TPM suggests its not an 'imperial vp' but an extraconstitutional one

Over at TalkingPointsMemo.com - David Kurtz (weekend regular for TPM) has a very, very significant post that begins with the WaPo "Cheney's shadow hangs over the plame trial" (not exact title) article. Then goes on to their own digging at TPMMuckrakers into trying to find out who works at the Office of the Vice President (OVP) and instead stumble on what reads like a rather shocking writeup.

from the entry:

Since then, I've gone from being open to the idea of an Imperial Vice Presidency to being convinced that historians will debate whether something approaching a Cheney-led coup d'etat has occurred, in which some of the powers of the Executive were extra-constitutionally usurped by the Office of the Vice President.

Last week, in trying to break the lock on who actually works in the OVP--which the Vice President refuses to reveal--the guys at Muckraker stumbled across this entry from a government directory known as the "Plum Book":

The Vice Presidency is a unique office that is neither a part of the executive branch nor a part of the legislative branch, but is attached by the Constitution to the latter. The Vice Presidency performs functions in both the legislative branch (see article I, section 3 of the Constitution) and in the executive branch (see article II, and amendments XII and XXV, of the Constitution, and section 106 of title 3 of the United States Code).

It appears that Cheney's office submitted this entry in lieu of a list of its employees, as federal agencies must do. It sounds like something Cheney's current chief of staff, David Addington, might have written. Cheney and Addington have been the among the most powerful proponents of the theory of a "unitary executive," but there are indications that they have also advanced, though less publicly, a theory of a constitutionally distinct and independent vice presidency.

more at: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/012263.php

This is a *Must Read* and a Must Discuss. Please read the entry and come back and let us know what you think.

I can buy that. He gets all the glamour and glitz, the appearance of being in control, but he lets Cheney do it all, and in secret. This makes perfect sense. And it is vital that people start looking at this very secretive OVP and find out who is there and what they are doing. Could this be the very thing that has gotten Cheney so upset recently? Not the thought so much of impeachment but of exposure?

as they (Addington/Cheney) ACT on their "unique" interpretations of the Constitution. Niether a part of the exec branch or the legislative branch but "attached to both"? What actions are they undertaking that they have 'defined' to themselves as being within the realms of their power - that noone can check because noone knows they are doing it? These folks are not bound by the constitution - they seem to claim the right to 'reinterpret' the constitution (er - isn't that the SC role) and then ACT on that reinterpretation.

"But for all intents and purposes, Cheney is chief, and Bush is more in the ceremonial role of the queen of England."

Some very good points about the press not focusing on Cheney and allowing him to operate with a complete veil over his day to day operations.

Also, the question of how an egomaniacal narcissist like Bush can stand having Cheney as the actual mover/shaker.

I think I can answer that question. Bush is lazy and somewhat delusional when it comes to how the world works. He is happy PLAYACTING as President and tells himself he is "The Decider". As long as he is the asshole who gets to push the button.

And Cheney's and Neocon plans are about confrontation and dominance. Bush is happy with that, I'm sure.

being taken by cheneyetal. I don't think he cares, particularly. What is frightening to me is the spector of folks who believe that they alone can reinterpret the constitution and act upon that reinterpretation ... feel justified in doing so and being accountable to No One - not the president, not the congress, not the SC, not the people of the US. As long as there is 'secrecy' - and their actions are fait accomplis.

and then find some twisted rationale or interpretation to fit their actions.

And they resent having to even bother coming up with that rationale, however twisted, but realise it's necessary as a fig leaf.

Well maybe SOME of them might enjoy the mental masturbation of coming up with some sort of intellectual framework.

But as we've seen, as time goes on they seem to bother less and less with keeping up appearances and trying to justify their behavior.

like his "the right of habeus corpus is not in the Constitution - the Constitution merely prohibits taking it away." (WTF kind of stupid logic is that).

