And While We're at It, Let's Take Away Their Security Clearance

by emptywheel

Mimikatz already posted Rahm's first response to Cheney's wicked theories that he is a branch of government unto himself. And mcjoan has posted his second response.

House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel issued the following statement regarding his amendment to cut funding for the Office of  the Vice President from the bill that funds the executive branch. The legislation – the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill -- will be considered on the floor of the House of Representatives next week.

"The Vice President has a choice to make. If he believes his legal case, his office has no business being funded as part of the executive branch. However, if he demands executive branch funding he cannot ignore executive branch rules. At the very least, the Vice President should be consistent. This amendment will ensure that the Vice President's funding is consistent with his legal arguments. I have worked closely with my colleagues on this amendment and will continue to pursue this measure in the coming days."

But I'd like to call attention to the recommendation Bill Leonard made last year when wrestling with these creeps.

Furthermore, if OVP is not to be considered an entity within the executive branch, I am concerned that this could possibly impede access to classified information by OVP staff, since such access would be considered a disclosure outside the executive branch. [my emphasis]

For the record, I've seen Leonard speak twice. He strikes me as a diligent, frustrated straight-shooter--if this is snark, it is sawdust dry. But I think we could have some fun if we find some way to threaten those sending OVP classified information with violations of their security clearance. Think about it--they won't be able to start their Iran war without targeting information. Condi might manage to shut down Gitmo if Cheney remains uninformed of the meetings to shut it down.

There's the problem that, so long as Bush is willing to put up with Cheney's little theories, executive branch agencies (the ones with all the classified info, after all) would get beat up if they refuse Cheney information. Still--it's a worthy idea, one the bureaucrats sick of Cheney's reign might enjoy.

Comments

[radiofreewill]

Addington isn't much of a chess player, I'd say.

[montag]

The WaPo has the first part of a 4 parter on Dickwahd online. It's scary.

[freepatriot]

as I understand it, there's a clause in the Constitution that says "all powers not delegated herein" are reserved to the States and the people respectivly

so if dead eye dick ain't covered under clause II, and he is entitled to be preznit of the Senate under clause I, then dead eye dick ain't got much to go on here

everything not mentioned in the Constitution belongs to US

and the powers that ARE delegated in the Constitution are delegated to Congress, the President, and the Supreme Court

so what powers exactly DOES dead eye have ???

he can vote when there is a tie in the Senate

can ANYBODY think of any other powers he might have ???

NASA director maybe (there's a power base for ya)

me thinks this is an argument that deadeye doesn't want to have with an opponent that can read and reason

the Constitution doesn't say anything about the power to pull shit out of your asshole ...

It does say that all the powers that deadeye CAN pull out of his asshole already BELONG TO US

it's like arguing with a fucking 4 year old ...

[Jody]

I like Dick!

[earlofhuntingdon]

Nail on the head. The "Office" of the Vice President has no constitutional authority other than to break tie votes in the Senate; it can acquire more if and only if the president is unable to serve, in which case the VP becomes acting or permanent president. Until then, he's a hat stand.

Mr. Cheney built a powerful "office" and accumulated enormous power only by taking it from a willing George Bush, who is as clueless about how to wield power as he is about environmental policy, running an oil drilling company or baseball team, or telling the truth.

Mr. Cheney's authority is derivative; he gets only a percentage of it, which is why he needs to demand that the president be deemed to have more and why he needs to keep all he does shrouded in secrecy. That derivative power is also his get out of jail card, because he's not the one responsible, the president is. Except, of course, that the "actor" is not exempt from liability when s/he acts outside the scope of authorithy of his or her office; then everything they do becomes personal. The "out" for that liability is to control the Justice Department. While 'Fredo remains in office, that control is complete. But that ends in January '09 at the latest. The statute of limitations on many things Mr. Cheney is liable for won't run for quite some time after that.

The issue then becomes what does the next president want to do about it? Practically, that will depend as much on how many votes he or she has in Congress as much as who the president is.

[pseudonymous in nc]

Harry Reid should tell Cheney that he'll be required to preside over the Senate from now till 2009.

If it means changing Senate rules, then so be it. Reid might even impishly suggest a vote on changing Rule I to limit the Veep's power of delegation over the presiding officer's duties. Better to keep him occupied than skulking about fomenting wars.

so what powers exactly DOES dead eye have ???

The Veep has precisely two constitutional roles: to preside over the Senate, and to stay breathing in case the presidency becomes vacant. I think Rahm's approach is the best one: if OVP ain't part of the executive branch, then it doesn't get funded as part of the executive branch.

But the context for this is Texas, where real power lies in the hands of the Lieutenant Governor. Cheney's theory of Veep-Power is essentially that of Texas state government imposed upon the federal system.

[Albert Fall]

Bush to Constitution:

You're not the boss of me!

[Woodhall Hollow]

Haha, EW! Brilliantiamento, and about time "some" in govt begin to use a little imagination.

