve for the impeachment investigation and the people will see the evidence of what was done by Trump while in The White House.

Steve, you don't care about lies any way because you don't believe Trump will LIE to YOU, when he has been LYING to you way before he reached The Orval Office.

If you watched the LIMITED debate on H.Res 660 Ron you saw the proof, these are not the same rules used for Clinton.

Hey Steve, do you think Trump will lie to you and or his supporters about Ukraine-Gate?

There is no Ukraine-Gate Ron. It's called Foreign Service-Gate.

Steve, do you think Trump will lie to you and or his supporters about Ukraine's Foreign Service-Gate?

Is that the subject Ron?

YES!!! Steve, do you think Trump will lie to you and or his supporters about Ukraine's Foreign Service-Gate?

The only lies I hear in this report Ron are the ones told by Joe, Mika and Heidi.

I did not ask you about Joe, Mika and Heidi. THE QUESTION IS: Do you think Trump will lie to you and or to his supporters about Ukraine's Foreign Service-Gate?

Lie about the memcon Ron? Absolutely not.

No! Steve, I am talking about The Ukraine Affair?

So what do you want to know about the Ukraine affair Ron?

Do you think Trump will lie to you and or to his supporters about Ukraine's Foreign Service-Gate?

Can you say Quid - Pro - Quo?

It was a proper and legal quid pro quo Ron.

Not according to The Emoluments Clause.

Ron, the President would have been remiss in his sworn duty if there had NOT been a quid pro quo. In return for a half billion $$ in aid, he required assurances that Ukraine was making progress against corruption. As a result Ukraine is cooperating with Durham's investigation into the genesis of operation Crossfire Hurricane, and the case against Burisma is being reviewed. And Ukraine CONTINUES to get the lethal aid it took TRUMP to provide. All of that is good and none of it has a thing to do with emoluments.

Let's take a look at what you said Steve: "Ron, the President would have been remiss in his sworn duty if there had NOT been a quid pro quo."

Also you said this: In return for a half billion $$ in aid, he required assurances that Ukraine was making progress against corruption.

Don't you understand that congress had already earmarked that monies for the defense of Ukraine without any Quid - Pro - Quo or personal gain like getting dirt on The Binden's or investigating any corruption.

That is why TRUMP wants the whistle blower, which at this point is moot because of what Trump presented in that memo of the phone call.

“I would like you to do us a favor, though, because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it," Trump said, in reference to those investigations.

“Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible,” Trump says.

Trump soon adds: “The other thing: There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution, and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can so with the Attorney General would be great.” STEVE!!! That is what TRUMP said.

What's the matter Steve, you don't believe Trump said those words?



Note that, Trump says he’s asking for “a favor.” He is not about meeting a policy objective. Trump is aware of what he’s doing: he wants a favor, something that is outside the scope of what world leaders talk about.

Trump says he that he would like Ukraine to do “us” a favor. But, who is “us”? The US… or the Trump political operation?
Note also, Trump volunteers the US Atty Gen in this investigation. WTF is the US AG doing, getting involved in the politics of another country?

Now Breaking News, we just found out that this was not the first call on this subject and now the news is out for all Americans can see it.

A senior administration official, who agreed to speak candidly on the condition of anonymity, says OMB put the hold on the Ukraine aid on Trump's order. A subsequent review by top White House officials including then-National Security Adviser John Bolton took longer than expected, and the hold was extended several times, according to the official.
After money is appropriated by Congress, OMB provides agencies with direction on how quickly to spend it, in a process called apportionment.
The purpose is to avoid spending too quickly and running out of money, or not spending all the funds that Congress has intended. In the past, apportionments were almost always written and signed by the agency's career officials, who remain in the job from one administration to the next.
However, Duffey, a former Wisconsin Republican Party executive director who has headed the National Security Programs section at OMB since May, began signing apportionments Aug. 3.
In a letter to OMB Sept. 27, House Budget Chairman John Yarmuth, D-Ky., and Appropriations Chairwoman Nita M. Lowey, D-N.Y., wrote they had "serious concerns that recent apportionment actions" by OMB "to withhold military aid for Ukraine and other foreign assistance constitute unlawful impoundments in violation of" the 1974 budget law. They wrote OMB "took the unusual and seemingly unprecedented step of delegating the authority to execute these apportionments to a political appointee."
Former OMB officials said while political appointees were sometimes involved in apportionment in the past, they rarely signed apportionments.
"In five years, I only ever got involved in one apportionment decision that I can remember," said Gordon Adams, a political appointee who oversaw national security programs under President Bill Clinton. "In no case did I ever sign an apportionment letter."
He said political appointees in general "don't know enough about the whole breadth of programs to accurately make a judgment about what an apportionment should be. And the staff people have been doing it for decades."
Senior administration officials say apportionment is a delegated authority, and that the OMB director can delegate it to political appointees.
Administration officials say Duffey was not trying to evade potential objections from career officials by signing apportionments.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/sns-tns-bc-...

