When I first saw this story, I thought "that can't be right"......



Not part of the Bush administration? Ok, then, where does the Vice President's office reside?


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/po...rack=crosspromo

Ok, so the questions for debate are:

1. Does the Vice President fall within the Executive Branch? Or does he fall within the Legislative Branch? Or is he in some other dimension altogether?

2. If his office is a part of the Executive Branch, how can Cheney refuse to follow an Executive Order?

3. If his office is part of the Legislative branch, how can Cheney claim Executive Privledge in matters like a congressional investigation into the Energy Policy meetings he conducted?

1. Does the Vice President fall within the Executive Branch? Or does he fall within the Legislative Branch? Or is he in some other dimension altogether?

I'll accept being part of both. I've never thought of it this way, as the VP doesn't do much with the Legislative branch besides breaking ties. Usually the Executive side doesn't do much either, but Cheney is more active at that level than many other VPs.

2. If his office is a part of the Executive Branch, how can Cheney refuse to follow an Executive Order?

Yeah, nice trick there I have to admit. I haven't heard such warped logic since grade school, but it looks like he's getting away with it. He ought to be forced to open the Executive records

3. If his office is part of the Legislative branch, how can Cheney claim Executive Privledge in matters like a congressional investigation into the Energy Policy meetings he conducted?

That whole thing stunk to high heaven from the beginning. But it looks to me that he has a stronger case for using Executive Privilege than ignoring an Executive Order. The VP slot is obviously more Executive than Legislative in nature. Cheney might preside over the Senate, break ties, and suggest what senators should do with themselves, but his main thing is with shaping policy. In this case, secret policy. It stunk, but he got away with it. It might have been an abuse of Exec Privy, but I can see how the justification would probably stand SCOTUS review from a national security angle.

This is really an interesting topic. Nice find NiteGuy!

It would be interesting to see how the Supreme Court would rule on this one, that's for sure.

1. Does the Vice President fall within the Executive Branch? Or does he fall within the Legislative Branch? Or is he in some other dimension altogether?


There is no question that the office of the Vice President is unique. He is an elected official, Constitutionally elected separate and apart from the President in theory and while he's considered to be a part of the Executive branch, under the Constitution his only defined duties are in the Legislative Branch as President of the Senate. Fascinating concept to be honest. I hadn't thought of this before.

2. If his office is a part of the Executive Branch, how can Cheney refuse to follow an Executive Order?

Technically speaking his office is a separate elected office under the Constitution. Technically speaking, under the Constitution he doesn't work for the President. In a strict legal sense, it's almost like the office of the VP is a fourth branch of our government. One with very little power to be sure, but distinct.


3. If his office is part of the Legislative branch, how can Cheney claim Executive Privledge in matters like a congressional investigation into the Energy Policy meetings he conducted?

This one is a little more clear-cut. The VP is an elected office that under the Constitution belongs to both the Legislative and Executive branches of the government. From a strict legal perspective I think the VP could make a decent case of having the best of both worlds. From a more pragmatic political standpoint though, I think it's a mistake to try and do that. Certainly his claim of executive priviledge has more weight though.


Aquilla

Thank you, Aquilla.



Well then, let me give you a little more to gnaw on.

The Vice President was created as a means of succession in the event of the President's resignation, incapacitation, or death. As you say, in theory, he is elected separate and apart from the President. And originally this was so, with the second highest Presidential vote getter being elected Vice President, although it no longer is, nor has it been for decades.

For all practical purposes however, we are electing two persons to the position of President. One in actuality, and one only provisionally. I mean really, have you ever seen a ballot upon which there was a separate check-box for the Vice Presidential position? Have you ever written in separate names for President and Vice President? Me either.

Now, let's complicate this further. If we assume Cheney's stance to be correct, and he is actually a member of the legislative branch, then the 25th Amendment to the Constitution is a violation of Article I.

Rather than the President appointing a VP in the event of an existing VP's death or removal, that individual as a member of the Senate should be elected by the people in a special election, or appointed by the Governor of the state from which the former Vice President resided.

