Big takeaway is Trump WH knew the hold was illegal: (1) Pentagon warned them, they ignored it; (2) they tried to preemptively blame the military for it; and (3) they scrambled to put together an absurd legal argument to justify it.
More on each:
nytimes.com/2019/12/29/us/…
More on each:
nytimes.com/2019/12/29/us/…
(1) DoD's budget person "notified the [WH] budget office that either $61 million of the money would have to be spent by Monday, Aug. 12 or it would be lost." Not spending the $ in time was illegal. But Trump told Mulvaney to continue the hold.
(2) On Sept 10, a WH official preemptively tried to shift the blame in a lengthy email to DoD suggesting the WH was not responsible if the $ couldn't be spent in time. DoD's response: "You can’t be serious."
The WH was trying to cover its tracks b/c the hold was illegal.
The WH was trying to cover its tracks b/c the hold was illegal.
(3) The WH was preparing to argue that "Trump’s role as commander in chief would simply allow him to override Congress." That's unconstitutional.
If they had a real legal justification, they wouldn't resort to such absurd claims.
If they had a real legal justification, they wouldn't resort to such absurd claims.
So why is this important? Because it blows up the claim that this was about fighting corruption or more $ from the EU. You don't secretly take illegal actions unless you know the thing you're doing is wrong. This was part of the extortion scheme.
justsecurity.org/67489/trumps-h…
justsecurity.org/67489/trumps-h…
