[Vice President] Cheney says top congressional Democrats complicit in spying

Salon ^ | December 22, 2008 | Glenn Greenwald

[rollo tomasi]

By the way stop being so convoluted with your argument. In order to find fraud, waste and abuse (Which you claim can happen) first they must actually be in constant watch for any laws, mismanagement of funds, or corruption (OVERSIGHT) found in the other two Branches then investigate their charges, duh!

Guess what, The E Branch has the Justice Dept. and USSC has Judicial review. Holy Moly a well designed “inefficient” government that checks each branch so that men can truly be free. And a bonus provision attached with that as well, division of powers with the States, only bone head voters blind to corruption could screw this gift up.

[TheBigIf]

You said:
“Apparently your disagreement is historically impotent since Congress has been using THEIR oversight powers for a loooonnnnggggg time. Take it up with Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison etc... who all partook in common sense powers PROVIDED by the certain Constitutional Clauses such as “necessary and proper” (Read into what Hamilton said).

It is good to know that you think various agencies, laws, and acts of war which are funded and passed by Congress are immune to their prowling eyes. Also ALL the actions of Executive officials running wild and denying Constitutional rights to individuals so much so every lawyer would be in glee with all this work you will be providing to them. A would be tyrant would love your vision of government. “

____________

So know you want to make statements without any real point except to just pronounce yourself the winner of this debate.

You have not given any historical example that claims that the Constitutional power given to the executive is only valid if Congress approves of it through some imaginary power of oversight that you attribute to them.

It is your vision of the Constitution that is dangerous and that would lead to tyranny. You would render the Congress as a Supreme entity that the Executive would have to bow down to and to fear. You obviously do not believe in the seperation of powers that our Founders created. You would render the Commander in Chief impotent and would open the door for another attack on our soil.

Your vision is very dangerous to our country and to our Constitution.

[TheBigIf]

You said:
By the way stop being so convoluted with your argument. In order to find fraud, waste and abuse (Which you claim can happen) first they must actually be in constant watch for any laws, mismanagement of funds, or corruption (OVERSIGHT) found in the other two Branches then investigate their charges, duh!
Guess what, The E Branch has the Justice Dept. and USSC has Judicial review. Holy Moly a well designed “inefficient” government that checks each branch so that men can truly be free. And a bonus provision attached with that as well, division of powers with the States, only bone head voters blind to corruption could screw this gift up.

____________

So you think that the Executive is allowed then to rummage through the drawers and files of everyone in Congress in the name of oversight or does it just work one way for you? Why do think that the Justice Department cannot do this? (or did you not know that?)

[TheBigIf]

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/aug/04/court-rules-fbi-raid-violated-jeffersons-rights/

So then explain this.

[rollo tomasi]

"You have not given any historical example that claims that the Constitutional power given to the executive is only valid if Congress approves of it through some imaginary power of oversight that you attribute to them." It's already been ESTABLISHED that Congressional oversight is an implied power. I already explained the common sense implication that allowed Congress this AUTHORITY from the get go. If you don't want to participate in common sense notions and established clauses I can't help you further. All three Branches should fear each other and the people, not just Congress being the bogeyman. If you want to see a Congressional bogeymen look at United States v. Chapman and Jurney v. McCracken.

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?

[TheBigIf]

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.

[rollo tomasi]

The FBI never successfully investigated a sitting Congresscritter before, that is news to me.



Some forced to resign rather than have fellow congresscritters kick them out all due to an Executive Branch investigation. Like I said news to me.

The FBI did managed to keep the cash and not all documents were returned. What is your point, that Jefferson's homework could be taken. Do you actually think that is what oversight is all about? Demand to know what is in the desk/safe etc...No, it's is a constant, efficient, and beneficial check in making sure laws/funding are being followed. You make it sound like a break in operation to go through someones private stash.

[TheBigIf]

You said:

It’s already been ESTABLISHED that Congressional oversight is an implied power. I already explained the common sense implication that allowed Congress this AUTHORITY from the get go. If you don’t want to participate in common sense notions and established clauses I can’t help you further. All three Branches should fear each other and the people, not just Congress being the bogeyman. If you want to see a Congressional bogeymen look at United States v. Chapman and Jurney v. McCracken.

____________

You should put some sort of separation between my words and yours because I missed this part of your post thinking it was part of what you were quoting from mine.

No it has NOT been established that there is a implied power of oversight in the Constitution. Only in your mind has it been. As I said before the laws and House Rules do not supersede the Constitution and the Supreme Court case you cited backs up my position on this and not yours.

[rollo tomasi]

"As I have said where is oversight mentioned in the Constitution?"

I already gave you the Article, section, and the clause, the founders clause, as well as a USSC decsision affirming the implied power. You do know what an implied power is?

Let me help you: A political power not expressly named in a constitution but that is inferred because it is necessary to the performance of an enumerated power. Yes, common sense is truly dead.

[TheBigIf]

You said:

The FBI never successfully investigated a sitting Congresscritter before, that is news to me.

