Guest essay by Eric Worrall
US Democrats are incensed that President Trump is blocking US funds for the incompetent UN World Health Organisation.
Trump’s WHO funding threat echoes action that got him impeached, Democrats say
PUBLISHED WED, APR 15 20203:50 PM EDTUPDATED WED, APR 15 20204:00 PM EDT
…
President Donald Trump’s first step toward pulling World Health Organization funding during the coronavirus pandemic has set the stage for another legal tug of war with House Democrats wary of him treading on their power.
…
“This decision is dangerous, illegal and will be swiftly challenged,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a statement Wednesday.
The party also raised the specter of the White House’s decision to withhold congressionally-approved military aid to Ukraine last year as Trump urged the country to investigate his political rival, apparent Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden. The action led to the House impeaching Trump. The Senate acquitted him in February.
“In a desperate attempt to deflect blame, President Trump is violating the same spending laws that brought about his impeachment,” House Appropriations Committee spokesman Evan Hollander said in a statement. “The President does not have the unilateral authority to withhold the United States’ assessed contribution to the World Health Organization.”
…
Read more: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/15/coronavirus-democrats-warn-trump-on-world-health-organization-funding.html
Reading the Impoundment entry on Wikipedia, it seems likely President Trump can only delay funding for the WHO for 45 days – a longer delay requires approval by both houses.
Presidents used to have the power to unilaterally cancel wasteful expenditure. The power was first used by President Thomas Jefferson to veto the expenditure of $50,000 on gunboats.
The Presidential power to permanently veto funding was removed under President Nixon in 1974; the Democrat Congress was incensed that Nixon kept using the impoundment power to withdraw funding from their bills, and used the Watergate scandal to pressure Nixon into approving the restriction of Presidential authority to withhold funds.
A few years later US National Debt started ballooning (see image at the top of the page).
President Clinton attempted to introduce a similar power, a line item veto, but quickly lost that power when the line item veto act was challenged and overturned in the courts.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
WP (cough)
Trump has already said that does not intend to not spend it, he will just circumvent WHO kleptocracy and find more direct routes to where the money needs to be spent.
Sounds like a great idea whether WHO wants to reform or not. Win-win.
Look at the jaw-dropping numbers that just came out of China. I have seen them on Wikipedia. A 20-fold lie. Go Dems Go. Believe what China says about emissions reductions too.
Trump also has a phone and a pen. So eat it dunce-o-craps. The frozen ass kicking rubber boot is on the other foot now.
I apologize if this is off topic, but the numbers at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:2019%E2%80%9320_coronavirus_pandemic_data/Mainland_China_medical_cases_chart still don’t look right. 82692 deaths is a lot more realistic than the 4000-or-so being reported as recently as this morning, but the decline in daily change seems to rapid and orderly.
The NHC page lined beneath the numbers (http://www.nhc.gov.cn/yjb/pzhgli/new_list.shtml) doesn’t have an item that contains the numbers or a reference to them. We don’t seem to have the whole story yet.
The democrats obviously view the population of the US as an expendable and renewable natural resource. Desperate times call for desperate measures and Pelosi and the gang will sacrifice anyone to try and gain some political traction at this point. The more desperate people the better in their book. They will extend this economic shutdown for as long as they possibly can as long as they believe it is to their electoral advantage. In their minds the ruination will only create more people dependent on the government and that is who they target as the bulk of their voting base.
Each earlier attempt to impeach Trump failed for lack of evidence. Now they are left with extremely thin gruel. Compare these charges (withholding funding to an incompetent and biased WHO) with some of the actual crimes committed by previous presidents and vice-presidents: cheating on taxes (Agnew, VP), covering up the Watergate break-in (Nixon, Pres.) perjury and suborning perjury (Clinton, Pres.), hiding all her emails on an illegal server (Mrs. Clinton, Sec State, included because this was so egregious, even though she was not president or VP), and Trump for winning. Agnew and Nixon resigned before the House began a formal procedure. Both Clintons were clearly guilty. President Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives but was not convicted in the Senate, which requires a 2/3 vote. H Clinton was never even charged for crimes that put several other people in prison for significant sentences or forced to resign their position, although they committed one or two counts. She committed one count for each e-mail that she moved off the official government network onto her private and unsecure server. They have discovered tens of thousands of emails, some with highly sensitive information. The attack on Trump has nothing to do with innocence or guilt, and everything to do with his election in the first place. It’s the liberal establishment power brokers’ own fault – they supported a candidate that had too much baggage to win. This attempt to impeach him will just push some more people in the middle to vote for him. Sadly, I will have to vote for him – as dumb as he is, he’s better than the other option.
“Each earlier attempt to impeach Trump failed for lack of evidence.”