I can "hear" the witless Rahm. As the realization finally hits that these people are really (as in for "real") out of control, then wtf is there to loose? May as well have some fun while, either we bring them down, or go down ourselves. Either way it will be fun. And that is the point, because fun is a word that Cheney (he of little imagination, which is how he got himself into the Libby/Wilson pickle) does not "get." He takes himself way too seriously (along with Lynn & Mary). When you are willing to have a little fun, the imagination is lubricated, and the patterns emerge. The patterns which always point the way to the truth, like a good whodunit.

As in: "At the very least, the Vice President should be consistent."

We need more of that sort of snark/truth from the Dem leadership!

[Ishmael]

Big Time just pulls these theories out of his ass, so I hate to dignify them with analysis. It is clear to anyone that Cheney is the President of the Senate, (not of the United States!), and that this role, subject to his tie-breaking power, is like that of any Speaker of any deliberative body in parliamentary systems. However, it may become important when the issue of who presides at the Cheney impeachment in the Senate arises. Chief Justice Roberts only would preside at Shrub's impeachment trial. The Constitution is silent on who would preside otherwise, so it would be the President of the Senate who would preside. Anyone want to bet that Big Time would willingly give up the right to preside over his own impeachment trial, just because, you know, it would be flagrantly unjust for him to do so? It is notable that the Senate can choose its own President pro tempore "....in the absence of the Vice President", but impeachment is not necessarily "absence". The Senator elected President pro tem would not have the power to tie-break, this power is explicitly vested in the Vice President. Before the 25th Amendment, there was no procedure for replacing a VP who died or ascended to the Presidency, and stayed vacant for as long as 4 years - seems unlikely that the Framers considered the Vice Presidency to be so important. I guess I would leave the last word to John Adams, who in a letter to Abigail Adams speaking about his Vice Presidency, wrote "My country has in its wisdom contrived for me the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived or his imagination conceived."

Section 3, Clause 5: President pro tempore and other Senate officers

The Senate shall choose their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of the President of the United States.

[prostratedragon]

[I]f this is snark, it is sawdust dry.

Nothing beats naked fact for snark. But beyond the rich satisfaction, wouldn't it be great if some bold civil servant treated the next "request," or however the schmo does it, for classified info or any other restricted accomodation from OVP as if it were from a non-executive entity? That person would be a hero.

[Albert Fall]

OT, more or less.

Is anyone else worried that the whole upcoming "family jewels" CIA disclosure is a political act (by the most political administration in history)?

With an objective of creating another Bright Shining Object for the MSM, and the objective of creating a very dumbed-down baseline moral equivalence argument of: "Hey, if Bobby Kennedy was for assasinations, why is Gitmo ...and torture...and warrantless wiretapping...and abridgement of habeas corpus....and relentless politicization of the the criminal subpoena and prosecution power in pursuit of a one-party state (read: Permanent Republican Majority)...so bad?"

The Beltway crowd is SFD ("So Fucking Dumb") that they would eat it up.

[Albert Fall]

OT, more or less.

Is anyone else worried that the whole upcoming "family jewels" CIA disclosure is a political act (by the most political administration in history)?

With an objective of creating another Bright Shining Object for the MSM, and the objective of creating a very dumbed-down baseline moral equivalence argument of: "Hey, if Bobby Kennedy was for assasinations, why is Gitmo ...and torture...and warrantless wiretapping...and abridgement of habeas corpus....and relentless politicization of the the criminal subpoena and prosecution power in pursuit of a one-party state (read: Permanent Republican Majority)...so bad?"

The Beltway crowd is SFD ("So Fucking Dumb") that they would eat it up.

[readerOfTeaLeaves]

It's refreshing to see Rahm use Cheney's secrecy against him; this sort of 'aikido politics' is long overdue from the Dems.

Per prostratedragon -- In our post-9/11 world, one can only hope that thousands of federal employees protect classified information and refuse to supply it to unauthorized parties ;-)

Here's hoping that Rahm keeps his proposal, the discussion, and his logic brief and simple.
(Silent prayer: Dear Rahm -- keep it iPod simple...!)

[Mimikatz]

Via Thgink Progress, a new areticle out from Rolling Stone on how Big Dick Cheney gutted Bush's tepid steps on climate change. I love the sound of sharpening knives.

[Mimikatz]

Ooops.

[Mimikatz]

link to Rolling Stone

[eyesonthestreet]

shiny object or not, here they are, the "family jewels," via a link form Guradian Unlimited article, http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2109513,00.html

family jewels: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB222/index.htm

[eyesonthestreet]

argh, the above is the "list of skeletons," the actual jewels will be "exposed" next week.

[ab initio]

It's good to hear that Rahm is going to have an amendment to defund the OVP if it claims its not part of the executive branch.

Anyone got any theories on why the Dems don't play hardball politics with the Repubs when they have got shafted and treated like dirt when they where in the minority?

[readerOfTeaLeaves]

Ab initio, I'd hate to see the Dems display the same short-sighted, self-defeating, 'hammer-fisted' venalty that defined Delay, Hastert, Foley, et al. Bush prefers 'mano a mano' swaggering, and sending minions to harrass people in post-op hospital beds. No need for the Dems to repeat any of that behavior, please (!).

