Su­san Wild’s state­ment on im­peach­ment in­quiry of Pres­i­dent Trump

The Morning Call - - NATION / STATE -

Le­high Val­ley Con­gress­woman Su­san Wild said Tues­day that she will sup­port an im­peach­ment in­quiry of Pres­i­dent Don­ald Trump if the ad­min­is­tra­tion does not share with Congress the whistle­blower com­plaint al­leg­ing Trump pres­sured the Ukrainian pres­i­dent to in­ves­ti­gate Joe Bi­den’s fam­ily.

Wild’s full state­ment on im­peach­ment:

“The use of one’s pub­lic of­fice to target po­lit­i­cal op­po­nents and in­vite for­eign in­ter­fer­ence in our elec­tions is un­equiv­o­cally un­ac­cept­able. Equally trou­bling is the Pres­i­dent’s re­peated ob­struc­tion and stonewalli­ng of Congress’s con­sti­tu­tional over­sight re­spon­si­bil­i­ties. To­day, I am an­nounc­ing that, should the ad­min­is­tra­tion con­tinue to with­hold the whistle­blower com­plaint at the heart of this mat­ter, I will sup­port an im­peach­ment in­quiry of the Pres­i­dent of the United States. Be­cause the House of Rep­re­sen­ta­tives has thus far been de­prived of its abil­ity to check the Ex­ec­u­tive in the way our na­tion’s founders in­tended, I view such an in­quiry as the only way to get all of the facts and es­tab­lish whether this Pres­i­dent did, in fact, lever­age the dis­burse­ment of for­eign aid in ex­change for Ukrainian in­ter­fer­ence in our elec­tion. “If these al­le­ga­tions are true, I want to be very clear about what they mean: the Pres­i­dent of the United States used his Of­fice — and tax­payer dol­lars — to co­erce a for­eign leader to in­ves­ti­gate his po­lit­i­cal ri­val for pur­poses of bol­ster­ing his 2020 re-elec­tion prospects. That would be an un­prece­dented abuse of pres­i­den­tial power war­rant­ing the most se­vere and swift rem­edy con­tem­plated in our Con­sti­tu­tion: im­peach­ment. “When the peo­ple of the 7th Con­gres­sional District gave me the honor of rep­re­sent­ing them in Congress, I promised to re­spect the po­lit­i­cal dif­fer­ences in our com­mu­nity and rep­re­sent the in­ter­ests of all my con­stituents, re­gard­less of po­lit­i­cal af­fil­i­a­tion or non­af­fil­i­a­tion. Make no mis­take, in my swing district, this is not the po­lit­i­cally ex­pe­di­ent de­ci­sion. How­ever, should we have to pro­ceed down this route, it is the only de­ci­sion that would be con­sis­tent with the oath I took to sup­port and de­fend the Con­sti­tu­tion and up­hold the laws of the United States. As this process un­folds, I want my con­stituents to know that my top pri­or­i­ties re­main un­changed: I will con­tinue to be laser-fo­cused on im­prov­ing the ev­ery­day lives of hard­work­ing Penn­syl­va­ni­ans across the Greater Le­high Val­ley and ad­vanc­ing my im­por­tant work on the Ed­u­ca­tion & La­bor, For­eign Af­fairs, and Ethics Com­mit­tees.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.