Also, you can correct me if I'm wrong, but he only presides over the Senate because he's Vice President. Serving as president of the Senate is one of his VP duties. Even then, the only Senatorial powers the Vice President has is to cast a tie-breaking vote, or to decide on an impass in procedure. Not much of a legislator.

Cheny cannot have it both ways. He cannot assert that he is exempt from both congressional action and Presidential orders. That would mean that his position is actually more powerful, in terms of protection from official actions than that of either the Presidency or the Legislature. That ain't gonna fly, if he's supposed to be a "separate and apart" elected official.

I love it when we complicate things like this. Now, correct me if I'm wrong here, but is your claim above based on your argument below?



If this is your argument that the 25th amendment violates Article I in the context of Cheney's claim, then it has a serious flaw. Cheney's claim is that the office of the VP is both executive and legislative and that applicable laws and protections apply for both. In the case of replacing a vacant office of VP, the 25th amendment applies because in that context it's in the executive branch. Article 1 spells out the duties of the office of the VP in the Legislative branch. Apples and Oranges from a strict legal standpoint.



I don't think you're wrong here although I would point out that many members of the senate aren't much in the way of "legislators".





Realistically, you're absolutely correct. But sometimes realism has nothing to do with the legal system and I do think that Cheney may have a valid legal argument here. Add to the equation the fact that he's already shot one lawyer and who knows what a judge might say?


Aquilla

Perhaps you're right, Aquilla.

On the other hand, as conservatives are fond of saying, every action has consequences. And I think that Mr Cheney is about to run into a consequence of his claims. I ordinarily don't link to blogs, as you know, but I haven't seen this posted anywhere in a mainstream news piece. Things could indeed get interesting:


http://atrios.blogspot.com/2007_06_17_arch...515904221461998

Looks like somebody decided to up the ante. Poker, anyone?

I'll see your Rohm and raise you a Cheney! Out of curiousity I wonder if the President's office has complied with this executive order. Any clue on that one, NiteGuy?


Aquilla

As far as I know the President's office is taking the same stance.

President Bush ignores President Bush's Executive Order (I'd rather not link from DailyKOS, but their link requires registration.)



Here's what I find interesting about this whole mess. The clause detailing who is eligible doesn't just say executive branch. Rather, it says "Agency" means any "Executive agency," as defined in 5 U.S.C. 105; any "Military department" as defined in 5 U.S.C. 102; and any other entity within the executive branch that comes into the possession of classified information.

Seems pretty clear-cut to me. Cheney may be head of the Senate, but he is undoubtedly an "entity" of the Executive Branch, as is Bush; and the same is true of their offices and staff.

Judges may be a bit gunshy, but the "we didn't mean it" argument has NEVER help up in court.

Funny what the threat of a loss of money will do.

Cheney's practically moonwalking trying to back out of his absurd proclamation that he wasn't part of the Executive Branch.

Here’s what I don’t get: The National Archives is where all governmental records are stored by law. Essentially, they are products of OUR (we the people’s) government and belong to US. We, the people, pay for their printing and storage through taxes. What a bit - no, a truckload - of unmitigated GALL on the part of the VP to arrogantly declare his refusal to comply with the law (of course, why should I be surprised ) and essentially issue an F--- you to "we the people".

I suspect this has less to do with the funding threat than it does with the blowback Cheney's been getting from conservatives over all of this. I have heard of nobody who actually supports his argument on this. I find it a fascinating legal argument in the abstract, but it's not a fight Cheney nor the rest of the Bush administration needs to pick. We're talking about an executive order here and who issues those kinds of things? The President. All Bush has to do is modify the order to exempt his office and Cheney's and all of this just goes away. Why in the world Cheney's people opened up this can I don't know. This really isn't a fight he needs right now.


Aquilla

Perhaps I'm being overly simplistic but the VP is counted as part of the executive in the US Constitution:

Article II, section I:

And again in Section IV:

While the VP is named president of the senate in Article I, I think the more relevant portion is as follows (I'm using the text of the 17th amendment for ease):


The VP is named as an Executive office for purposes of election and impeachment. The VP is not elected on the schedule or in the manner of other senators. The office is executive in nature.

Yes, it’s not as if our chief exec is shy about changing, or even nullifying laws by using signing statements.