The FBI did managed to keep the cash and not all documents were returned. What is your point, that Jefferson’s homework could be taken. Do you actually think that is what oversight is all about? Demand to know what is in the desk/safe etc...No, it’s is a constant, efficient, and beneficial check in making sure laws/funding are being followed. You make it sound like a break in operation to go through someones private stash.

__________________

Yet you seem to miss that in the case of Jefferson the Court ruled that the Executive could not just have access to the Congressional records or office (for the purpose of oversight) due to the Constitution and to the separation of powers between the branches. The cash was found in his home. His Congressional office search was ruled un-Constitutional.

Yet you had claimed earlier that the Executive had full power of oversight in regards to the Congress (did you not?) I guess you are wrong.

[rollo tomasi]

Your ignorance has summoned the copy and paste regurgitation.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/97-936.pdf

http://www.rules.house.gov/archives/comm_gp_cong_oversight.htm

http://www.espionageinfo.com/In-Int/Intelligence-United-States-Congressional-Oversight-of.html

There is plenty more if you so desire.

[rollo tomasi]

Can Pelosi break into Bush's office? If you think that is my implication of congressional oversight than you are truly ignorant of what it actually pertains to.

[TheBigIf]

“I already gave you the Article, section, and the clause, the founders clause, as well as a USSC decsision affirming the implied power. You do know what an implied power is?

Let me help you: A political power not expressly named in a constitution but that is inferred because it is necessary to the performance of an enumerated power. Yes, common sense is truly dead. “

Maybe you should look up the word oversight in the dictionary because there is no power granted to Congress implicitly or implied that makes them the Supreme supervisors of either of the other two branches or that any other branch needs their approval for the execution of its own Constitutional power.

Congress has the right to pursue information and/or conduct investigations but it is not a Constitutional power of theirs to be supervisors of the Constitutionand all actions of the other two branches as you seem to think.

[TheBigIf]

We are talking about the Constitution here and not house rules and/or laws.

It is your ignorance that continually spews the notion that either Congressional laws or house rules in someway supersede the Constitution.

[rollo tomasi]

“full power of oversight in regards to the Congress”

Bwhahahaaaa, as in investigation purposes towards corruption such as bribes and such. They have certain IMPLIED privileges like Executive critters. Plus oversight in this case is totally different since a Congresscritter is not in charge of actually executing laws/$$$$ passed on behalf of “the people”. It's about the grease not the perverted action.

Do you now need to know the difference between what the Executive Branch does compared to Legislative? I don't think I can hold your hand and point out common sense functions that a forth grader should know and understand. Apparently I need to be more detailed. I don't think my fingers can take it.

[rollo tomasi]

Hey, "The authority of Congress to do oversight is derived from its implied powers in the U.S. Constitution, various laws, and House rules."

House rules is listed third, you forgot the first two implications of where oversight powers come from. You never did mention Article 1 s.8 cl. 18. I guess that flew right by you.

[TheBigIf]

Didnt fly right pass me but I do not agree with your interpretation of it meaning that Congress somehow are the supervisors of themselves and the other two branches.

Your posts are getting more and more insultive and I no longer have time to continue this right now.

Thanks for the discussion (hopefully another time we can continue it) and have a Merry Christmas!

[rollo tomasi]

It doesn’t matter if “it” flies past you, what is established has been since the first Congress through implied powers. What Congress passes and the President signs gets (Or suppose to) checked.

What, is the Executive Branch suppose to take all the money/abuse all the laws and demand Congress look the other way? If you say no, welcome to the world oversight through implied powers (In order that enumerated powers can OPERATE efficiently). If you say yes, welcome to a corrupt government.

[TheBigIf]

So by your notion of “implied” powers of Congress to oversee and supervise the President and Executive branch then the records, communications, and all files of the Executive branch should be made available to the Congress on a weekly or daily basis so that they can approve of whether or not there is any abuse of power in their opinion? You are claiming that the Congress has a “Implied” Constitutional power that has been granted to them right?

[rollo tomasi]

“...Congress somehow are the supervisors of themselves and the other two branches.”

I take corruption seriously. The fact that all these Branches have different functions and different kinds of oversight does not register to you.

The Executive Branch takes the money, diverts it through various departments, in charge of executing the laws, and other such powers like negotiating treaties.

The Legislative Branch is in charge of, to save my fingers Ar.1, section 8, impeachment/conviction, etc...

Oversight on Congresscritters by an investigation dept. of Executive Branch consist of corruption, bribes, and other laws if one or a group working together break. Hence we are not looking at various departments etc. they are looking for individuals, all these guys do is create stuff, to often times, spend on things they favor.

Oversight on the Exec. Branch consist of departments being managed correctly by not themselves but by Congress (As well as other Exec. Dept.), laws the Leg. pass are be followed correctly, and that abuses are not occurring. To deny this responsibility is asking for bad government with no responsibility what so ever. You actually approve of this? Good grief. Are you a relative of a Truman Administration employee that got busted by an oversight committee for abusing funds?

What is your take on the mid 1990’s IRS abuses found by a congressional oversight committee which led to reform protecting the tax payer? I guess all that stuff was unconstitutional in your eyes (Bad Congress, sticking your nose in the Executive's business).