yes, and i thought those of you on the "other side" of this issue might find it interesting what some of your nominal opponents were saying, ie, THEY FREAKING AGREE WITH YOU! interesting, no?
Some of our nominal opponents are beginning to agree with us on a lot of stuff, including the war. You're one of the last holdouts.
That's fine. That doesn't prevent me though from discussing and debating the content of the article. Especially when the content of the article doesn't agree with my opinion that the VP is part of the Executive and not Legislative. Furthermore the article itself never mentioned that the VP should be under Senate rules which I believe would be the case if it were in the Legislative.
Since he falls outside the 3 branches of government recognized by our Constitution, I don't see why not. More forceful arguments have been made that enemy combatants fall outside the Geneva Conventions.
Love it!!! Rahm Emanuel calls Cheney's bluff. -- ------------ O.K., says Emanuel. If Cheney's a member of the legislative branch, the Democratic Caucus chair suggests, the vice president won't need all the money that currently goes to pay for his executive office, extensive staff and that secure undisclosed location that is so often his haunt. So Emanuel plans this week to offer an amendment to a spending bill that would defund the Office of the Vice President. "This amendment will ensure that the vice president's funding is consistent with his legal arguments," say Emanuel, a former aide to President Clinton who, like Cheney, has served in both the legislative and executive branches. http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20070625/cm_thenation/1207869_1
more from Emanuel... "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."
I have a quick question. If Cheney isn't part of the Executive Branch, how can he site Executive Privilege (upheld be the SC no less) when denying public access to information forming energy policy in 2001? basso you're a big Cheney lover, do you have a rational answer?
Isn't he next in line for the top job? God forbid it ever happens, but how much closer to the executive do you have to be when you are NEXT IN LINE!!!
Somebody make some popcorn! ------------ Vote to defund Cheney’s office to be held this week. Reacting to the Office of the Vice President’s assertion that it is not an “entity within the executive branch,” Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) announced that he will introduce an amendment to cut off funding to Cheney’s office. Emanuel discussed the legislation on MSNBC tonight: http://thinkprogress.org/
O.K. ...You sound a little too excited...I think you are weirding everybody out now...calm down. Take a cold shower for goodness sake! holy moly!....
am I buggin ya? don't mean ta bug ya. ROX I'd realy like to here your take on this. Do you agree that the office of the VP is not in the executive branch of government?
Yeah right. If it was poop covered popcorn you would be up in arms with phoney self righteousness and a bunch of to make us believe you're really mad.
Cheney part of executive branch again Vice President Cheney’s office will not pursue the argument that he is separate from the executive branch, senior administration officials tell The Politico. The decision follows a threat by Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), the No. 3 House Democrat, to try to cut off the office’s $4.8 million in executive-branch funding. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0607/4679.html
That is absolutely hilarious. Cheney has had egg on his face so many times it is hard to count. The funny thing is that the "liberal" media rarely make much of a fuss about it at all. Cheney's bold face lies and false claims are making fools of those that supported him.
This isn't going away. -- Waxman to Gonzales: So, Is the Veep in the Exec. Branch? By Spencer Ackerman - June 27, 2007, 5:00 PM Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) continues his full-court press on Dick Cheney's claims to be exempt from oversight on how his office handles classified information. In a just-released letter (pdf) to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Waxman -- joined by House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) and rep. William Lacy Clay (D-MO) -- asks after the status of a DOJ review requested by the head of the Archives' Information Security Oversight Office in January to settle the matter of whether the vice presidency resides in the executive branch: The letter goes on to request information sure to make Gonzales's life so much easier: who's involved with the review, what work they've accomplished, what (if any) communications they've had with the White House or OVP on the question, whether DOJ has taken any position on which branch of government -- if any! -- the VP belongs to, and more. Closest to the bone, however, is this question: The day just gets worse for Gonzales. If he was involved in the 2003 revision to EO 12958 (which became EO 13292), then he'd be able to speak to the question of whether the order always intended for the veep to be exempt -- which would further raise the question of whether Gonzales accepted David Addington's theory that the vice presidency is outside the executive branch. After all, the White House's fallback line in the controversy has been that president never "intended" for EO 13292 to apply to Cheney, thereby begging the question of what legal ground that contention is based upon. As White House counsel when President Bush revised the EO, Gonzales or a deputy must have looked at it; if no one from the counsel's office did, that itself is scandalous. http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003546.php
