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.