You know, in the oath that brand-new citizens take, it contains six different references to 'the law.' If it's good enough for us to ask brand-new citizens to affirm their devotion to the law, is it too much to ask that the president do the same?

I don't have an issue with whether - from a legal standpoint, with whether or not government can impose the ultimate punishment on people. We do it in capital cases. Police officers shoot fleeing felons.

There's a reason that students don't grade their own papers. There's a reason defendants don't sentence themselves. And there's the reason the State Department doesn't get to investigate itself, determine whether or not it made errors in Benghazi. That is Congress's job.

While people are free to draw different conclusions from the facts, there should be no debate over whether the American public is entitled to have all of the facts.

Members of Congress are incredibly blessed and fortune to have the jobs that we have. Nobody makes us run. Every two years we offer for public office, and if you don't want to do it then don't run. But the notion that you can make $174,000 in this country and be underpaid is laughable.

When you go into public service, you understand you're trading something. You want to feel good about what you do, but you're not going to make what people in private sector make.

Even someone as lowly as an assistant U.S. attorney has to undergo a background check, and you're asked a series of very invasive questions, and you're expected to tell the truth and they're under penalty of perjury. And you're asked those questions so you can't be blackmailed or extorted.