June 27, 2007 9:56
Dick Cheney's Napoleon Complex, Continued
Facing mountains of much-deserved ridicule over what we here at Swampland have come to think of as the Liger Principle, the Vice President has shifted his rationale for refusing to comply with rules regarding the handling and oversight of classified material:
In a letter to Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), Cheney Chief of Staff David S. Addington wrote that the order treats the vice president the same as the president and distinguishes them both from "agencies" subject to the oversight provisions of the executive order.Adddington did not cite specific language in the executive order supporting this view, and a Cheney spokeswoman could not point to such language last night. But spokeswoman Lee Anne McBride said the intent of the order, as expressed by White House officials in recent days, was "not for the VP to be separated from the president on this reporting requirement."
Inconsistent, you say? Not at all, my friends. Once again, Cheney is relying upon one of the great constitutional scholars of our time:
Kid on the Bus – What are you going to do today, Napoleon?Napoleon Dynamite – Whatever I feel like I wanna do! Gosh!
Kudos to commenter Anon for seeing this one coming.
UPDATE: Over at CQ, Craig Crawford finds that ligers have even MORE skills and magic than we thought:
Cheney refused to include his office in the so-called “plum” book, a detailed listing of White House jobs and salaries produced every four years.In the 2004 edition, the VP’s office is only mentioned in an appendix that explains the omission by asserting “the Vice Presidency is a unique office that is neither part of the executive branch, nor a part of the legislative branch.” Also, the Center for Public Integrity reported in 2005 that Cheney and his staff exempt themselves from travel disclosure rules followed by the rest of the administration.
Before Cheney writes his own Constitution for future holders of the office, Congress might want to step in and at least try to settle whether or not the vice president works for anybody at all.
About Swampland
Ana Marie Cox is the founding editor of Wonkette and the author of the novel Dog Days. Read more
Joe Klein is TIME's political columnist and author of six books, most recently Politics Lost. Read more
Karen Tumulty is TIME's National Political Correspondent and has also covered the White House and Congress. Read more
Jay Carney is TIME's Washington bureau chief. He has covered the Clinton and Bush 43 White Houses as well as Congress. Read more
Jay Newton-Small has covered the Bush 43 White House and Congress since the DeLay era. Read more
Michael Scherer is a TIME Washington bureau correspondent covering the 2008 presidential campaign. Read more
Mike Murphy is a GOP consultant and was a senior strategist for John McCain's 2000 presidential campaign. Read more
RSS Feed
 |
Daily Email
CNN Politics
Get U.S. and global politics 24-7. Politics at CNN has campaign coverage, latest headlines and video, candidates' positions on the issues, fundraising totals, states to watch, delegate counts, election results, news and analysis
CNN Politics
The Page
Mark Halperin and the TIME political team covering the 2008 campaign bring you all the latest breaking news, videos, and best stories from every
source, all in one place, expertly culled and edited, 24/7.
The Page
White House Photo Blog
Get an intimate look at the Bush administration and race for 2008 through the eyes of TIME's White House photographers.
White House Photo Blog
Ana Marie Cox on the trail
Keep up with Cox as she posts pictures and tidbits from the campaign trail.
Flickr
Twittr
Reader Comments
Posted by Sir Foxbat
June 27, 2007
DANG!
What does a guy have to do to get impeached around here?
Posted by Acid
June 27, 2007
But spokeswoman Lee Anne McBride said the intent of the order... was "not for the VP to be separated from the president ..."
________________
Dick Cheney is so secretive he cannot "be separated from the president." Indeed, like Voldemort in "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone," he is a serpentine creature fitted onto the rear of Bush's head.
Posted by Elvis Elvisberg
June 27, 2007
Perfect, Karen (and Anon). That really is the You/Addington Divine Right of Republicans legal theory in a nutshell.
Posted by Terrapin
June 27, 2007
Karen - I think that people are finally beginning to see the actions of this administration as the sly, grasping, legalistic stalling techniques that Progressives have been describing for years. Apparently, if you are a Repulican, you are free to disregard or break any law that you do not like on any particular day as long as you say something to the effect of "...we have an alternative interpretation of that law on which reasonable people can disagree..." and find some kind of snivelling quisling of a lawyer to stand behind you.
