taken by members of the administration. the charge is abuse of power. what the majority is upset about is that the president and administration ist exercising s power under the constitution, its authorized powers. for example, the president s authority to set foreign policy and fire, for example, an ambassador is not a smear on an official. it s the use of article 2 section 2 of the constitution. the president is authorized by statute to put a stop on the distribution of funds. the president is instructed in the ndaa to ask for and monitor investigations into corruption in the ukraine. when you talk about direct testimony from individuals like
tennessee s debate on the last subject, shows what we re dealing with. this iswe not a rifle shot impeachment with facts and no evidence. this is bird shot. he talked about everything from campaign finance concerns to trump university, concerns about clarities. this is like pin the tail on your favorite impeachment theory because they don t have any evidence on one single thing to impeach the president for. i yield back. the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does mr. mcclintock seek recognition. move to strike the last word. the gentleman is recognized. the constitution introduces the president with 15 words, executive power shall be vested in a president of the united states of america. ite does not vest any authorit in lieutenant colonel, nsc, ambassadors, state department officials or cabinet secretary.
pro quo, mulvaney said we do that all the time with foreign policy. getor over it. let meov remind you of a statemt that dr. fiona hill made in her opening statement and her extraordinary powerful opening statement, incredible testimony before this congress. she said,re and i quote, if the president or anyone else impedes or subverities the national security of the united states in order to further a domestic politicalti or personal interes that is more than worthy of your attention. i ask my colleagues respectfully on the other side of this dias, is it not worthy of our attention to uphold the constitution and ask the president to do the same, or do they think it is proper? do they think it s okay for any president, not just this one, but for any president to invite foreign interference into our
corruptly in that report. as pertains to obstruction of justice it was stated, quote, corruptly means acting with an improper motive or with intent to obtain an improper advantage for himself or someone else inconsistent with the official duty and the rights of others. by that standard, by mueller s own standard, the president s behavior is entirely inconsistent with the definition of the underlying statute. with that i yield back to my friend and colleague from alabama. i yield the remainder of my time to the gentleman from texas. thank you, ms. roby, so much. first of all i was astounded, having been a prosecutor, i ve defended some cases. i ve been a judge. i ve sent a lot of people to prison, but i ve never sent someone to prison where the victim didn t know our figure out that they were a victim.
there is none. you can call it whatever you want and try to sell it to the american people, but they re not buying it. they re not. it s going to get harder and harder for members to go to that well next week, go to that ballotgo where they stick their card in and vote yes on abuse of power and go back and explain that. it s easy in this room. you ve got help in your colleagues. when you re back home trying to explain why you re going to take down a president duly elected over abuse of power because of some of the arguments we ve heard this morning, that s just amazing. there is true skepticism about what went on in the ukraine, it s deeply rooted with this president. there was another time when ukraine aid was held.ra it s not the irs if time. skeptical of foreign aid. this before. most people are amazed he does those kind of things. that s what a president who shows true leadership does.