Sponsors

Did Anyone Notice When Cheney Said This?? Email Print

Cross-posted everywhere, but primarily at Daily Kos)

My last post was generally about the ratcheting-up of defensive rhetoric by the President in two recently-delivered speeches (on Veteran's Day and on a stopover in Alaska). Vice President Dick Cheney's speech last night, then, wasn't shocking given the new "strategy" to defend the war in Iraq. The "strategy" seems to be:

  • Deny and decry the allegation of misleading America into war.
  • Claim that a Congressional investigation cleared the Administration of manipulating intelligence - be sure not to mention that the investigation itself was about whether or not the Administration pressured intelligence analysts and agents to deliver specific content - the current allegations are about whether that intelligence was misused.
  • Attack specifically the Democrats who voted for the Iraq war authorization.

Now that that recap is out of the way, I caught something a bit curious in Cheney's remarks at the Frontiers of Freedom Institute 2005 Ronald Reagan Gala last night. Read on.

First, if you're interested, the full text of the speech can be found here. Here's the comment that caught my eye:

But in the last several weeks we have seen a wild departure from that tradition [of truthfulness and good faith]. And the suggestion that's been made by some U.S. senators that the President of the United States or any member of this administration purposely misled the American people on pre-war intelligence is one of the most dishonest and reprehensible charges ever aired in this city.

My emphasis added. Now - a little over a week ago I commented in this diary on Daily Kos. My comment was this:

Well, in the downstream of that exchange (and it was WAY heated - CNN and MSNBC covered it extensively) questions were repeatedly asked and not answered as to whether or not the Vice President's office is a part of the Administration.

Is there any precedent for this?

I was referencing a White House press briefing (the subject of the diary). The response to that comment came from Federalist X and was, in part, as follows:

the VP is actually NOT a member of the executive office. look at the constitution. he's an officer of the senate. his constitutional power, to preside over the senate, is found ONLY in the article I (i.e., the legislature).

presidents have moved around this by granting officer commissions to the VPs staff, eg. libby was an officer of the executive branch AND the VP's office. but the VP's office, constitutionally at least, is a part of the LEGISLATURE.

Do you see where I'm going with this? Cheney denies that anyone in the Administration misled the American people. Cheney, Constitutionally speaking, is not a member of the Administration.

Bush commented on Cheney's speech in this article in The Washington Post:

"I agree with the vice president," Bush said Thursday in South Korea when asked about Cheney's remarks. "I think people ought to be allowed to ask questions. It is irresponsible to say that I deliberately misled the American people.

"What bothers me is when people are irresponsibly using their positions and playing politics," Bush added. "That's exactly what is taking place in America."

My emphasis added.  It's entirely possible that, on a technicality, the President is telling the truth and the Vice President is telling the truth while giving himself legal cover. The fact that it could have been the Vice President misleading America, in turn, gives the Administration cover.

I suppose it depends on what the meaning of the word "IS" is, though.


KEYWORDS: , , , ,

Sign up for a Complimentary Member Account... Join the community! It's fast. And it'll allow you to take advantage of all this site's great features!

< Meet the new Iraq, Same as the old Iraq | NO, NO, NO ALITO - YES, PLAN B (ACTION!) >
 Display:
...he doth protest too much. Every liar's first inclination is to attack the accuser. Bush either misled the nation or he was too stupid to know he was being misled. Either way, he misled the nation.

by Meteor Blades on 11/18/2005 03:45:27 PM EST

The Republican defense of the "you lied" issue comes down to "did not, we were just stupid."

by Devilstower on 11/18/2005 05:22:58 PM EST

[ Parent ]
GOP: Stupid!

Dems: Lied!

GOP: Stupid!

Dems: Lied!

GOP: Stupid!

Dems: Lied!

American People: Stop!  You're both right!

"Be realistic. Demand the impossible!" --Wall poster from the 1968 Paris Uprising

by Paul Rosenberg on 11/20/2005 10:20:13 AM EST

[ Parent ]
The enormous amount of brainpower we have to expend trying to figure out which little "wiggle room" word or words they're using to cover up their bullshit.

This is a perfect example.

It makes my head hurt.

God, I'd so much rather be putting my head to use brainstorming about how to implement universal health care or improving our educational system. But you can't even get to thinking about stuff like that because you've got to play "gotcha" all the time to build a case to get these criminals out of power so you can eventually do something decent with your thinking.

Arrrrgggghhhh!

by SusanG on 11/17/2005 01:24:57 PM EST

Hmmm...very interesting.

BushCo has always been all about really careful language. Bush was smart enough to never say Saddam was an "immenent threat," but he sure used both words in the same paragraph a lot.

Dissent Protects Democracy

by cscs on 11/17/2005 01:57:54 PM EST

you know, nuance.

"heh, heh, heh. Not like that other feller's nuance, ya know, what was his name, --Kerry?"

(Jon Stewart should do a bit on this.)

Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle. FDR

by btyarbro on 11/18/2005 11:28:44 AM EST

[ Parent ]

Adding to your point, while Cabinet officers and White House staff serve "at the pleasure of the President", this is not true of the VP. The President and Vice President can absolutely despise each other -- and I'm sure this has happened more than once in U.S. history -- and there's not a damned thing the President can do to change the situation.  (Well, except maybe for a well-planned foreign mission by the V.P...)

by Nowhere Man on 11/17/2005 02:46:56 PM EST

There's every indication that people see through 36% Bush and even more clearly see through 19% Cheney.  I think far more than half the mud they're slinging is landing on their own heads.

by Devilstower on 11/17/2005 09:34:37 PM EST

Congressional dems won't back down over these new accusations re: the "reprehensible" playing of politics.

by D Cupples on 11/18/2005 02:16:45 AM EST

formulate national foreign policy in the Office of Vice President (OVP)? Should that power not have remained in the Executive office?

All it takes to fly is to hurl yourself at the ground... and miss. (Douglas Adams)

by scoophound on 11/18/2005 01:26:29 PM EST

The dude's starting to look like Gitmo - not here, not there, not under Federal oversight, not under international oversight... How convenient.

And how frightening.

Hey - Why haven't you visited my blog?

by RenaRF on 11/18/2005 03:53:07 PM EST

[ Parent ]
The Vice President is part of the Executive Branch.

Article II, dealing with the Executive Branch begins thus:

Section. 1.

Clause 1: The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows...

While he is given no explicit powers in the Costitution, neither is anyone else in the Executive Branch.  And, as for where things are mentioned. Well, the Treasury is mentioned three times Article I (the Legislative Branch) but never in the Article II. Doesn't prove a thing about
Section. 6.

Clause 1: The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States....

Section. 9....

Clause 7: No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

Section. 10....

Clause 2: No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

As Wikipedia notes, the Treasury Deparment was created by an act of Congress:
The United States Department of the Treasury is a Cabinet department, a treasury, of the United States government established by an Act of U.S. Congress in 1789 to manage the revenue of the United States government.
While it's true that the President can't fire the Vice President, that's the only thing that distinguishes him from other members of the Executive Branch.

As for who's a member of the Administration--that isn't even a Constitutional issue.  The word "administration" does not even appear in the Constitution.

"Be realistic. Demand the impossible!" --Wall poster from the 1968 Paris Uprising

by Paul Rosenberg on 11/20/2005 10:44:55 AM EST

 Display: