Blog EntryGot Dick?: VP office not part of White HouseJun 22, '07 10:58 AM
for everyone
  Go to Original

    Cheney Power Grab: Says White House Rules Don't Apply to Him
    By Justin Rood
    ABC News

    Thursday 21 June 2007

    Vice President Dick Cheney has asserted his office is not a part of the executive branch of the U.S. government, and therefore not bound by a presidential order governing the protection of classified information by government agencies, according to a new letter from Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., to Cheney.

    Bill Leonard, head of the government's Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO), told Waxman's staff that Cheney's office has refused to provide his staff with details regarding classified documents or submit to a routine inspection as required by presidential order, according to Waxman.

    In pointed letters released today by Waxman, ISOO's Leonard twice questioned Cheney's office on its assertion it was exempt from the rules. He received no reply, but the vice president later tried to get rid of Leonard's office entirely, according to Waxman.

    Leonard did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

    In a statement e-mailed to the Blotter on ABCNews.com, Cheney spokeswoman Megan McGinn said, "We are confident that we are conducting the office properly under the law."

    As director of the tiny, 25-person Information Security Oversight Office, Leonard is responsible for keeping track of the nation's secrets and making sure they are properly protected.

    For the first two years of the George W. Bush administration, Cheney's office complied with a presidential order that requires officials to report statistics on the number of documents it classifies and declassifies.

    Since 2003, however, Cheney's office has refused to submit the data to ISOO. And when ISOO inspectors tried in 2004 to schedule a routine inspection of the vice president's offices, they were rebuffed, Waxman's letter claims.

    Other White House offices, including the National Security Council, did not object to similar inspections, according to Waxman.

    "Serious questions can be raised about both the legality and advisability of exempting your office from the rules that apply to all other executive branch officials," Waxman said in his letter to the vice president, and asked him to explain why he felt the rules didn't apply to him and his staff and how he was protecting classified information in his office.

    Former Cheney aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby was recently convicted on several counts of perjury and obstruction of justice stemming from the leak of the identity of former covert CIA officer Valerie Plame, Waxman noted, and in 2006, former Cheney aide Leandro Aragoncillo pleaded guilty to sharing classified U.S. documents with foreign nationals. Aragoncillo also worked under former Democratic Vice President Al Gore, who complied with ISOO's requests.

 


    Go to Original

    Vice President Exempts His Office From the Requirements for Protecting Classified Information
    US House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

    Thursday 21 June 2007

    The Oversight Committee has learned that over the objections of the National Archives, Vice President Cheney exempted his office from the presidential order that establishes government-wide procedures for safeguarding classified national security information. The Vice President asserts that his office is not an "entity within the executive branch."

    As described in a letter from Chairman Waxman to the Vice President, the National Archives protested the Vice President's position in letters written in June 2006 and August 2006. When these letters were ignored, the National Archives wrote to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales in January 2007 to seek a resolution of the impasse. The Vice President's staff responded by seeking to abolish the agency within the Archives that is responsible for implementing the President's executive order.

    In his letter to the Vice President, Chairman Waxman writes: "I question both the legality and wisdom of your actions.... [I]t would appear particularly irresponsible to give an office with your history of security breaches an exemption from the safeguards that apply to all other executive branch officials."

    A fact sheet prepared by Chairman Waxman describes other instances in which the Vice President's office has sought to avoid oversight and accountability.


17 CommentsChronological   Reverse   Threaded
jackfrost wrote on Jun 22, '07
MORE:
Cheney - White House Rules Don't Apply to Him
Cheney Declares VP Not Part Of Executive Branch

Fine by me. But then the VP should be elected separately from The President. NOT ON THE SAME TICKET.
tortoiseboy wrote on Jun 22, '07
Christ, they're rotten to the core. Nice one Jack, this kind of thing is exactly why I added you
mildlot wrote on Jun 22, '07
Actually, I can go along with this one. Now that he's not part of the Executive Branch, his office is no longer protected by executive privilege.

So, let's have those Energy Task Force meeting docs, hmmm?
jackfrost wrote on Jun 22, '07
mildlot said
Actually, I can go along with this one. Now that he's not part of the Executive Branch, his office is no longer protected by executive privilege.

