WASHINGTON, June 23, 2007
White House Backs Cheney's Secrecy Stance
Bush Administration Defends VP's Decision Not To Cooperate With Archives
-
Vice President Dick Cheney listens as President Bush meets with members of Congress, Wednesday, June 20, 2007, in the Oval Office at the White House. (AP)
-
Interactive Second In Command A closer look at Vice President Dick Cheney's career and his much-publicized health problems.
Despite objections from the National Archives and others, presidential spokesmen say Cheney's office is not bound by certain sections of a presidential executive order that seeks to protect national security information generated by the government.
Under the order, executive branch offices are required to give the Information Security Oversight Office at the archives data on how much material they classify and declassify. Cheney's office provided the information in 2001 and 2002, then stopped.
White House deputy press secretary Dana Perino said it's clear that the president's executive order never intended for the vice president's office to be treated as an "agency."
"He's not exempt from following the laws of the United States," Perino said. "He's exempt just from this reporting requirement in this particular executive order."
Cheney's office claims it doesn't have to comply with the order because it is not an "agency" or "entity" within the executive branch, according to Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, which is investigating the matter.
Waxman scoffed at the assertion, calling it "an absurdity for the ages."
"The vice president is pretending he isn't part of the executive branch and the White House is pretending that the rules for protecting classified information are being followed," he said in a statement.Court Watch: Is The VP's Office Above The Law?
"The vice president can't unilaterally decide he is his own branch of government and exempt himself from important, commonsense safeguards for protecting classified information. And he can't insist he has the powers of both the executive and the legislature branches but the responsibilities of neither. Our Constitution doesn't work that way," he said.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales was asked in January to resolve the legal dispute, but he has not yet ruled on the issue.
Government secrecy specialists insist that Cheney's office is covered by the executive order and must report the number of times it classifies material and the number of pages it declassifies to the Information Security Oversight Office.
Steve Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists' government secrecy project, said the executive order defines "agency" as any executive agency, military department and "any other entity within the executive branch that comes into the possession of classified information."
If Cheney's office is not part of the executive branch, "they're going to have to rewrite the textbooks," Aftergood said.
In an eight-page letter to Cheney on Thursday, Waxman said that J. William Leonard, director of the Information Security Oversight Office, told his committee that Cheney's advisers recommended that the executive order be amended to abolish the ISOO.
"I don't think that anyone has suggested that," Perino said.
In the letter, Waxman asked Cheney to respond to a series of questions about why he believes his office is exempt, and what steps his office has taken to ensure that national security information is protected.
"The office of the vice president is in compliance with laws relating to classified material," said Megan McGinn, a spokeswoman for the vice president.
However, according to Waxman, Leonard told the House panel that Cheney's office blocked the archives from doing an onsite inspection of his office in 2004 to make sure classified information was being properly protected.
Data from Cheney's office has not been included in the Information Security Oversight Office reports since it stopped reporting them after 2002.
A White House official said the vice president's office never believed it was required to file the reports, and that when it realized it had done so in 2001 and 2002, it ended the practice.
© MMVII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
More From Politics
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 6
- next
See all 113 CommentsPosted by b48151 at 03:55 PM : Jun 25, 2007"
Berger was sentenced. What about Cheney, now ?
And if you want to get further in the past, only the McNamara copy of the "Operation Northwoods" documents was saved (fortunately). What happened to the other ones ? "You want to talk about being above the law ... How about this " Lyman Lemnitzer fU#K ?
Posted by azman80 at 03:35 PM : Jun 25, 2007
I don't know, but maybe from funding ...
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/2007/06/25/2007-06-25_dems_move_to_defund_veep.html
"The office of the vice president is in compliance with laws relating to classified material," said Megan McGinn, a spokeswoman for the vice president.
--- Thanks for telling us that Mrs. McGinn. We appreciate your statement. ... Like you and your office have any credibility on anything other than how to lie like a rug.
Sacks of lying hippocritical ***!
Since Americans don't want to impeach these two, one has to conclude that Americans like what they are doing. They are running wild, because they control the Senate, and the American Communist Party (GOP).
I wonder when we will be required to have number tattoed on our arms, probalbly hidden in the proposed immigration bill.
Go for it chimp us American saps love you, write a new law so you can run for a third and fourth term.
Since Americans don't want to impeach these two, one has to conclude that Americans like what they are doing. They are running wild, because they control the Senate, and the American Communist Party (GOP).
I wonder when we will be required to have number tattoed on our arms, probalbly hidden in the proposed immigration bill.
