stonewall67

If you don't think the dems sought help from foreign entities then you haven't looked into the origins of the whole "Russian Collusion" and FISA warrant beginnings.

I guess Bernie, Biden, Bloomberg etc. need not look for that coveted endorsement from the throne. Is he for Tulsi????

Apples and oranges. Here is the thing with Benghazi that makes it so different..... Hillarious lied and Americans died. Read the account from those who were there. She should have been grilled and she should have been held accountable. She never was. 9/11 hearings didn't require as much time because there wasn't anyone actively trying to cover up anything.

So you would rather see one of the current crop of dems be President? Which one of those is wanting to balance the budget? Reduce the National debt?

Well, then we walked high school halls at the same time!!!

I can say the same for the other side!!! I read both so as to be able to find the truth in the middle. Trump being bombastic about something isn't a problem with me. The 13K+ lies the left likes to call out are mostly "I had record numbers of people at my inauguration" or "I had the largest victory ever" or "Im the best since Lincoln"..... The left lists those as lies. I care less about his boasting. Here's what I care about. Lower taxes, lower unemployment, higher wages lower restrictions, lower regulations and so on.

The proof will be in the pudding! Poll numbers had Hillarious winning easily. Heck, even exit poll numbers were indicating that. Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Ohio will tell the story. The dems are doing what the republicans have done so many times in the past. Look at the current field of potential candidates. The remind me of Bob Dole, Mitt Romney and John McCain. If I was a dem, I would be worried about what options the party is giving America. Bernie? Old and a socialist. Warren? Proven liar and a socialist. Biden? Old, liar, incoherent, sexist and don't forget...... Bribery is in his past!!!!

I. Introduction Under the United States Constitution, the federal government includes three branches: the legislative branch, consisting of a bicameral Congress with a House of Representatives and a Senate; the executive branch, consisting of the President, the Vice President, the Cabinet, and various agencies and other bodies; and, the judicial branch, consisting of the Supreme Court and the federal appellate and trial courts.[1] Although the branches of the government are distinct and, in broad terms, equal in power, the legislative branch constrains and checks the power of the executive in important ways, including by exercising oversight powers.[2] Back to Top II. Oversight Processes Congressional oversight of the executive branch has existed since the earliest days of the United States Congress.[3] Major processes related to congressional oversight include the investigative, impeachment, confirmation, appropriations, authorization, and budget processes. A. Investigative Process The Supreme Court has held that the power to investigate is implied in the Constitution’s vesting of legislative powers in Congress.[4] In furtherance of these powers, Congress may compel the disclosure of documents or require the attendance and testimony of witnesses at hearings through the issuance of subpoenas.[5] Failure to comply with a valid subpoena or the provision of false statements to Congress may result in criminal liability.[6] Investigatory hearings and reports published in conjunction with such hearings may receive extensive media attention and result in resignations, firings, or impeachment proceedings.[7] B. Impeachment Process The Constitution gives Congress the authority to impeach and remove the President, Vice President, and other federal civil officers after determining that the officers have engaged in treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.[8] While this is a critical tool for holding government officers accountable, it is rarely used,[9] and is considered a political mechanism for checking executive branch authority.[10] C. Confirmation Process The Constitution requires Senate confirmation for a number of high-ranking executive branch positions,[11] especially those “exercising significant authority pursuant to the laws of the United States.”[12] This process can be used by senators to provide policy directions to and obtain commitments from nominees seeking confirmation.[13] D. Appropriations Process The Constitution requires appropriations measures for general government operations and certain discretionary funding.[14] Appropriations measures may include explicit statutory controls, including language constraining how the funding may be used.[15] Nonstatutory controls also exist where agencies reliant on future appropriations risk receiving less funding and becoming subject to more stringent controls if they ignore the recommendations of Congress.[16] E. Authorization Process Authorizing measures are pieces of legislation that establish, continue, or modify an agency, program, or activity on a permanent, annual, or multiyear basis.[17] Such measures may contain statutory controls in the form of explicit directions, as well as nonstatutory controls imposed by committees.[18] F. Budget Process Members of Congress can use the budget process to relate program priorities to financial claims on the national budget and incentivize the elimination of less-desirable programs in favor of more-desirable ones.[19] https://www.loc.gov/law/help/parliamentary-oversight/unitedstates.php Civics 101 according to the library of Congress. I'm not sure how this works in Trumpkinland B/A There ya go. They have oversight. So what does precedence show us? When the Legislative Branch seeks to subpoena and seek testimony from the Executive Branch and the Executive Branch disregards that subpoena, all past Legislative Branch actions have been to seek relief from the Judicial Branch. The left in this case decided to do an end around that precedent and go straight to Impeachment by creating a never used before crime..... "Obstruction of Congress". Please keep bringing it B/A...... Maybe we can learn more together!!

I agree with you on that. The issue is, you make that statement like it's Fox and Fox alone that deserves your disdain because of it. If you would call out ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, PBS, NPR, NYT, and on and on for doing the same thing then your disdain would be sincere and palpable. As it is, you decry Fox and act as if they and they alone tell the news from a one-sided perspective.

ummmmm...... HRC wasn't a sitting president! It's called separation of powers!!! Legislative Branch does not have power over the Executive Branch. I sure wish we still taught Civics in school!

And now you know why our founders created the electoral college!!!!!! LOVE IT!!!!

Twitter is the only way he can get a message out. The MSM refuses to cover him fairly. 2% coverage on the good, 98% coverage on the made up bad. I don't blame him for it! I applaud him for it!

His beef with Fox can really be linked to one person (now that Shep is gone)..... Chris Wallace. Chris has made the mistake of claiming Trump is wrong for calling out the media. He then purports that the media then makes it worse by doubling down against Trump. What he fails to recognize though is that the Media started all this with their out right lies, cherry picking of facts to fit a narrative and their constant parroting of the Democrat Party lines. Trump calling them fake news is justified in the minds of those on the right because we all can point to hundreds of examples that illustrate how this is true. That's the funny thing about the left calling Fox a right wing news source...... At least at Fox, both sides get a voice!

Wow!!!!!!!! A very thoughtful dissertation of the facts. He fights! I like it!

CNN had the same issue today when their poll showed that Dem support for impeachment has dropped from 98% down to 72%. One commentator said the poll was wrong because he said it was. (its a wonder he didn't slam his fists down and stomp his foot) HAHAHAHAHA....