I completely agree. This was nothing more than a smokescreen to try to exempt the OVP from complying with the law.

In answer to the title's question, "... [Is Cheney] in the Twilight Zone?" I would say no, Cheney knows where he is, including all the legal (and sort of legal) nooks and crannies that can serve his interests in this universe. If he weren't Vice President, he might have a real future as an attorney for The Mob.

1. Does the Vice President fall within the Executive Branch? Or does he fall within the Legislative Branch? Or is he in some other dimension altogether?

VP Dick Cheney is part of the Bush Administration. He is not a Senator. He breaks ties; he doesn't legislate. And he does a heckuva lot of other things that he obviously doesn't want the public at large to know.

2. If his office is a part of the Executive Branch, how can Cheney refuse to follow an Executive Order?

How can he do it? Very adroitly, I'd say. He can refuse to follow Executive Orders so long as President George W. Bush allows it, and the Congress doesn't get its act together and take measures to stop his activities.

3. If his office is part of the Legislative branch, how can Cheney claim Executive Privilege in matters like a congressional investigation into the Energy Policy meetings he conducted?

He can do it in the same way that Alberto Gonzales can call the Geneva Conventions "quaint" and fire Federal attorneys with differing political ideologies and then have a "memory lapse" about it when he testifies to Congress; in the same way that George W. Bush can order and sanction domestic wiretapping and then say "I disagree with the Supreme Court's ruling" when it is judged unconstitutional and make signing statements that his administration treats as nullification of the bills he signs into law, etc.

Cheney knows his way around Washington, and he probably knows of a lot of skeletons in the closets of those who would be willing and able to clip his wings. Dick Cheney is evidently a law unto himself, and this is one more instance where U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich sounded visionary when he called for the impeachment of the Vice President.

I just pray that there will be an election and an actual inauguration of a new President and Vice President in 2009, that this too won't become a casualty under the guise of "national security" in the never-ending "War on Terror." It just seems like the law doesn't apply to these two we have in office the way it does to the rest of the country.

Oh puuullleezzee, PE. You gotta get a grip here on reality. Do you really think Bush is going to attempt to suspend the Constitution to stay in office past his term? I know you don't like him and all that stuff, but geez. Don't worry, Fred Thompson will be inauguarated as the 44th President of the United States on 20January2009.


I'm sure that will make you happy.


Edited to add an Ooops I almost forgot......

Hoisting one for Fred!!!!

Aquilla

Maybe so, Aquilla. Yeah, the 2004 election problems in Ohio and the 2000 election problems in Florida were just small potatoes in comparison to suspending a national election in the name of national security. Someone might actually notice if they did that...

...You're right. With DIEBOLD, why worry?

Suspending the Presidential election does not seem feasible in this country, and I so hope it is unfeasible. However, there is that expession, "Nothing ventured, nothing gained." A person who regularly gets around the law starts thinking of himself as Teflon-coated after a while.

This administration, and particularly Richard Cheney, have gotten away with a lot. After all, all it took for Bill Clinton to be impeached was a dress stain and a lie...

1. Does the Vice President fall within the Executive Branch? Or does he fall within the Legislative Branch? Or is he in some other dimension altogether?

2. If his office is a part of the Executive Branch, how can Cheney refuse to follow an Executive Order?

3. If his office is part of the Legislative branch, how can Cheney claim Executive Privledge in matters like a congressional investigation into the Energy Policy meetings he conducted?

Well, first you have to understand the law. Not the written law, but the theory and the reality of law. The theory is, that if you break the law, you suffer the consequences. The reality of the law is, if nobody enforces it, or selectively enforces it, then the law really doesn't mean anything except what the person in power wants it to mean. So until someone is willing to stick a boot in Dick Cheney's rear end, he's going to be a part of the Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch, or even the Tree Branch if he likes. Cheney will claim Executive privileges or some sort of bogus exemption because nobody is enforcing the law, so he can do basically whatever the heck he wants. He has Scooter Libby serving time for him. He shoots people in the face and they apologize for getting shot. He holds a public office yet has private meetings about the Energy policy outside the scrutiny of the Congress or the people. He is America's number #1 gangster. Dick Cheney and Tony Soprano are one in the same.