Wrong. It failed for lack of charges. Also, lack of a impeachment procedure lawfully started. Pelosi has no power to declare an impeachment. There was no impeachment, and no charges anyway. It’s a sham.
“Mrs. Clinton, Sec State, included because this was so egregious, even though she was not president or VP”
We know that President Obama sent her emails, on her own private email domain name, so he is complicit.
I apologize if I sounded a false alarm at 1:42 pm. The most likely explanation for the current state of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019–20_coronavirus_pandemic_in_mainland_China is that an update to the Cases column was spliced into the Deaths column. Cabin fever and fears about what CoViD could do to the vulnerable population elsewhere in China did the rest.
From the article: “Reading the Impoundment entry on Wikipedia, it seems likely President Trump can only delay funding for the WHO for 45 days – a longer delay requires approval by both houses.”
Forty-five days is about all Trump needs. What Trump wants is for WHO Director Tedros to resign and the WHO agrees to major reforms.
Trump’s “cutting all the money” is part of the “Art of the Deal”.
I don’t think Trump is the only one unhappy with the WHO. The UK and others have been grumbling. Tedros should go find himself a good job in China. China’s leaders need practiced propagandists and I think Tedros qualifies.
The Impoundment Control Act is a farce. The only remedies are bureaucratic and civil. Failure to comply with the Act is not a “High crime or Misdemeanor”. It is not a crime of any sort at all.
Secondly, the act is unconstitutional, especially when it is applied to the President’s power to conduct foreign relations. Budget authorizations are just that, authorizations. They are not blank checks delivered to third parties. The President will often want to be authorized to give money to foreigners. Bribery of foreigners has been an important part of diplomacy since Classical Antiquity.
But, the BCA cannot possibly be construed to prevent the President from not delivering money to foreigners when the interests of the United States, in the President’s judgment require him to turn off the tap.
Thirdly, I think Nancy has a great idea. Impeach Trump for not sending money to anti-American toadies of the Chinese. She will prove that the previous impeachment was indeed a politicized farce, and she will ensure his landslide re-election.
Anyone that doesn’t already know that the first impeachment was a farce is an idiot. IG changing the criteria for a whistleblower from a person with first hand knowledge to one that has nothing but hearsay so the “charges” could be fabricated. So called whistleblower never testifying in public and proven to have coordinated with Adam Schiff’s staff. Schiff with his secret restricted meetings in the basement to plot it. The speaker of the house declaring the start of impeachment proceedings instead of having a vote as required. Not a single witness testifying publicly in the house and then the demand by the Pelosi and the democrats for public testimony by witnesses in the Senate except for the so called whistleblower accuser who’s identity they claimed must be protected at all costs.
Also, bribery is an essential part of the power of a leader. And it’s 100% legitimate. Bribing bad people is what good leaders do. It was never intended to be an impeachable offense. Or an offense at all.
The intentional misreading of the Constitution at play during the sham impeachment was… impeachable.
Should say not a single witness that saw the crime(s) committed testifying publicly in the house.
I have this gut feeling that at the next presidential election that the USA electorate are going to leave the Dumbocrats well and truly stuck on the naughty step. This is the view of the childish behaviour of the Democrats from across the pond. When is some one going to take the party of JFK and LBJ by the scruff of its neck and shake some sense into it? The UK has the same problem with the Labour party.
The democrats would get hammered if they tried to impeach Trump for holding the WHO to account. It would be perceived by the public that they were supporting the WHO incompetence that lead to deaths. Trump would have a field day with this
Odd correlation.
Nixon repealed the Dollar convertibility of the Bretton-Woods in 1971, by 1973 floating currencies took off, and debt ballooned with the creation of vast volumes of dollars in London and London’s “offshores”, through the eurodollar and petrodollar markets, even as the dollar has been supposed to be the international reserve currency. $5 trillion/day in currency speculation transactions. London again the world’s financial center. Speculative activity emphasized over real economic investment, and further falling living standards, both up to and after the 2007-08 crash.
Restore Bretton-Woods now with China onboard.
My view. Perhaps someone who knows more about the legality of appropriations knows better but it does not appear that the Dems have any standing on this one.
The 2020 Appropriations bill H.R. 2839 never mentioned WHO as a Congressionally directed funding target or required contribution. WHO would be typically rolled under the $1.52 B funding for “International Multilateral Organizations.” POTUS has wide latitude to conduct foreign policy and to distribute any supporting funding. Democratic assertions that his action is illegal and impeachable is likely specious.
Another impeachment hoax??
To be quite honest, I think the democrats will have more to worry about than trying for impeachment 2.0 once all this gets out into the public …:
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/04/17/declassified-doj-letter-to-fisa-court-highlights-severe-institutional-corruption-doj-blames-fbi-for-spygate/
… that is if the lying anti-Trump MSM are game enough to touch it.