…here’s some bad news for you.
As is not being reported by most mainstream media, but is nonetheless true, the General Accounting Office (GAO) has a history of accusing presidents of “stuff”, which usually is laughed off and ignored.
In fact, as Joel B. Pollak of breitbart.com points out, the GAO went after Barack Obama 7 different times during his presidency…and was ignored every one of those times.
From Mr. Pollak’s commentary:
Democrats and journalists were excited Thursday when the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a legal opinion that the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had violated the Impoundment Control Act by withholding congressionally appropriated aid to Ukraine last summer.
The non-binding opinion was disputed by the OMB, which released a memo last month arguing that the “programmatic” delay sought to fulfill, not oppose, congressional intent.
Nevertheless, if a mere GAO finding is sufficient to justify impeachment, then President Barack Obama ought to have been impeached at least seven times over for each of the following cases in which the GAO found that the Obama administration had violated federal law.
As you might guess, Mr. Pollak’s article goes on to enumerate and explain each of the seven “violations” of federal law the GAO accused then-President Obama of.
Do you remember any of them offhand? I’d bet anything you don’t – because mainstream media laughed them off, one after the other.
But are they laughing this one off, when the alleged Violater-In-Chief is President Trump? Nope. Of course not.
In any event, there you have it. Another tempest in a teapot, timed perfectly to take attention away from the two major pieces of good news brought to us by the Trump administration this week – the China pact and passage of the USMCA replacement of NAFTA.
But, then again, what’s more important? A non-binding finding by the GAO that is disputed by the OMB, or the huge boost to our farming industry and the untold billions of dollars and job creation China and USMCA will bring?
The coverage by our wonderful “neutral” media will provide the answer, I’m sure……..