Donald Trump signed a $1.4 trillion spending package on Friday night, averting a government shutdown, but he would have threatened a veto had lawmakers refused to remove language requiring the prompt release of military aid to Ukraine.
That’s according to five administration and congressional officials.
The Ukraine provision would have forced Trump to release a quarter-billion in military aid for the country within 45 days. The language – which required White House Office of Management and Budget to sign off on the release of the money with no delays – was a “non-starter” for Trump, sources said.
Hilariously, White House legislative affairs director Eric Ueland admitted as much. “We made crystal clear that no restriction on the president’s apportionment powers would be acceptable to him regardless of topic”, he told The Washington Post, which reported the news.
Of course, the White House claimed that their objection to the provision had nothing to do with a desire to leave the door open for Trump to bribe Ukraine again once he’s acquitted in the Senate. Rather, Trump viewed it as an unacceptable encroachment on executive branch discretion on the handling of congressionally-approved funding.
“The impeachment inquiry focused in part on a Pentagon program called the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative and how it was handled for the 2019 fiscal year”, the Post reminds you, adding that “the Ukraine provision that was kept out of this week’s spending bill involved the same program and the same amount of money, but for the 2020 fiscal year, which ends next September”.
Relatedly, the White House demanded the removal of language that would have made OMB apportionment letters public. The effort to promote transparency would have made it more difficult for the administration to clandestinely manipulate the release of funds for inappropriate purposes.
As the Post details, that language did not originate with the Ukraine affair. Rather, Democrats wrote it in response to concerns over the administration’s handling of disaster relief money for Puerto Rico. The president has, on numerous occasions, suggested the government spent too much money assisting the island following a devastating hurricane.
“These issues were negotiated primarily by the Appropriations Committee and OMB”, Nancy Pelosi’s spokesman Drew Hammill said. “These matters were two among dozens that had to be resolved in order to reach agreement on the two spending bills between both Houses of Congress and the White House”.
Had the language not been removed, there would have likely been a shutdown, he told the Post.
The bill is passed. Let him take veto and responsibility for shutting down the government over the demand to bribe when it suits his purpose. It would seem to drive home the point of the articles of impeachment.
Perhaps there is a long game I don’t see.
Gosh, there doesn’t appear to be a limit as to the amount of damage he can do.