Rep. Roy's remarks against politicized committee's effort to hold Mark Meadows in contempt of Congress

Statement

Rep. Chip Roy gave the following remarks Tuesday evening ahead of his vote against a resolution to hold former Congressman and former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows in contempt of Congress:

A year ago in January, I spoke on this floor in defense of the Rule of Law, and my view that it was incumbent upon Congress to count the electors sent to us from the respective states.

In doing so, I reminded this chamber that "We are deeply divided."

Now, we are a nation perilously divided further. And a divided nation must return to first principles.

Those first principles include separation of powers and in so doing, the judicious use of the Congressional subpoena power as requiring, per the U.S. Supreme Court, "a valid legislative purpose."

That power is not, per the Court, limitless. It is not, per the Court, a "power to expose for the sake of exposure." It is not, per the Court, a power to "punish," as such would be "indefensible."

The Jan. 6th Committee was born in politics. After all, we have standing committees, like Judiciary, which have had precisely zero hearings about the 500 Americans who have been charged, arrested, and/or in jailed regarding January 6 -- and then the natural pursuit of any conspiracy associated with the crimes alleged against them.

No, this select committee continually moves the goalposts far from a core legislative purpose. Indeed, one target seeking to claim privilege was told to take specific steps to claim that privilege, then did so, and then was told 'sorry, this was not sufficient en route to contempt.'

Now, we have the targeting of our friend, Mark Meadows.

Congressman Meadows sought accommodation -- and while, yes, it is between branches -- the question of privilege regarding the former President continues to be litigated for good reason.

The gentlelady from Wyoming outlined text messages from some of us imploring action by the President. The text messages from which she read were, in fact, turned over by Mr. Meadows.

He produced more than 1,100 documents totaling over 9,000 pages and more than 2,300 text messages. Mr. Meadows offered to appear before the committee to address agreed upon non-privileged substance and communications, and agrees to continue to work through questions of privilege.

But again, here we are, facing a vote to hold Mr. Meadows in contempt.

Anger over January 6th and the events leading to it is not reason for a committee formed in that anger and in partisanship to exercise unlimited power to command attendance and production while moving the goalposts.

This itself is an assault on liberty and our Republic.

Source