Terry Sampson
Well-Known Member
As the impeachment hearings grind on, Trump has presented his strongest defense so far: the "monkey see-monkey do" argument, which goes something like this:
Regarding the aid withheld by the Obama Administration:
FACT CHECK: President Trump’s False Claim Equating His Illegal Ukraine Aid Freeze With President Obama’s Lawful, Legitimate Pauses On Aid | United States Senate Committee on Appropriations
- Major premise: A black did it and got away with it.
- Minor premise: What a black can do, a monkey can do.
- Conclusion: A monkey cannot be impeached.
- Quod est demonstrandum.
- "In the summer of 2019, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) withheld from obligation funds appropriated to the Department of Defense (DOD) for security assistance to Ukraine. In order to withhold the funds, OMB issued a series of nine apportionment schedules with footnotes that made all unobligated balances unavailable for obligation.
Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law. OMB withheld funds for a policy reason, which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA). The withholding was not a programmatic delay. Therefore, we conclude that OMB violated the ICA."
Regarding the aid withheld by the Obama Administration:
FACT CHECK: President Trump’s False Claim Equating His Illegal Ukraine Aid Freeze With President Obama’s Lawful, Legitimate Pauses On Aid | United States Senate Committee on Appropriations
- Patently false equivalence between Trump’s misconduct and President Obama’s actions.
- Unlike Trump’s Ukraine aid freeze, which was for personal, political purposes and which the Government Accountability Office found was illegal, all of the Obama administration’s pauses of foreign aid cited by Trump were:
- 1. Done consistent with authority provided by Congress, which has the exclusive power of the purse;
- 2. Made in consultation with Congress and not in secret; and
- 3. To promote important, bipartisan U.S. national interests, not personal interests.
- Unlike Trump’s Ukraine aid freeze, which was for personal, political purposes and which the Government Accountability Office found was illegal, all of the Obama administration’s pauses of foreign aid cited by Trump were:
- Background on the Obama administration examples cited by President Trump and his defenders:
- Ukraine: When the Obama administration threatened to withhold a $1 billion loan guarantee to Ukraine in exchange for legitimate anti-corruption reforms, it was doing so as part of a congressionally supported, coordinated, and international effort along with our partners in the European Union and the International Monetary Fund. Furthermore, this threat to withhold aid did not usurp Congress’s appropriations power because Congress had not required the administration to use these funds for this purpose.
- Pakistan: When the Obama administration publicly announced it would suspend $800 million in aid to Pakistan following its murder of a journalist and its failure to take action against militant networks conducting attacks against U.S. forces, it did so pursuant to clear statutory authority granted by Congress. Specifically, in Section 1220(b)(2) of the 2011 National Defense Authorization Act, Congress made aid to Pakistan contingent on promoting human rights, fundamental freedoms, and respect for legitimate civilian authority.
- Colombia: Congress, not the Obama administration, imposed conditions on aid to Colombia pursuant to clear statutory authority. Under Section 7045 of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, Congress has conditioned a portion of aid to Colombia on progress on human rights and rule of law issues for nearly two decades.
- Philippines: When the Obama administration did not approve an additional Millennium Challenge Corporation Compact for the Philippines, it did so because President Duterte’s extrajudicial killings as part of his so called “drug war” undercut the Philippines’ eligibility for this aid under the Millennium Challenge Act of 2003, as amended. Congress was briefed on the decision-making process to withhold this aid from the Philippines.
- Egypt: When the Obama administration withheld a portion of U.S. aid to Egypt, it did so because the Egyptian regime’s brutal crackdown on and killings of political opponents raised serious questions about compliance with multiple, longstanding, bipartisan human rights conditions imposed on foreign aid generally and specifically on aid to Egypt by Congress (including Section 7041 of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act).
- Honduras: The Obama administration at times withheld aid from Honduras based on various statutory conditions – for example, Section 7045 of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act – related to human rights, rule of law, resolution of commercial disputes involving U.S. companies, and similar policy goals.
- Mexico: When the Obama administration withheld aid to Mexico, it did so because of human rights conditions imposed by Congress on a portion of aid to Mexico pursuant to Section 7045 of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act.