Yesss, Clinton used an extrememly legalistic argument in order to avoid admiiting to an embarrassing relationship with a young intern - but Bush/Cheney/Rove/Gonzales/Yoo/Addington/etc have incorporated this technique into their daily modus operandi and have used it to subvert our nation's most cherished Constitutionally protected liberties and institutions.
As we get closer to the end of this administration the leaks will continue fast and furious. The Courts will continue to strike down or reverse the policies of this government and nobody will be held accountable.
Posted by Dave
June 27, 2007
Karen,
Will any establishment media type ever call for Cheney's resignation or impeachment?
Maybe better: what case is to be made for Cheney to remain in office?
Posted by Crust
June 27, 2007
On the new "agencies" angle -- which supposedly exempts the President and the Vice President from oversight with regards to handling classified material -- Spencer Ackerman explains:
'As TPMmuckraker highlighted yesterday, that amended order, known as Executive Order 13292, doesn't just deal with "agencies," it also deals with Executive Branch "entities." Former Justice Department lawyer Marty Lederman explains that because both the President's office and the OVP "are 'entities' within the Executive branch, they are 'agencies' covered by the E.O. (see section 6.1(b)) under a plain reading of the E.O."'
(link at my handle)
Posted by p_lukasiak
June 27, 2007
It would help if it were explained what exactly is at stake here.... sure its fun to be snarky about Cheney's idiotic claims, but we are talking about very serious breaches of national security protocols here...
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003531.php
To say the White House is lax in enforcing rules designed to protect highly classified information is an understatement. When the top guys in charge of ensuring that information is secured openly violate the rules (like taking cellphones and blackberries into the rooms where super-secret documents are reviewed), there is cause for concern --- and what we are talking about here is the independent agency assigned to audit security procedures being told that everyone who works directly for Bush or Cheney can do whatever they want with top-secret information (as long as it isn't politically damaging to the administration.)
Of course, Time never bothered to report the stunning revelation that the White House security office had not bothered to do an internal investigation of the Plame leak (possibly because the Plame leak may have been just the "tip of the iceberg" when it came to the handling of classified information in the White House). So its unsurprising that we aren't being told what THIS opportunity for a snarkfest is really about....
Posted by sean samis
June 27, 2007
I really have run out of words to adequately express how frustrating and angry Cheney makes me. Between his role in compromising Ms. Plame--an act that verges on treason--and his more banal mendacity, no person of conscience could possibly support this man's continuation as VP; yet we are stuck with the rat-bastard until 2009. Cheney-like people are the ones who will bring our country down. sigh ...
sean s.
Posted by Crust
June 27, 2007
Dave asks:
"Will any establishment media type ever call for Cheney's resignation or impeachment?"
Well on resignation, Sally Quinn sorta kinda did the other day (accompanied by her Valentine to Thompson). And I think others have in the past.
But calls for resignation -- while a good step -- won't accomplish much in themselves. Look at the Gonzales case. There have been overwhelming calls for his resignation, including even parts of the right wing press (e.g. the editorial board of the National Review) but he's still on the job.
To actually force the issue -- with either Cheney or Gonzales -- there need to be widespread calls for impeachment and/or a special prosecutor.
Posted by mikeg
June 27, 2007
Another bullseye, Karen.
I think you are becoming one of the best bloggers in the biz, a certainly the best pro reporter doing the blogging thing.
Joe is also very, very good at blogging. I know I'm not supposed to say that, but there it is.
Swampland is now a daily must-read.
Posted by Franco
June 27, 2007
Good heavens. So instead of reporters asking about what Cheney is covering up, they're all agog over this red herring. You all took the bait, hook, line and sinker.
Posted by Terrapin
June 27, 2007
mikeg - You wrote: "Joe is also very, very good at blogging. I know I'm not supposed to say that, but there it is."
I agree with this as well. Clearly, I do not agree with his concepts of centrism and moderation and I think he could help himself if he engaged more of his critics instead of preaching at them but he is a far sight better than most.
