Posted on 05/09/2024 6:57:04 PM PDT by Macho MAGA Man
Articles to impeach President Joe Biden over his decision to withhold aid to Israel for political reasons are in preparation, freshman Rep. Cory Mills (R-FL) announced Thursday.
Biden’s decision to withhold bombs from Israel is concerning due to its political implications. Biden’s base wants him to defund Israel, while many moderate Democrats support Israel’s ability to defend itself against terrorists. Biden appears stuck between competing coalitions during an election year. He currently trails in the polls to Trump and has a historically low approval rating to win reelection as an incumbent.
Democrats accused former President Donald Trump in 2019 of withholding military aid from Ukraine for alleged political reasons.
“These are the same accusations made against President Trump, which resulted in his impeachment by Democrats. The same must happen for Joe Biden, which is why we’re drawing up articles of impeachment now,” Mills told Fox News.
Impeachment proceedings already have some support. “The House has no choice but to impeach Biden based on the Trump-Ukraine precedent of withholding foreign aid to help with reelection,” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) posted on X. “Only with Biden, it’s true.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
I asked this same question earlier today!
Wasn’t Trump impeached for holding up arms shipments?
Be fun to hear the arguments made by Dems about that action by Trump back then.
From when Trump / Ukraine:
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) is asking the Government Accountability Office (GAO) for an opinion on the legality of President Trump’s decision to hold up Ukraine aid.
Van Hollen sent a letter on Monday to Gene Dodaro, the GAO comptroller general, outlining why he believes Trump’s decision violated the Impoundment Control Act (ICA), which restricts a president’s ability to withhold funds appropriated by Congress.
“The Administration has failed to even state a legal reason under the ICA for its withholding of security assistance for Ukraine, and the evidence refutes the Administration’s stated reasons,” Van Hollen wrote in the letter, which was obtained by The Hill ahead of its release.
“The Administration must be held accountable for its
violations of the ICA, or we will open the floodgates for this and future Administrations to violate the ICA with impunity,” Van Hollen continued.
The GAO announced last month that it was probing Trump’s decision to delay $400 million in security assistance to Ukraine. The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has said it followed the correct procedures in holding the funding, which was released in mid-September.
Saint George Floyd and Black Looting Matters was the 2020 version.
Oh and this key language from that article:
Van Hollen said in his letter that under the ICA, a president has to notify Congress if they want to claw back or freeze funding already passed by lawmakers. But, “not only did the President not notify Congress of a deferral or rescission,” Van Hollen noted that the Defense Department told Congress twice that the funds would be obligated.
He added that Trump’s “corrupt purpose” for delaying the aid does not meet the ICA’s definition of a “programming delay,” in which an agency can temporarily delay obligating money as they prepare to implement a program.
“It should be clear that the corrupt purposes identified by the House impeachment inquiry for withholding Ukraine aid violated the ICA,” Van Hollen wrote.
They’ve had a million reasons already to impeach Biden but did nothing. Until now when aid to Israel is threatened. Shows you their priorities. Closing the southern border is last on their list.
Thanks for bringing that to our attention.
Mark Levin eviscerated the Biden on Hannity.
It was magnificent:
https://www.foxnews.com/shows/hannity
Here’s the language from the Democrats at the time justifying Trump’s impeachment:
In addition to establishing the Congressional Budget Committees and the independent Congressional Budget Office, the Impoundment Control Act also limits the circumstances under which a president can legally impound Congressionally-appropriated funds.
According to the Act, although the President may request authority from Congress to withhold or permanently cancel the availability of budget authority, such an action is not allowed without Congressional approval. Any amount of budget authority proposed to be de-ferred (i.e., temporarily withheld) or rescinded (i.e., permanently withheld) must be made available for obligation unless Congress, within 45 legislative days, completes action on a bill rescinding all or part of the amount proposed for rescission. The Impoundment Control Act does not permit the withholding of funds through their date of expiration, which would be a de facto rescission without Congressional approval.
https://www.congress.gov/116/crpt/hrpt335/CRPT-116hrpt335.pdf
No sense in Impeaching him, he is hopefully on the way out. THEN charge him with Treason for not defending the border.
How about BOTH?
...so what either way, impeachments are nothing but political kabuki and just another distraction.
Ha!
So will he change his story now?
The language bashing Trump for this is still on their website:
Hearings
Markups & Business Meetings
Budgets
The Inflation Reduction Act
The American Rescue Plan
Investing in America
Committee Schedule
Resources
Reports & Documents
Budget Basics
Focus on Function
Letters
Priorities
Affordable Health Care For All
Expanding Access to Education & Opportunity
Improving America’s Fiscal Outlook
Investing in Children & Families
Protecting Congress’ Power of the Purse
Supporting Our Military & Veterans
Tackling the Climate Crisis
Newsroom
Press Releases
Contact
Home
Resources
Reports & Documents
The Impoundment Control Act of 1974: What Is It? Why Does It Matter?
