This is not, "another finding", sorry.
This is another OPINION.
YOUR linked to article states;
1) This is according to a "nonpartisan congressional watchdog".
(These watchdog groups do not determine what is legal or not, they inform you of what they see as government errors or shortcomings. This particular one, by their very title, watches over Congress anyway, sooo………...)
2) "The GAO said in a decision issued Thursday that the White House budget office violated the Impoundment Control Act, a 1974 law that limits the White House from withholding funds that Congress has appropriated."
(Note this is their "decision". Nothing more. An OPINION."
3) The Office of Management and Budget told the GAO it "withheld the funds to ensure that they were not spent 'in a manner that could conflict with the President's foreign policy,'"
(The OMB's OPINION.)
4) "But the GAO rejected that argument."
(HUH? How is THAT? Under what authority is the GAO granted the power to accept or reject the validity of the opinions of all?)
5) The GAO wrote, "OMB withheld funds for a policy reason, which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act. The withholding was not a programmatic delay."
(And under whose authority was this watchdog group granted the right and ability to determine whose reason for delays is "the" one and only correct one ?)
6) "Therefore, we conclude that OMB violated the ICA."
( Well hells bells, there you have it...…..this BS is actually a legal finding because, well, as was stated, this watchdog group concluded it was...…….Damn.)
7) "This bombshell legal opinion from the independent Government Accountability Office demonstrates, without a doubt, that the Trump Administration illegally withheld security assistance from Ukraine."
(Where did it do that exactly? Demonstrate without a doubt that the Trump Administration acted illegally I mean.)
8) "The publicly available evidence also shows that the President himself ordered this illegal act, Sen. Chris Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat, said.
"The act perhaps, it doesn't show it was illegal, otherwise we wouldn't be hearing about all these OPINIONS on the matter, correct? So this being in the OPINION of the good Sen. from Maryland makes this sh it no more legitimate than the opinions of you and I, sorry but that is just the truth.)