So, let's have those Energy Task Force meeting docs, hmmm?
Oh SNAP!
tortoiseboy wrote on Jun 22, '07
Energy Task Force docs?
dammitjim wrote on Jun 22, '07
yeah, can you believe this?
i'd say "elephgant balls", but it's not that. it's just ordinary contempt, in extraodinary quantities. elephant dung.
this cocksucker should be tried, and whatever appropriate & duly deliberated sentence carried out at dawn. upside down.
dammitjim wrote on Jun 22, '07
Energy Task Force docs?
the tooth fairy?
jackfrost wrote on Jun 22, '07
tortoiseboy wrote on Jun 22, '07
aah i see

Shoulda thought of that... i guess it was as much a cue to make conversation
tortoiseboy wrote on Jun 22, '07
forgive my naivety i am but young and impressionable
mildlot wrote on Jun 22, '07
Jack, your other post on this is quite interesting too... subject to rules of the Senate... including the Julius Caesar rule perhaps?
mildlot wrote on Jun 23, '07
From the Follow The Money Department:

Democrats plan to cut Cheney out of executive funding bill
Josh Catone
Published: Saturday June 23, 2007

Following Vice President Dick Cheney's assertion that his office is not a part of the executive branch of the US government, Democratic Caucus Chairman Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) plans to introduce an amendment to the the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill to cut funding for Cheney's office.

The amendment to the bill that sets the funding for the executive branch will be considered next week in the House of Representatives.

"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," said Emanuel in a statement released to RAW STORY. "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."

At a press briefing yesterday, White House Deputy Press Secretary Dana Perino said that Cheney's assertion that he operates outside of the executive branch of government was "an interesting constitutional question that people can debate," and a "non-issue."

On Thursday, Emanuel suggested that if Cheney feels his office is not part of the executive branch "he should return the salary the American taxpayers have been paying him since January 2001, and move out of the home for which they are footing the bill."
mildlot wrote on Jun 23, '07
And, from the Wait, Uncle Dick, Don't Seal The Bunker Without Me! Department:

President Bush claims he's exempt from security oversight too, Los Angeles Times to report

RAW STORY
Published: Friday June 22, 2007

"The White House said Friday that, like Vice President Dick Cheney's office, President Bush's office is exempt from a presidential order requiring government agencies that handle classified national security information to submit to oversight by an independent federal watchdog," the Los Angeles Times will report Saturday, RAW STORY has learned. Excerpts:
#

"The executive order that Bush issued in March 2003 covers all government agencies that are part of the executive branch and, although it doesn't specifically say so, was not meant to apply to the vice president's office or the president's office, a White House spokesman said.

The issue flared up Thursday when Rep. Henry A. Waxman, D-Calif., criticized Cheney for refusing to file annual reports with the National Archives and Records Administration, spelling out how his office handles classified documents, or to submit to an inspection by the archives' Information Security Oversight Office.

The archives, a federal agency, has been pressing the vice president's office to cooperate with its oversight efforts for the past several years, contending that by not doing so, Cheney and his staff have created a potential national security risk.

Bush issued the directive in response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks as a way of ensuring that the nation's secrets would not be mishandled, made public, or improperly declassified.
mivox wrote on Jun 23, '07
Democratic Caucus Chairman Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) plans to introduce an amendment to the the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill to cut funding for Cheney's office.

Wow. I wish he were my representative. ahhahahaha
jackfrost wrote on Jun 24, '07
ha! $10 sez no elections in 2008.
controlgroup wrote on Jun 24, '07
I'll take that bet. I can always use more money.

I'm almost -- Almost -- ready to bet that Cheney's going to end up indicted for some kind of high crime before this presidency is over. But That's just crazy optimism and late night alcohol. In the end, he'll probably get away with it. I'll settle with the money I'm already winning for now.
tortoiseboy wrote on Jun 24, '07
scapegoat or culpable?
Add a Comment
   
© 2008 Multiply, Inc.    About · Blog · Terms · Privacy · Corp Info · Contact Us · Help