You said:
“ Your contention that I favor an Imperial Congress is wrong and immature. The Oversight must be proper and not out of political revenge or power. The role of oversight is an important function within checks and balances in order to guard against waste, fraud, and abuse. Executive investigation against members of Congress goes likewise or do you think Congress should only police itself? “
_________
Well I think some of your contention that I favor an Imperial Executive and tyrants, etc… is wrong and immature so you got it right back at ya. But in all seriousness I do think that your vision is one of a Imperial Congress.
As I have said where is oversight mentioned in the Constitution?
And who is it that decides what is ‘proper’ oversight? If there is a Congress who just hates the President and/or just wants to play politics and render him impotent then what would stop them from running all over the Executive branch with the power you would give them? He would have to get their approval before exercising his power and of course they could easily make up argument after argument against anything that he would set forth to do.
I believe in the separation and balance of power that is outlined in the Constitution whereas certain power is enumerated to each branch. These are not shared powers but are specific powers to each branch as outlined in the Constitution. Congress has its own power that it can use to check and balance the power of the Executive.