When An Executive Is Not An Executive Or When A Whale Is Not A Whale

Via Daily Kos here is Executive Order 13292 and as Karo X points out (David Walden who was just on C-Span this morning with Robert Bluey)several, no many instances of the power to safgeguard, classify and declassify information is given to the president and the vice-president, for instance:

[Sec. 1.3. Classification Authority. (a) The authority to classify information originally may be exercised only by:
(1) the President and, in the performance of executive duties, the Vice President;
(2) agency heads and officials designated by the President in the Federal Register; and
(3) United States Government officials delegated this authority pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section. ]

As (1) clearly states, the Vice President has executive duties. And yet,

"Other officials familiar with Mr. Cheney's view said that he and his legal advisor, David S. Addington, did not believe that the executive order applied to the vide president's office because it had legistaltive as well as an executive status in the Constitution." (courtesy of Scott Shane in the NYT Friday, June 22)

So . . .

[Article I The Legislative Branch Section 3: "The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided."
Ariticle II The Executive Branch Section 1: "The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term . . . ."]

The Constitution doesn't seem to have a problem viewing the Vice President as both executive and legislative. In other words, one doesn't eliminate the other.

What is the goal of such obtfuscations? One goal would be the ability of the future to read the past, and the interest of Bush / Cheney to make such a reading difficult if not impossible. What is the relevance of this? Well, let's read Livy.

"There is this exceptionally beneficial and fruitful advantage to be derived from the study of the past, that you see, set in the clear light of historical truth, examples of every possible type. From these you may select for yourself and your country what to imitate, and also what, as being mischievous in its inception and disastrous in its issues, you are to avoid" (Founding of the City).

Per my last post, if the executive branch does not allow for itself to be read, then the citizen's ability to know what to imitate or avoid is attacked.

Why do I put this forth? here is a quote from a Wasghington post series on Cheney by Barton Gellman and Jo Becker: "Cheney expresses indifference, in public and private, to any verdict but history's, and those close to him say he means it."

Here's another gem:

"Across the board, the vice president's office goes to unusual lengths to avoid transparency. Cheney declines to disclose the names or even the size of his staff, generally releases no public calendar and ordered the Secret Service to destroy his visitor logs. His general counsel has asserted that "the vice presidency is a unique office that is neither a part of the executive branch nor a part of the legislative branch," and is therefore exempt from rules governing either. Cheney is refusing to observe an executive order on the handling of national security secrets, and he proposed to abolish a federal office that insisted on auditing his compliance."

Much more. Excellent, detailed journalism.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/cheney/chapters/chapter_1/

It appears the Vice President is trying to write his history through distortive readings designed to choose what texts will be part of history.