October 23, 2019
Report
Download PDF
What is the Impoundment Control Act?
The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (ICA) reasserted Congress’ power of the purse. Specifically, Title X of the Act – “Impoundment Control” – established procedures to prevent the President and other government officials from unilaterally substituting their own funding decisions for those of the Congress. The Act also created the House and Senate Budget Committees and the Congressional Budget Office.
Why was the ICA necessary?
Congress passed the ICA in response to President Nixon’s executive overreach – his Administration refused to release Congressionally appropriated funds for certain programs he opposed. While the U.S. Constitution broadly grants Congress the power of the purse, the President – through the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and executive agencies – is responsible for the actual spending of funds. The ICA created a process the President must follow if he or she seeks to delay or cancel funding that Congress has provided.
What does it mean to ‘impound’ funds?
An “impoundment” is any action – or inaction – by an officer or employee of the federal government that precludes federal funds from being obligated[1] or spent, either temporarily or permanently.
How does the ICA work?
The ICA lays out procedures the President must follow to reduce, delay, or eliminate funding in an account. The Act divides impoundments into two categories: rescissions and deferrals.
Rescissions
Put simply, if the President wants to spend less money than Congress provided for a particular purpose, he or she must first secure a law providing Congressional approval to rescind the funding in question. The ICA requires that the President send a special message to Congress identifying the amount of the proposed rescission; the reasons for it; and the budgetary, economic, and programmatic effects of the rescission. Upon transmission of such special message, the President may withhold certain funding in the affected accounts for up to 45 legislative session days. If a law approving the rescission is not enacted within the 45 days, any withheld funds must be made available for obligation.
A 2018 Government Accountability Office legal opinion
holds that if the President proposes a rescission, he or she must make the affected funds available to be prudently obligated before the funds expire, even if the 45-day clock is still running. This means, for example, that the President cannot strategically time a rescission request for late in the fiscal year and withhold the funding until it expires, thus achieving a rescission without Congressional approval.
Deferrals
The ICA defines a “deferral” as withholding, delaying, or – through other Executive action or inaction – effectively precluding funding from being obligated or spent. The ICA prescribes three narrow circumstances in which the President may propose to defer funding for a program: (1) providing for contingencies; (2) achieving budgetary savings made possible through improved operational efficiency; and (3) as specifically provided by law.
The ICA requires that the President send a special message to Congress identifying the amount of the proposed deferral; the reasons for it; and the period of the proposed deferral. Upon transmission of such special message, the funds may be deferred without further action by Congress; however, the deferral cannot extend beyond the end of the fiscal year in which the special message is sent. The ICA language on deferrals is long-standing budget law that allows the Executive branch to delay the obligation or expenditure of funding only for the specified reasons rather than policy reasons.
Why is the ICA important?
Today, 45 years after the ICA became law, Congress once again confronts a President attempting to push past the long-recognized boundaries of executive budgetary power. This year, for the second straight year, the Trump Administration reportedly considered issuing rescission requests for certain foreign aid and security assistance accounts less than 45 days before the end of the fiscal year, when the funds in question would expire. In the closing weeks of fiscal 2019, OMB withheld funding in these accounts in a manner inconsistent with longstanding procedures and policies. The House Budget and Appropriations Committees have serious concerns that President Trump and his administration violated the ICA in withholding these funds. The committees are examining when, why, and how these funds were withheld; and whether these actions prevented agencies from spending the full amount that Congress provided for these activities, thus thwarting the will of Congress. Congress will not bend to executive overreach. It will defend its constitutional power of the purse and the fundamental checks and balances that are critical to our constitutional republic.
Ha.
See if the Democrats take that down tonight!
Ass’t ‘Rat Johnson is not leading the charge?
He’s NOT a “good man”.
They dragged out the Hunter thing so it coincides with Joe being able to pardon Hunter after his last Election (either way, no political price, no jail time).
Hard to believe the GOP moves with urgency.
It would be a first.
Excellent.
STUPID. Impeachment for cutting aid to Israel but NO IMPEACHMENT for opening our border.
Johnson decides if it comes to the floor at all. Then he decides whether he’ll whip votes to get it to pass.
These people have shown no desire to inconvenience Joe. Sad Truth.
They had the kickback scheme going even then, and weren’t about to let Trump spoil the party.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.