Cheney's intelligence
This stems from the reports that came out late this week detailing Cheney's obstruction of the agency within the National Archives (called the Information Security Oversight Office) in charge of monitoring executive-branch offices to ensure that they securely maintain classified materials. Cheney first refused them access, then tried to get the shut down, and then claimed hilariously that the Office of the Vice President isn't part of the executive branch and that therefore ISOO has no jurisdiction over his classified materials.
Ignoring words of indignation for the time being, this has led to some pretty hilarious interplay between Cheney and his antagonists in Congress. OVP, after all, is in some ways part of both the legislative and the executive branches of government, but if Cheney really wants to contend that he doesn't fall under Bush's purview, then that means he answers to...Democrats! Either that or he's contending to have erected--without voter approval--something like a fourth, coequal branch of the government in which case he's probably committed something close to treason. Regardless, if Cheney continues not to comply with the ISOO based upon these laughable Constitutional arguments, then it seems the possibilities for fun are endless. Firedoglake lists some of them. What's funny to me, though, is that, in addition to both inviting Henry Waxman into his life, and inviting Congress to eliminate his executive funding, he's also, I'd guess, opened the door for the Senate or House Intel Committee to launch a program just like ISOO to monitor any legislative functionaries who have access to classified national security information. Which would basically defeat the entire purpose of this absurd little gambit.
Comments
My understanding is that members of Congress are already covered by ethics rules on security matters that are quite strict.
Steve Benen at TPM reports that Rahm Emmanuel will propose eliminating funding for the Office of the VP next week.
The Constitution is clear. The VP is only described in Article I where its duty (singular) is to preside over the Senate. In Article II, The VP is mentioned, but no duties or powers are described.
Aside: John Adams as VP was required by the Senate (by its rules) to preside every day over the Senate, and after he abused his ability to speak from the chair, he was threatened with a motion to silence him, so he stopped to participating in debate, to his mortification.
Cheney/Dick Addington (the VP's Chief of Staff and Gen. Counsel) should both be impeached, or with the latest gambit, should be on trial for treason (they haven't just advocated overthrow of the Constitution, but have actually done it).
Cheney/Addington have been trashing the Consitution and Laws since the very beginning - recall the Energy Task Force that they refused to disclose anything about? And how about the Cheney order to shoot down airline planes on 9/11 that was not authorized by the President and the President had not become incapacitated?
The only realistic-to-the-Constitution defense to his conduct is insanity, and then Cheney should be confine him in a secure mental hospital - preferably in some 'stress positions'. He's clearly off his rocker.
More here
and here
Jack Balkin, Knight Professor of Constitutional Law and the First Amendment
and Director, The Information Society Project at Yale Law School, adds some questions.
Post A Comment