BUSH AND CHENEY BOTH CLAIM EXEMPTION FROM OVERSIGHT LAWS THAT APPLY TO THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH
June 24th, 2007The U.S. now has five branches of government:
1) Legislative
2) Judicial
3) Executive
4) Bush
5) Cheney
And then it was too late…
Via: Los Angeles Times:
The White House said Friday that, like Vice President Dick Cheney’s office, President Bush’s office is not allowing an independent federal watchdog to oversee its handling of classified national security information.
An executive order that Bush issued in March 2003 — amending an existing order — requires all government agencies that are part of the executive branch to submit to oversight. Although it doesn’t specifically say so, Bush’s order was not meant to apply to the vice president’s office or the president’s office, a White House spokesman said.
The issue flared Thursday when Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles) criticized Cheney for refusing to file annual reports with the federal National Archives and Records Administration, for refusing to spell out how his office handles classified documents, and for refusing to submit to an inspection by the archives’ Information Security Oversight Office.
The archives administration has been pressing the vice president’s office to cooperate with oversight for the last several years, contending that by not doing so, Cheney and his staff have created a potential national security risk.
Bush amended the oversight directive in response to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks to help ensure that national secrets would not be mishandled, made public or improperly declassified.
The order aimed to create a uniform system for classifying, declassifying and otherwise safeguarding national security information. It gave the archives’ oversight unit responsibility for evaluating the effectiveness of each agency’s classification programs. It applied to the executive branch of government, mostly agencies led by Bush administration appointees — not to legislative offices such as Congress or to judicial offices such as the courts.
“Our democratic principles require that the American people be informed of the activities of their government,” the executive order said.
But from the start, Bush considered his office and Cheney’s exempt from the reporting requirements, White House spokesman Tony Fratto said in an interview Friday.
Cheney’s office filed the reports in 2001 and 2002 but stopped in 2003.
As a result, the National Archives has been unable to review how much information the president’s and vice president’s offices are classifying and declassifying. And the security oversight office cannot inspect the president and vice president’s executive offices to determine whether safeguards are in place to protect the classified information they handle and to properly declassify information when required.
Those two offices have access to the most highly classified information, including intelligence on terrorists and unfriendly foreign countries.
Waxman and J. William Leonard, director of the Information Security Oversight Office, have argued that the order clearly applies to all executive branch agencies, including the offices of the vice president and the president.
The White House disagrees, Fratto said.
“We don’t dispute that the ISOO has a different opinion. But let’s be very clear: This executive order was issued by the president, and he knows what his intentions were,” Fratto said. “He is in compliance with his executive order.”
Fratto conceded that the lengthy directive, technically an amendment to an existing executive order, did not specifically exempt the president’s or vice president’s offices. Instead, it refers to “agencies” as being subject to the requirements, which Fratto said did not include the two executive offices. “It does take a little bit of inference,” Fratto said.
Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists’ government secrecy project, disputed the White House explanation of the executive order.
He noted that the 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” — which, he said, includes Bush’s and Cheney’s offices.
Future American History Fortold:
November 4, 2008: Bush suspends free elections, orders polls closed at 10:00 a.m., orders U.S. ReichMarshalsService to seize all absentee ballots.
January 20, 2009: Bush declares himself American Reichchancellor for Life.
They can claim whatever they want. At this point, legally speaking, they are a running joke. What they are really doing, is thumbing their noses at people two cowardly to enforce the law, as if to say, “Sure, we know we break the law like we break wind, but what are YOU going to do about it? You have to maintain the illusion with us, or else things will really look bad.”
See, Big Lies are the only thing holding the country together, mostly those that we tell ourselves, like as soon as Bush is out of office, and as soon as he’s impeached, things will go back to normal, and law with order will return.
