well, it's not a thing here (afaik), but that makes a lot of sense. then again, didn't hugh grant get a blowjob from some hideous hooker? so maybe some of the deer are 'lucky'...

It took me like 10 seconds to get the Hugh Grant connection. good analogy lol

Would you look at that.

That's weird, because it explicitly, specifically refutes any defenses Joe Biden has for withholding aid from Ukraine to get a prosecutor fired: He can't substitute his own foreign policy for that authorized by congress, not whether its a 'legitimate' US policy or personal reason, it would be unlawful under this GAO finding either way. Except for some reason, the GAO only chose to issue a statement on Trump withholding aid, not Biden, despite being virtually identical scenarios.

the GAO is a colossal waste of taxpayer dollars. there has been systemic waste of taxpayer funds to the tune of trillions for decades on decades across so many administrations, and they decided to make a political one-off statement under the guise of 'accountability' because someone at the top is an election-denier

The same bodies should do Democrats and America a favor then and issue the same statement on Biden.

If your point is that the statement is political in nature by not saying the same on Biden, fine. But this does seem to implicate the Trump administration in unlawful behavior, whether Biden did the same or not.

yes, but that's also an issue because impeachment is itself political in nature and there is no crime in this 'unlawful behavior', rather its a dispute over legal authority and policy
the kind of stuff that congress and the executive have court cases and spats over all the time, every administration. Like Obama unlawfully granting deferred immigration enforcement status to the parents of illegal aliens in DAPA, something ruled on by the courts. What you wind up with is a scenario in which Trump and Biden both engaged in the same executive overreach in similar situations, but while democrats pursue impeachment against Trump and the GAO feels the need to make political statements over it, Biden gets a free pass and brushes it aside saying its not relevant- while running for president to replace Trump. Which is what makes this all so farcical.

Its also especially an issue when impeachment is supposed to be reserved for high crimes and misdemeanors, not disputes over legal authority. That rationale would have been grounds to impeach Obama about 5,000 times.

This post was edited by Goomshill on Jan 16 2020 11:21am

Impeachment is political in nature. There are probably multiple occasions where every one of our past Presidents has violated the law.

I would posit that negotiating with a foreign country to investigate one of your political opponents does meet that political bar of a high crime and misdemeanor, especially if funds were unlawfully held to do so.

have you read about this fun historical parallel?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/01/15/james-madison-donald-trump-did-same-thing-trump-got-impeached/

Interesting read. Yeah, Madison should have probably been impeach over that, too. Lol. Looks like the Federalists did not make a move toward it because they did not control the House, unlike 2019-2021 Democrats.