On the other hand, the philosophies embodied in the martial arts (i.e., karate, aikido, kendo) require self-mastery, self-discipline, patience, balance, and an emphasis on exploiting the opponent's weakness. I'd prefer the Dems go after these creeps in the spirit of kendo.

Less obnoxious pugilism; more "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon," savvy, shrewdness, and skill, please ;-)

[pow wow]

Not just scary, montag (good to see your tag again, btw), I think you could say that this article begins to lay the groundwork for impeachment and a war crimes prosecution against our Vice President.

Unbelievable (and out of character) reporting from the Washington Post about Cheney, with information about inner White House workings from all over the spectrum:

On Nov. 14, 2001, the day after Bush signed the commissions order, Cheney took the next big step. He told the U.S. Chamber of Commerce that terrorists do not "deserve to be treated as prisoners of war." [Read Cheney's full remarks]

The president had not yet made that decision. Ten weeks passed, and the Bush administration fought one of its fiercest internal brawls, before Bush ratified the policy that Cheney had declared: The Geneva Conventions would not apply to al-Qaeda or Taliban fighters captured on the battlefield.

Since 1949, Geneva had accorded protections to civilians and combatants in a war zone. Those protections varied with status, but the prevailing U.S. and international view was that anyone under military control -- even an alleged war criminal -- has some rights. Rumsfeld, elaborating on the position Cheney staked out, cast that interpretation aside. All captured fighters in Afghanistan, he said at a news briefing, are "unlawful combatants" who "do not have any rights" under Geneva.

At the White House, Bellinger sent Rice a blunt -- and, he thought, private -- legal warning. The Cheney-Rumsfeld position would place the president indisputably in breach of international law and would undermine cooperation from allied governments. Faxes had been pouring in at the State Department since the order for military commissions was signed, with even British authorities warning that they could not hand over suspects if the U.S. government withdrew from accepted legal norms.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/cheney/chapters/chapter_1/

On Sunday's Page One. What's going down in Washington, this time?

[Vicki]

The question is, what will happen in this scuffle? Does anyone up there really care about security? I think not. My personal prediction if this is taken to ISOO… nothing will happen! Why do I say this? Look only as far as Mr. William J. Leondard- Director, ISOO. Prior to Bill Leonard’s showing up at ISOO, and his eventual appointment to the position of director, Bill Leonard served in the HQ Office of the Defense Investigative Service (later to become the Defense Security Service). So what you say; what does that have to do with anything? Well, the Defense Security Service has oversight authority for all defense contractors performing on contracts with classified peramaters attached to them. This included (and includes) contractors such as Halliburton, Lockheed/Martin, Boeing, General Dynamics, etc., etc. The list goes on to the tune of approximately 11,000 + cleared defense contractors. During the midddle 1990’s there was tremendous pressure from the defense industry to change the oversight role and mission of the Defense Security Service. No small part of that pressure came from the industrial giants. At that time, Bill Leonard was working in DSS/HQ, Alexandria, VA along with Gregory A. Gwash- DSS, Deputy Director for Industrial Security. Bill Leonard and Gregory Gwash worked closely with the corporate facility security officers (FSO’s) of the defense contractor giants. For example, Lockheed/Martin, Boeing, then McDonnell/Douglas, etc. So what, you say. Leonard and Gwash, working in close concert with those defense industrial FSO’s penned a new Industrial Security Manual (DoD 5220.22-M); one much more open ended, with reduced security requirements, and one subject to much more intrepretation. Should I say, one much more favorable to industry? Again, so what? This was all passed, and signed off by Pentagon authorities to the exclusion of the other signatory User Agencies to the Industrial Security Program. No one ever bothered to actually legally change the Industrial Security Regualtion (ISR 5220.22-R, dated December 1985) that the ISM is supposed to be based upon. Why not? Because that would have taken to much coordination (dare I say visibility) with all the other authorities in the twenty plus other signatory User Agencies to the National Industrial Security Program (NISP). All those other User Agencies would have had their collective input into the regulatory process. Since those days of the middle 1990’s, industry’s influence upon the government regulatory process has continued to grow. There has been far too much movement of individuals in government regulatory oversight roles to industry and vice versa. In too many instances, allegances have be blurred; and what’s best for industry is not always in the best interest of the nation, or national security.
And what about Greg Gwash? Well, shortly after completion of the penning of the new industry frendly ISM, he accepted a position as the corporate FSO of the Boeing Company, Seattle. Hummm, now how does that work? You go directly from a position as the oversight authority for 11,000 + defense contractors to the corporate FSO of one of the largest defense contractors in the world.
And in the last six years it’s only gotten worse. So, what will happen to Cheney? My prediction… nothing!

[Brendan]

Posted by: Jody >

Is that you, freepatriot?

[Brendan]

Oops! I posted incorrectly with a < in front, I guess.
Meant to post:

I like Dick!
Posted by Jody

Is that you, freepatriot?