But I think some of the actions of the OVP are intentional - when one reads some of the signing statements (authored by Addington in the OVP) they are over small stuff - as if the ss were the point in some cases not nec a signal of trying to do something else covertly. I think that Cheney and Addington really are intentionally trying to change the balance of powers as stated by the Constitution - and deliver them as an 'already done' - as in now congress (or the SC) can't "take back" these powers. I thnk serious structural issues to our Constitutional form of govt are secretly being exploited and CHANGED - as the END not just the means to an end.

Bush wants to BE president, not DO president.

The easy, christmas tree type stuff is the part he enjoys and wants to do but the hard, painstaking and time consuming stuff just doesn't rise to the level of attention he is willing to deliver.

Sounds pretty much like a pre-adolescent, a-d-d and all.

(snip from above article)

Still, I can't help but be fascinated by the more pedestrian issue of how Cheney continues to assert himself so vigorously without running up against the ego of a cocksure President. How is it that Bush, who is so caught up in macho public demonstrations of his own personal strength and courage, can tolerate a shadow presidency within his own White House? What kind of spell has Cheney cast that allows Bush to continue to believe he is the decider? You can imagine all sorts of dysfunctional psychological dramas playing out behind the scenes.

Emphasis mine.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: How indeed? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

1) How does this new extra-Constitutional power play out for the next VP? And the next?
2) Who are the republicans planning to insert in that position in '08?
3) What are 'their' plans for the future that this type of power shift is being enacted?
4) What happens in the event a sitting President fires one VP and appoints another?

In short, "We, the People" could conceivably wind up with an appointed VP about whom we know nothing, whom we did not elect and who runs a shadow government in our country; for all intents and purposes, a 'shadow' dictator.

that these powers and excerise thereof will result in somekind of Constitutional showdown (through courts) which, if our system is to survive, will turn back some of those powers.

It always amazes me that wingnuts are really unable to look at some of the extreme powergrabs and ask themselves... "would I still think this was good if it was Bill (or Hillary) Clinton doing this?" - as if trying to think about the powergrabs objectively is somehow beyond them - too much grey and not enough "Support Bush at all costs!" :shrug:

I think these are very good questions - very serious ones.

Gets straight to the point that this administration really may end up leaving a very altered form of govt - one not outlined in the Constitution - than the form of govt that has served us for more than two centuries.

cynic that I am, I don't see our, conservative rigged courts turning back this kind of power for two very simple reasons. They do not think they will 'lose' and they have already booby-trapped the system to blow up in the winner's face (8 years of "Hunting the President" comes to mind here).

For several decades now, the neo-cons, for lack of a better term than fascists, have been stacking the local and state courts with 'their' people. Some of those judges are now being appointed to federal positions (gonzales as one example). 'They' are fanatics of the worst kind. 'They' will win at all costs (the 2000 selection being the most obvious example). It does not cross their mind that someone other than 'their' own will win an election and have any kind of power. That is why, in my opinion, 'they' don't bother with "would I still think this was good if it was Bill (or Hillary) Clinton doing this?" It doesn't matter. They have already created a "very altered form of govt".

'Theirs' is not a world view which includes democracy, liberty, equality, human rights or any of those other "touchy feely" ideals for which "We, the People" believe the U.S. and its government stands ("and to the Republic, for which it stands. One nation, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for All." 'They' have focused so long on 'under God', not in the religious sense but in the 'under one ruler' sense, that they have forgotten the rest of our pledge).

One of the reasons I hope libby's trial will lead to additional charges filed against additional 'persons of interest' is that I hope that some of the machinations behind the scenes will be brought to light and that our elected officials will become concerned enough to start examining the 'fine print' which has gradually and insidiously been introduced into our system of government.

Yeah, I'm preaching to the choir here. I just hope those reading this understand that the current regime occupying the White House was not the beginning of and is not the end of the assault on the U.S. and its people. Elections are cool and fun and crank up the adrenaline, but they aren't the 'be all and end all' to undo the crimes committed against "We, the People" and our Republic.