Impoundment of Appropriated Funds

In his Third Annual Message to Congress, President Jefferson established the first faint outline of what years later became a major controversy. Reporting that $50,000 in funds which Congress had appropriated for fifteen gunboats on the Mississippi remained unexpended, the President stated that a “favorable and peaceful turn of affairs on the Mississippi rendered an immediate execution of the law unnecessary... .” But he was not refusing to expend the money, only delaying action to obtain improved gunboats; a year later, he told Congress that the money was being spent and gun-boats were being obtained.628 A few other instances of deferrals or refusals to spend occurred in the Nineteenth and early Twentieth Centuries, but it was only with the Administration of President Franklin Roosevelt that a President refused to spend moneys for the purposes appropriated. Succeeding Presidents expanded upon these precedents, and in the Nixon Administration a well-formulated plan of impoundments was executed in order to reduce public spending and to negate programs established by congressional legislation.629

Impoundment630 was defended by Administration spokesmen as being a power derived from the President’s executive powers and particularly from his obligation to see to the faithful execution of the laws, i.e., his discretion in the manner of execution. The President, the argument went, is responsible for deciding when two conflicting goals of Congress can be harmonized and when one must give way, when, for example, congressional desire to spend certain moneys must yield to congressional wishes to see price and wage stability. In some respects, impoundment was said or implied to flow from certain inherent executive powers that repose in any President. Finally, statutory support was sought; certain laws were said to confer discretion to withhold spending, and it was argued that congressional spending programs are discretionary rather than mandatory.631

https://law.onecle.com/constitution/articl...

Another lie deacon of WHAT?

…... There's no resemblance to the Clinton impeachment at all.

billyBoy Clinton fellated in Oval Office with a litteGal……

…….. He Lied about "havingRelations" with that littleGal

mintJulip Lindsay from South Carolina Prosecuted successfully an IMPEACHMENT>……..

Don't you understand that congress had already earmarked that monies for the defense of Ukraine without any Quid - Pro - Quo or personal gain like getting dirt on The Binden's or investigating any corruption?

What's the matter Steve, you don't believe Trump said those words?

It's not about personal gain Ron. It's about making sure Ukraine investigates the corruption of the Bidens and the corruption of America's 2016 election. It's a damn shame you don't give a s-hit about that.

Ukraine or any other florigen country should have nothing, I repeat "NOTHING" to do with U.S. elections and that is the POINT Steve and YES, I don't give a damn about that, don't you?

Hey Little Bobby (robert) Powder,

Did you see that video material yet?

Ron, nobody but you are talking about 2020. WE are talking about 2016 and earlier. We can clearly see the corruption that was in the highest reaches of our government and we are rooting it out.

Remember Ron, "No one is above the law."

Remember what you said Steve.

I've remembered 2016 for the last three years Ron, have you?

As I sit in front of the computer, I am looking at what the people of Kentucky has done. They have elected Andy Beshear Democrat as They sent a message to Trump, to stop crying now, his man is OUT!

Remember Trump won this state by 30 points, now he can't pull anyone over the finish line, sorry Steve. People are learning to truth about Trump regardless of your efforts. LOL!!!

Trump has lost nothing in Kentucky Ron. For 3 years you've thrown everything you have at him and he hasn't shed a tear, and you have become the laughingstock of the world.