Actually, Bush’s unpopularity gives THEM a unique opportunity. Of all the presidents we’ve had, he may actually be the one who goes to jail. He just might. It could happen after he’s out, and then a new “progressive” candidate allows International War Crimes Tribunals to create jurisdiction over one of the most obviously unpopular presidents in U.S. history. The U.S. might just get behind it, and then that would be the beginning of the U.S. being integrated into global government, really the only country with the ability to decline falling under UN jurisdiction; the UN being mostly an Anglo-American tool to keep the developing nations in line, and anti-Communist.
“This executive order was issued by the president, and he knows what his intentions were,†Fratto said. “He is in compliance with his executive order.â€
Also, we know the Bible is the inerrant word of God because the Bible says so.
– Mike Lorenz
Both Larry and Ozzy are right. Larry, for saying that in all likelihood elections will be cancelled. Bush, in case anyone missed it, said something like, “A dictatorship wouldn’t be so bad, just as long as I’m the dictator,” in 2000, no less! Ozzy is right too, because few among those with power will tolerate it. I mean the military won’t, and they will strike up a coup as soon as they get their ducks in a row. This could also be the reason Nancy Pelosi declared that impeachment is off the table–because when she met with Bush after becoming House Speaker Bush may have told her that in no uncertain terms that if the House starts impeachment procedings, Bush will just dissolve Congress. Just my 2 cents.
snorky Said:
“Bush, in case anyone missed it, said something like, ‘A dictatorship wouldn’t be so bad, just as long as I’m the dictator,’ in 2000, no less!”
Actually it was after his first 100 days in office, and what he said was “A dictatorship wouldn’t be so bad, ‘cos being a dictator would sure be alot easier”.
In addition to be one of the stupidest, most incompetent, and least artful liars we’ve ever had as president, Bush has also got to be one of the laziest. Even Mussolini never took off for months at a time to dick around, posing for photo ops on his private estate.
But come 1/20/09, I doubt Bush will try to stick around. He will flee to the exile of his Rancho del Stroessner in the Paraguayan hinterlands, to live out his days off the million$ he’s no doubt made all these years from his “blind trust” with the Carlyle Fund.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1928928,00.html
http://www.bushwatch.com/bushcarlyle.htm
“This could also be the reason Nancy Pelosi declared that impeachment is off the table–because when she met with Bush after becoming House Speaker…”
Let me suggest another reason: the total surveillance state Kevin has chronicled on this site. The AT&T/NSA network, for instance, can’t possibly be primarily a law enforcement tool. The people running the show are more concerned about corporate buyouts and political leverage than “terrorists.” Most politicians are scum. It’s not hard to imagine that this administration has collected plenty of damaging information on the people it needs to control; in fact, most of what has been revealed about these systems and the data they collect would seem to have little value or purpose beyond developing information useful for blackmail and control.
I don’t see a cancelling of ellections happening. The elections are an important RITUAL if nothing else. They keep up the appearance of the democratic process. I’d much more expect to see Clinton or Gulliani get elected and continue the current administration’s policies.
A suspension of elections could serve as a flash point, why should the Powers That Be risk throwing the whole show away when they own both major political parties anyway?
For God’s sake people, do you really think that our current president is the evil mastermind behind the show? The show has been going on for long before he stepped on stage.
I fully expect another “terrorist” attack, followed by another round of State security messures which a “reluctant” congress will pass to save us from whatever flavor of the month boogey men (I’m betting Constitutionalist 9/11 conspiracy types, think McVeigh with a Masters degree).
Wild conjecture, sure, but while everyone else is playing, I might as well play too.
@Tito
Your wild speculations match my own. Even the Soviet Union held elections, the fake elections in North America are likely to continue even after the current nations are a memory.
Likewise, agree the next spectacular false flag terror is likely to blame a domestic dissident “fifth column”, perhaps supposedly funded and armed by an OPEC member state. In one fell swoop, a pretext to arrest the 9/11 truthers, shut down youtube, and grab more hydrocarbon reserves away from OPEC.