/stepping off soap box

per your words of the incidious actions of the administration. I couldn't agree with you more.

Ironically, the current admins hubris - and venal actions - are beginning to be exposed, I think the Libby trial is just one of such fronts that will expose to enough of the public and to enough elected officials that will lead not only to the examination you refer (per the fine print) - but also a public repudiation of those within the party that so blindly enabled such actions. However the public repudiation has to be stronger than the Watergate repudiation (which just led to a quick reemergence via reagan, and then a reemergence with a vengence (8 yrs of planning while out of power) after Clinton. I think there is hope - but only if more is fully exposed and known and becomes part of the public psyche as reality. For example, it is now pretty commonly accepted that Bushco manipulated facts to take us into war (that idea was resisted by the public for years - but seems to by now have taken hold) - but there is so much more than that - esp with regards to our public institutions.

Along with the trial - I have great hope for pushes by the ABA and ACLU on the NSA assualts on civil rights (warrantless spying); I have an emerging hope that the issue of signing statements will also make its way not just to legislators (Go Waxman!) but into the public psyche - per the insididious disregard for Congress and thus challenging the Constitution itself; We have aleady seen the public reaction to the indifference of this admin and its party to the victims of Katrina but I bet that the upcoming house hearings (thank you Dennis Kucinich) will lead to a major questioning of the price of the priorities of the GOP... To me one of the big questions is whether enough will come to public and officials attention per the false belief that "privatization" always = better services than public services... and that the growing reliance on such privatization has led to GOUGING of taxpayers by corporations who have come to view the fed. govt as primary sources of excessive revenues - and the system of political 'gifting' that has served to protect the profiteers and deeply corrupt our system.

Me, too - guilty of preaching to the choir - but those above are a few of the things that I believe if they fully penetrated the public psyche would lead to some real changes and some hefty cynicism in the future that would prevent an act three or four in the future from whatever form the bushco of today might reemerge as in the future.

That is the key.

What has been and continues to happen in the 'hallowed halls' of our government has to become part of the body of information we refer to as 'common knowledge.' Not in a 'you can't fight city hall' or 'all politicians are crooks' sort of way, but in a 'OMFG! look what they did while I wasn't watching!' sort of way. (I hope that made sense.)

Can we pull people away from their complacent lives and educate them enough that they become outraged (or scared) enough that we will finally demand! accountability and transparency from those whom We put into office?

As you noted, it is happening, as it needs to, on many fronts. I hope that there are enough of us preaching to the choir to get the word out in a simple and concrete manner. Not because the American people are stupid. But because American people are busy waking up and their caffeine hasn't kicked-in yet. :D

Maybe with enough exposure to warrantless spying, signing statements, the criminal incompetency of Katrina (and what's coming out about what they're finding at the WTC ground zero), the extra-Constitutionality that is becoming the OVP and the ever increasing damage caused by privatization and corporate personhood and its deleterious effects on peoples' lives, people will hear enough repeated that it can "become part of the public psyche as reality".

So, I guess this means you and I and others who think as we do, get to continue to preach to the choir. For, as 'Toby' replied to 'Sam' after 'Sam' asked, 'Why preach to the choir?' 'Because that's how you get them to sing.' (West Wing, #417 "Red Haven's on Fire". Hey, I'll take influencing 'common knowledge' from wherever I can get it. ;)) Oh well, to use another lame pop cultural reference "I'd like to teach the world to sing..."

/that concludes today's broadcast of "Educating the Masses" brought to you by "Learning can be fun!"

Eh, the soap from my soapbox turned into 'Tiny Bubbles' and I went all 60s.



:rofl:

From an article in another DU thread



And which of our Democratic firebrands wrote this? Um, er, that would be Joe Scarborough. From this article


Maybe it's finally going 'mainstream'.

ala incompetence rather than intentional manipulation. Actually if you read lots of LTTE I *do* think that the public psyche (ala the public's 'conventional wisdom') has moved further than Joes - a year ago more people still attributed to the lack of WMDs to bad intel - where if you read folks (esp those without an axe on the right (or left, for that matter) to grind - you see much more 'lied' language per the bad intel.