Go for it chimp us American saps love you, write a new law so you can run for a third and fourth term.
Right, as if Cheney wasn't part of the White House. OK, well, HE thinks he isn't. But the Executive Order in question specifically states that oversight applies to all agencies.
Can anyone say that it would have been better if Nixon HADN'T been caught? Besides Bush and Cheney, who seem to want to one-up Nixon in dirty deeds, that is?
I'm really concerned about anyone in this country trying to position themselves as being above the law, and most Americans agree with me. The fact of the matter is these two bozos are probably only trying this now because it's a matter of months before the trails of lies, manipulation of intelligence, politicization of our justice system, incompetence in management of federal agencies, etc., leads us right to them.
I think a jail sentence is the best outcome for Bush and Cheney, and it can't happen fast enough.
Posted by realpatriot1 at 10:06 AM : Jun 24, 2007
Let's hope the terrorists go after them there instead. They'd get a round of applause from most Americans (including me) if they succeeded too.
With Cheney & Bush it isn't even about power. They just pure and simple hate the Democratic system here but they want to export it over there.
When someone hates our system of democracy this much, they are fascists at heart. That's why Haliburton is moving to Dubai. They've raided our treasury and now they're taking their winnings to Dubai.
When the terrorists hit us with a suitcase nuke it won't be their problem because they won't be here. They'll be Dubai & Paraguay's problem then.
it cost us americans 35000 per inmate in prison each year. so how come nobody is looking at that number when they say that if someone has broken as a illeigal and we put them in prison for breaking a law and we give them 2 or 5 years or more then they say we will deport them after they serve there time..
so why would americans be willing to pay for this out of our tax dollars????
Pray for Peace, God Bless Each of You.
It is time to end this session indeed. My wife will be poking her head out of the bedroom anytime to give me the evil eye. She claims the tapping of the keys keeps her up. I think she suspects I'm having fun arguing (she knows I love a good argument!) and heaven forbid that I should be enjoying myself. lol
Time to turn on a good movie for the night. Perhaps "Becket" or "Inherit the Wind". Good choices either one. Good night.
Posted by RandalDS
Is that similar to saying if we bomb Iraq first they won%u2019t bomb us and we can fight them over there so we don%u2019t have to fight them here?
Posted by RandalDS
Maybe your polite when its expected but I read many of your post and you%u2019ve been rude, obnoxious, arrogant and sometimes beyond reasoning with but since you like to contradict yourself so often it's time for you to get off the couch for this session.
Posted by menofoz at 01:34 AM : Jun 24, 2007
Odd duck? LOL. Well that's one of the milder things I've been called and I am a bit eccentric from time to time. However I still don't see where I contradict myself. I do hate Bush with all of the passion in my soul, but it just happens that on this one point he agrees with me (I'd rather look at it that way then to say I agree with him). I am a liberal atheist and that does seem to bother some people, but I actually am glad it doesn't bother you. I suspect our politics are a lot closer then further apart.
As for the amnesty, I have no idea if it'll be the best or worst thing for America, but it is, in my mind, the only realistic choice. Since I believe there are no other realistic options, then it automatically becomes the best one. Logic.
But again, this is not the thread for this. Also when I take shots at Bush they're from the bottom of my heart and my right to take as an American and as a poster here. I say nothing worse about him then many others here and it's not your place to tell me what I can or can not post or what does or does not meet your specifications of what a good post is. Yours of course are no good example of posting to begin with, so you have no room to criticize mine.
Posted by RandalDS
Like I already said back it up with solid reasoning and that%u2019s what you come up with how%u2019s that going to help this country and Mexico?
I can post my opinion and offer advice if I want you don%u2019t have to take it but don%u2019t tell others what they can and cannot post either. What%u2019s with you anyway you say one thing and then post the opposite obviously were not getting anywhere and I think you%u2019re a odd duck regardless. It doesn%u2019t matter to me if you%u2019re a liberal, conservative, atheist or something else I know you%u2019re a person behind that monitor though and I do feel some empathy for you because that%u2019s the way I am.
Posted by mikekleber at 01:24 AM : Jun 24, 2007
For Cheney it doesn't matter if he has anything to hide or not. For him it's about power. He honestly believes he and Bush are above Congress and the Judiciary. He believes in the concept of an "Imperial Presidency" where the Congress and courts have no authority and exist as little more then rubber-stamps for the vision of the Executive branch. He honestly believes that is the Constitutional role of the Executive Branch. he is crazy of course, but he is serious about it. Frighteningly enough there are many neoconservatives who feel the same way.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 6
- next
See all 113 Comments