Posted by Acid
June 27, 2007
Joe Klein: Better than Instapundit.
Posted by Florida
June 27, 2007
So Karen, you gonna eat your tots?
Posted by ama
June 27, 2007
Kid on the Bus – What are you going to do today, Napoleon?
Napoleon Dynamite – Whatever I feel like I wanna do! Gosh!
***
Seems the Cheney/Addington/Yoo/Gonzales
cabal achieved what none of our Founding Fathers anticipated a Vice President would EVEN THINK ABOUT--establishing a Fourth Branch of government that answers to NO ONE.
There used to be some truth in this line:
"Our reach should exceed our grasp,
Else what's a heaven for?"
[I think from R. Browning's Andrea del Sarto, but needs verifying.]
OVERREACH + SILENCE = COUP
And apparently, there isn't a dang thing
anyone can do about it, despite what Rahm says about cutting off Veep's funding.
Posted by Dave
June 27, 2007
Crust says: "But calls for resignation -- while a good step -- won't accomplish much in themselves."
To me it barely matters what calls for resignation "do" in the real world. I think that Bush and Cheney and the neocons need to be ritually exorcised from the body politic via impeachment for the sake of future politics. Short of that, the larger the universe of impeachment discourse, the better: sure, Cheney may still be governing until the bitter end, but if he's the only person who thinks he's justified in doing that, the more likely it is that future politics won't be conducted under his auspices. It's not impeachment, but it's isolation/containment in the public imagination.
So I say again: Impeach!
Posted by ama
June 27, 2007
Joe is also very, very good at blogging. I know I'm not supposed to say that, but there it is.
****
mikeg,
He's getting better, but he still takes unfair pot shots, calling bloggers "parasites" or some such nonsense.
His journey thus far has been one step forward and two steps back, which isn't the quickest route to a destination.
I give him high marks for the effort though.
Posted by mikeg
June 27, 2007
ama,
"His journey thus far has been one step forward and two steps back, which isn't the quickest route to a destination."
I would say more like two steps forward, one back. There is discernable forward motion. The parasite stuff was not good, certainly. But he does listen to commenters, which is miles better than most do, and he does inform, and he is a slyly amusing writer. Sounds like a good blogger to me.
Also, your "OVERREACH + SILENCE = COUP" is brilliant. Nicely done.
Posted by trifecta
June 27, 2007
50 years from now, the historians will be writing more books about Shooter than Charlie McCarthy.
Dick Cheney selected himself as Vice President, and there really is no question that he is the guy. A man at 18% in the polls is running our ship of state into the ground and Bush is too insulated to save his legacy, and the country's reputation to do anything about it even if he had that sort of inclination.
Posted by Crust
June 27, 2007
Here's Marty Lederman on Addington's letter (link on my handle).
Posted by Crust
June 27, 2007
Dave, I think we're on the same page on this one.
Posted by B-52
June 27, 2007
Chip chip chip away at the Constitution , international treaties , environmental protections , civil liberties , the justice system ...
Americans are like the frog in a pot gradually heated water . We'll never know ( at least ,too few of us ) what hit us .
Unless we get serious about impeachment.
Posted by amberglow
June 27, 2007
There is specific language in the Executive Order mentioning both of them over and over--why aren't you pointing that out at all? They're lying to all of us again, and you don't tell us what the truth is.
Posted by Karen
June 27, 2007
This country cannot afford Cheney. He is within reach of the Constitution and has been attempting to use it for toilet paper for too long. He needs to leave now.
I find myself idly hoping for a blood clot and I feel guilty as all get out for that but it seems almost too much to ask to expect people to ask for his impeachment. If we can't get Gonzales out, how can we get rid of Cheney without getting rid of Bush, too.
Posted by Karen
June 27, 2007
This country cannot afford Cheney. He is within reach of the Constitution and has been attempting to use it for toilet paper for too long. He needs to leave now.
I find myself idly hoping for a blood clot and I feel guilty as all get out for that but it seems almost too much to ask to expect people to ask for his impeachment. If we can't get Gonzales out, how can we get rid of Cheney without getting rid of Bush, too.