When the "lied" or "manipulation" of intel crosses Joe's lips - you will know it is not just conventional knowledge (ala most of the public) but UNIVERSAL conventional knowledge (ala even the real conservatives who *want* to believe the neocon lines - but no longer can). The fact that we are approaching that point suggests that we are further to the point that you and I wish for (full out public recognition of, repudiation of and FUTURE rejection of) the GOP and the behaviors that led (before bushco just accelerated under bushco) to our current eroded state of affairs.

power. Rove had THE math, but they didn't fix the last election quite enough to account for the changed situation, what with Foley, Abramoff, DeLay and all. I do not doubt that the Dem landslide was much greater than we saw, including in the Senate, but there was enough fixing and voter suppression to cut the Dem lead, just not enough to overcome it altogether.

If they thought for a minute the Dems would ever have a chance to use all that power they grabbed, they would have been more careful. They didn't even think the Dems would have a chance to use the power in the House and Senate, much less that of the "unitary executive."

congressional approval. But that means we need a Dem party with a spine.

Our interests versus corporate interests is what I mean. NAFTA, CAFTA, the bankruptcy bill and other pro-corporate, pro-business anti-people legislation keeps running through my mind.

behind the 'wizard' - but they have to do it in the sense of starting to DIG into the actions of Cheney. On how many fronts has Cheney and Addington inserted some language somewhere that grants them more power than given Constitutionally? And how has that effected how the fed govt has carried out the laws passed by Congress.

In the TPM article and earlier item by Kuttner is linked that discusses that Cheney etal have placed high up officials, oft at the objection of the cabinet secretary, in various agencies in order to exert power. Okay -lets find out what they are doing. Take away the veil - then challenge the Hell out of the cheney attempts at extraconstitutional actions.

We need him not only gone from office - but we need to understand the damage done - so that it can be reversed.

INSTALLING synchophants at every level of government.

NOTHING gets past these agencies unless it is run through a Bush 'Block Mother', like those Chinese spies on every corner in every neighborhood, who let the Govt there know WHO has too many Children, too many FEMALES, WHO is REQUIRED to Abort or pay a hefty fine.

People should be complaining, framing Bush's latest move as akin to COMMUNISM, that'll get some reaction, and from BOTH sides.

THANKS so much for this insight, as much as I read, digest and try to comprehend, these fuckers are so BEYOND me in their evility that I can't keep up, I have EVIL Fatigue :)

Cheney needs to be treated as Mussolini, and if it is a Pay Per View Event I will empty my bank account and invite the world to watch, him and his Traitorous Whore.

If you wonder if this article is a 'reach' just take a look at the Wolf interview on CNN. Wolfie was SHAKING, FRIGHTENED, as he KNOWS how much power Cheney has, and how pervasive it is.

This is all payback for Nixon btw, probably an OATH sworn, and written in blood.

Would. Rush etal have made the communism charge mean = any public program or increase in taxes - even if 'increase' = restore past levels.

However this is TOTALITARIANISM - but the word by itself means little to those who haven't studied college level history, poli-sci or sociology - but tie it to an example of totalitarianism (controlling everything - in the most intrusive way possible - ala Stalin) - and folks might get it.

I think that more and more in the corporate media are finally *beginning* to get it - read the info without always cynically shrugging it off as rhetoric - and what they are reading is far worse than any democratic rhetoric - and they are beginning (finally) to shudder in the way that many of us have been doing since the onset of 2002.

Btw - always good to see you symbolman - I appreciate your perspective as it brings a 'long-sighted' view to it - and one that makes me feel that I am not off-target and just reacting - but that my policy mind/reaction when trying to look at historical significance is more spot on rather than reactive. :hi: