'Dick' Cheney Declares Self King!
 

I could be wrong, but I believe this will give us the right to have him beheaded after the trial. So, this can only be a good thing.

I think I know the answer to the question. I think you do, too. In fact, I think most any fifth grader does as well. But six months later, the nation's top lawyer still hasn't mustered up a response. This delay and the ambiguity it has fostered is important because the Office of the Vice President — the same folks who brought us the leak of the secret identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson — has taken unto itself the authority to declare as a formal legal position that it is not part of the executive branch and thus does not have to let the National Archives' folks do whatever it is they do to comply with Executive Order 12958.

Key line there, "(Cheney believes himself) not to be part of the executive branch"!

Top stories over at Foxnews.com ... Ohio Moms Missing Body Found, Dad Charged with Murdering Family, Teen in Court over Chastity Ring! Way to go, Fox!

These are good times, my friends. I love to see evil things implode

If I believed in a hell, this man would be candidate number 1. How does he sleep at night? How do any of them live with themselves? All of this abuse of power makes me sick to my stomach, and I'll be so excited when they are out of office and all this crap is in the past.

That is to say, I'm sure that there will be future abuses of power, but I doubt they'll be quite as vomit-worthy as the trespasses we've seen with <gag>Cheney. Who THE FVCK does he THINK HE IS?

:mad:

I don't say this about very many people, but I'll be sincerely glad when he is dead.

As I posed elsewhere, it's even worse than that. On the heels of that, Bush is now saying that the office of the President is exempt from the order too. Yeah, the office of the President isn't part of the executive branch. I totally get that logic.

Abuse of power aside, and with the knowledge of my recent political postings bashing republicans in general, it is tough for me to accept what is written in an article where the author refers to the secret identity of Valerie Plame. I believe the ruling in that particular case was that nothing illegal was done in reference to Valerie Plame.

So what bugs me, is in discussing something that is indeed problematic, why inject the Plame thing in again? When I read this, even though I recognize the problems that are being discussed, seeing the whole Plame thing makes me less likely to take seriously what the author is writing.

I think you bring up a very good point, scaeagles.
It's just really frustrating how more people seem interested in some rich tramp serving time than our very country being swept out from under us.

Okay, Leo, here's an article that doesn't mention Plame.

And another

And another.

Need more?

For good measure, here's a story about the White House claiming that "any executive agency, military department and 'any other entity within the executive branch that comes into the possession of classified information'" somehow doesn't include the President's office. It doesn't mention Plame either.

Did I make you upset, GD?

All I said was when you have something valid to present, why include something like the Plame thing again? It detracts from the message - and agreeably an important message.

Upset? No. You made me laugh.

Powers of the VP are outlined in Article I of the Constitution....not in Article II.

Cheney may have a point and certainly is not obligated to help his enemies by conceding anything he doesn't have to.

Isn't Ken Crane the King?