Monday, June 25, 2007

Oh Where, Oh Where Has The Executive Branch Gone?

Under fire for his office’s handling of classified documents, Vice President Dick Cheney has asserted that he’s not part of the executive branch of the US government. No, really.

He said this in response to criticism of his failure to provide annual reports and allow occasional access by National Archives officials to those documents, in compliance with a 1995 executive order (re-signed by Bush in 2003).

Cheney is the guy, by the way, who continually destroys his visitor logs and refuses to divulge exactly who’s on his staff. He’s also the guy who crafted US energy policy with his oil baron friends in a closed-door session shortly after taking office. Notably, no environmental group or alternative fuel advocates were included. Just Cheney’s corporate benefactors, the ones who are now charging record-high gas prices while posting record-high profits.

When some tried to gain access to information from that meeting, Cheney fought the request all the way to the Supreme Court; hunting buddy Antonin Scalia then saw to it that Cheney would never have to reveal details of the meeting. (Scalia refused to recuse himself from the case, saying that there was no conflict of interest in him ruling on a friend's case!?)

But, back to now, and Cheney’s outrageous claim that has stunned constitutional scholars. You don’t have to be a constitutional scholar to understand the makeup of the US government: executive (president and VP), judicial (judges, attorneys, the courts, etc.) and legislative (Congress). I learned it in grade school.

Cheney may soon want to rethink his position on his position within the government: In response to his claim, Democrats are seeking to cut off his paycheck, which comes out of executive funds. So, which is it, Mr. Vice President? Are you or aren’t you part of that branch? I love it.

Not to be outdone, the president had his people quickly assert that he, too, was exempt from rules long accepted as applicable to the executive branch (he’s clearly a part of the executive and has not contested that… yet).

According to a White House spokesperson, “…although (the 2003 executive order) doesn't specifically say so, (it) was not meant to apply to the vice president's office or the president's office.” Well, if it ain’t in the contract, buddy, it just ain’t. That’s quite a detail to have left out of the re-signing of the executive order, wasn’t it? How come no one ever told us of these exemptions before now?

So, if half of the executive branch is not really the executive branch and the other half is, but is not to be bound by its rules, who/where/what exactly is the executive branch?

With these brazen statements, hopefully the power grab of this burgeoning dictatorship is becoming apparent even to the president's and veep’s longtime supporters. Whatever your political affiliations, be afraid of leaders who flout every rule and work under such comprehensive secrecy; they're “up to something,” and are not to be trusted.

17 comments:

she said...

i'm a few exits past afraid bogs. i am well down the "pitchfork and torch" road.

you may recall when we first met that i wrote (on WCH"S site) that pat buchanan best represented true conservative ideals...and the response was negative. but if you go back in the archives of the american conservative (his website) you will see he had predicted every one of these things exactly as its happening now.

and now we have another constitutionalist, ron paul, who asks all the right questions, out loud and on record, only to be dismissed by the "party".

no matter what i couldnt have punched in Kerry.
but i believe W and company have committed treason on more fronts than i can write without blowing a gasket.

and what worries me about people who are pro republican no matter what is that they dont take what cheney's pulling and look down the road. if he gets to do this, he sets a precedent for everyone to follow to do the same.

the house and the senate have approval rates as low as W. looks like nobody believes they have any representation. and they are right!

Pete Bogs said...

Buchanan's views are a bit out there, from my POV, but Ron Paul is saying some interesting things...

your point about Cheney is well taken... I would say the same for Bush... of both these guys are able to get away with so much, what's to stop the next guy from thinking that he can get away with AT LEAST that much? they need to be reined in, for the good of the country...

Jack K. said...

bogs, bogs, bogs, I am surprised you haven't awakened yet to the not so subtle rules of the KING. When one behaves like a king, then one awaits for the proper time to announce your appointment to such high office by none other than god himself. (btw, the non-capitalization of god was intentional.)

So, our dear king W, is just waiting to spring his revelation on the populace at the swearing in ceremony of his elected replacement.

If only we could have a government that really cares about the people they have sworn to serve.

I guess we get what we deserve. Glad I didn't vote for W.

Pete Bogs said...

interesting development on the Cheney/executive thing today in the press:

“That's quite opposite the argument Cheney made in 2001, when he said that a congressional probe into the workings of his energy task force ‘would unconstitutionally interfere with the functioning of the executive branch.’”

don’t these people know everything they say publicly is on tape?

Cheney contradicts self, again

Pete Bogs said...

the link, again:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/25/AR2007062501565.html

LeftLeaningLady said...

I have been telling everyone since 2003 that W was not going to leave office in 09, that some how he was going to work it out and that we would end up wiht a King. It is my guess that something horrific will happen in Oct 08 to prevent the elections and then where will we be?

Pete, I can't seem to read the story about Congress cutting off funding, can you repost the link? Thanks.

Pete Bogs said...

LLL - try copying and pasting this link... different site, same article:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-06-24-cheney_N.htm

if in fact Bush plans to stay on past '09, then there IS time to start impeachment proceedings against... there have been arguments it would take too long...

she said...

let's see....ive got farm implements and sticks with rags and some kerosene....

i can't tell a nickels difference between ANY of them.
a nest of traitors. the lot of em.

im moving to the bahamas.

LeftLeaningLady said...

Let's start the process of impeachment NOW and even if he isn't impeached (right!) or found guilty before his term expires, maybe he will be too busy to cause us anymore harm.

And who is going to impeach? The same useless Congress who gave him carte blanche on the war funding?

SHE, please let me know about the economy, jobs and housing prices in the bahamas. It sounds better than Canada, I don't like cold weather.

Pete Bogs said...

LLL - I'll head to Ireland... the economy's booming there... and it's not too hot or too cold... whereas, the Guinness... ahh...

she said...

LLL: the most important aspect of expatriation is to be the source of your own income. creativity will be your salvation. er, that's what im hoping for. ireland sounds good too. an island.

as far as impeachment goes this is your dream moment, libs. the conservatives are on fire today and loaded for bear with this amnesty treachery.

sorry bogs, i know i know. its not a post on immigration.

Jack K. said...

lll, you might want to rethink Canada. We were just in Victoria and it is magnificent. Go here to see the first of several posting of our trip there.

The Canada postings range from #153 to #160. We had a grand time.

Pete Bogs said...

she - I hear ya... immigration is just not one of my hot-button issues...

jack - those pics are beautiful... it's the long winter that would keep me from moving there...

Infinitesimal said...

my understanding was that he wanted to declare the accusing agency as illegitimate and therefor not able to accuse him.

what do you know about this.

Sitting at your feet Bogs, another great posty from you!

Pete Bogs said...

infini - true, he tried to eliminate that agency... kind of like criminals trying to eliminate the police force... it's an admission of guilt, to my mind...

Jack K. said...

Bogs, I don't know if you have seen this site yet, but you might want to pass it on to others. It gets directly to the question you posed about Cheney.

Bird said...

i thought nothing could shock or surprise me about the current regime ...

but of course ...

i am just flabberghasted ...

you got be in awe of such hutzpah.

now why doesn't this work for me?

bring us cheney's head on a stick (and bush's too).

uh oh - does that constitute a threat? sorry bogs if your blog is shut down. quit - delete this!