Posted by Karen
June 27, 2007
This country cannot afford Cheney. He is within reach of the Constitution and has been attempting to use it for toilet paper for too long. He needs to leave now.
I find myself idly hoping for a blood clot and I feel guilty as all get out for that but it seems almost too much to ask to expect people to ask for his impeachment. If we can't get Gonzales out, how can we get rid of Cheney without getting rid of Bush, too.
Posted by bartkid
June 27, 2007
Ms. Tumulty,
Well, to pile on:
Uncle Rico: We also need some way to make us look official, like we got all the answers.
Kip: How bout some gold bracelets?
Uncle Rico: We need like some name tags with our picture on it, all laminated and what not. I mean, we gotta look legit man.
Kip: That's true, that's true.
(Addington strikes me as Rico and Scooter as Kip.)
Posted by linda
June 27, 2007
Ah, if it were just Cheney.
Somebody's got balls. Subpoenas issued.
If they can't get Cheney, the WH, and gang this way, I suggest an 'insanity hearing'. There must be one judge still on the bench who isn't a mushroom.
Posted by ama
June 27, 2007
mikeg,
Don't know if you have been reading Swampland since it came online or not, but some of Joe's tottering attempts were disastrous. He is doing better, and maybe is doing 2 forward and 1 back more recently, but if averaged out, I think the trend is still as I indicated.
Thanks for the compliment, but "brilliant" ain't
my forte. I'm more homespun and anecdotal. ;>
Posted by SpotWeld
June 27, 2007
Okay.. someone correct me on this. The office of the Vice President is being put into a unique and higly powerful position that if the same steps were attempted for the office of the President we'd be talking impeachment (whatever the party in office)?
If we cannot accept a Presidency with such minimal oversight how can we accept a Vice-Presidency under the same circumstances?
Posted by Jim Lawrence
June 27, 2007
I'm still struggling to understand how the Vice President is not a part of the Executive Branch.
Perhaps Glenn Beck or Ann Coulter can explain it to me as what do we, the uninformed citizens of The Great Land, truly know, after all, about what the Founding Fathers really intended?
Surely they must have intended the VP to be an island in a sea of bureaucracy, for national security reasons. Nothing else even makes sense. And no doubt Mr. Cheney has been channeling them all along. Silly us.
Posted by Jim Lawrence
June 27, 2007
I'm still struggling to understand how the Vice President is not a part of the Executive Branch.
Perhaps Glenn Beck or Ann Coulter can explain it to me as what do we, the uninformed citizens of This Great Land, truly know, after all, about what the Founding Fathers really intended?
Surely they must have intended the VP to be an island in a sea of bureaucracy, for national security reasons. Nothing else even makes sense. And no doubt Mr. Cheney has been channeling them all along. Silly us.
Posted by Gary
June 27, 2007
Cheney/Addington's argument amounts to looking at a Venn diagram and insisting that the overlapping parts cease to exist.
And the circles are drawn in phosphorescent paints on black background in a roomful of blacklights and a strobe.
And you just dropped 8 hits of high-grade acid.
Posted by arch stanton
June 27, 2007
"But he does listen to commenters, which is miles better than most do, and he does inform, and he is a slyly amusing writer"
I have to admit, when reading Joke, I know exactly what the White House talking points are...so there's that.
Posted by Question Authority? QUESTION HILLARY.
June 27, 2007
"...Clixon said she would introduce legislation soon to deal with nuclear terrorism. She said the administration has abandoned nonproliferation efforts, cutting off dialog with Iran and allowing North Korea to reprocess enough material to make nuclear bombs and test a nuclear weapon..."
Q: How do you know when Hipplery IS fibbing?
A: Her dorsal fins IS flapping.
Posted by Air Gupta
June 27, 2007
What did Senator Clinton know about the NYC power grid problems, and how many years ago did she ignore IS?
Posted by Tom
June 27, 2007
Uncle Fester does not want to answer to anyone. He doesn't anwer to W. Why should he answer to the country?
Posted by Bram R
June 28, 2007
Aaaahahahahahah, Karen. [sniff] Welcome.
Posted by sophia
June 28, 2007
Erh...