Sunday Discussion Group

In 2001, shortly after his inauguration, Dick Cheney met with Dan Quayle, who had of course served in the same position eight years earlier. Quayle wanted to offer some advice, one vice president to another.

“Dick, you know, you’re going to be doing a lot of this international traveling, you’re going to be doing all this political fundraising … you’ll be going to the funerals,” Quayle said. “We’ve all done it.”

Recalling the conversation, Quayle said Cheney “got that little smile,” before replying, “I have a different understanding with the president.”

The first of a four-part series in the Washington Post today, written by Barton Gellman and Jo Becker, helps demonstrate just how true those comments were. Today’s profile helps document the scope and breadth of a Vice President with unprecedented (and largely unchecked) authority. Cheney wanted a “mandate that gave him access to ‘every table and every meeting,’ making his voice heard in ‘whatever area the vice president feels he wants to be active in,'” and, naturally, Bush gave his VP what he requested.

It’s hard to know which of the many jaw-dropping anecdotes to highlight, but Cheney’s work in establishing military commissions for detainees stood out for capturing all the characteristics of Cheney’s hyper-secretive, ruthless, legally-dubious style.

At the White House, Bellinger sent Rice a blunt — and, he thought, private — legal warning. The Cheney-Rumsfeld position would place the president indisputably in breach of international law and would undermine cooperation from allied governments. Faxes had been pouring in at the State Department since the order for military commissions was signed, with even British authorities warning that they could not hand over suspects if the U.S. government withdrew from accepted legal norms.

One lawyer in his office said that Bellinger was chagrined to learn, indirectly, that Cheney had read the confidential memo and “was concerned” about his advice. Thus Bellinger discovered an unannounced standing order: Documents prepared for the national security adviser, another White House official said, were “routed outside the formal process” to Cheney, too. The reverse did not apply.

Powell asked for a meeting with Bush. The same day, Jan. 25, 2002, Cheney’s office struck a preemptive blow. It appeared to come from Gonzales, a longtime Bush confidant whom the president nicknamed “Fredo.” Hours after Powell made his request, Gonzales signed his name to a memo that anticipated and undermined the State Department’s talking points. The true author has long been a subject of speculation, for reasons including its unorthodox format and a subtly mocking tone that is not a Gonzales hallmark.

A White House lawyer with direct knowledge said Cheney’s lawyer, Addington, wrote the memo. Flanigan passed it to Gonzales, and Gonzales sent it as “my judgment” to Bush. If Bush consulted Cheney after that, the vice president became a sounding board for advice he originated himself.

Cheney and his small team had, by design, excluded the Justice Department, the NSA, and the State Department to create the entire policy, which would also circumvent the federal judiciary.

The same thing happened with the NSA warrantless-domestic-search program.

Forbidden by federal law since 1978, the surveillance would soon be justified, in secret, as “incident to” the authority Congress had just granted. Yoo was already working on that memo, completing it on Sept. 25.

It was an extraordinary step, bypassing Congress and the courts, and its authors kept it secret from officials who were likely to object. Among the excluded was John B. Bellinger III, a man for whom Cheney’s attorney had “open contempt,” according to a senior government lawyer who saw them often. The eavesdropping program was directly within Bellinger’s purview as ranking national security lawyer in the White House, reporting to Rice. Addington had no line responsibility. But he had Cheney’s proxy, and more than once he accused Bellinger, to his face, of selling out presidential authority for good “public relations” or bureaucratic consensus.

Cheney and his “triumvirate” of lawyers (Addington, Flanigan and Gonzales) crafted the policy, to the exclusion of everyone else. When it came time for a congressional briefing, the chairmen and ranking minority members of the intelligence committees were summoned to the White House for a meeting with Cheney, not Bush, who would oversee “the portfolio for intelligence activities.”

As for the Discussion Group, borrowing a page from Stephen Colbert, the question is simple: Dick Cheney — scary, authoritarian U.S. leader or the scariest authoritarian U.S. leader?

So 50 or 60 years from now, will some young, up and coming, and latin newsperson follow some leads and find the safe where cheney hid his secrets???

  • Scariest.
    I hope Dems in congress use Cheney’s otherworldly view of his office to open an investigation into every document he’s ever laid a finger on. This whack-a-mole game he’s playing – Executive rules don’t affect me, because I’m part of the Legislature – Legislative rules don’t affect me because I’m part of the Executive – is not only an insult to the country, but a dare to anyone to do anything about it. If Cheney can’t decide which branch of government his office belongs to, congress should subpoena every document to have crossed his desk and determine it for themselves. If he won’t cough them up, impeach.

  • or the scariest authoritarian U.S. leader?

    That one. I think he should be impeached. If that happened, though, the ’08 election would be thrown up for grabs if we had a new incumbent VP. BTW, does anyone know what the process is for replacing a VP?

  • the scariest, of course.

    I spend a lot of time bashing the msm for shoddy political journalism and opinion. This article is quite good, but seems self-contradictory at times. This segment early on was pretty remarkable: “Cheney is not, by nearly every inside account, the shadow president of popular lore. Bush has set his own course, not always in directions Cheney preferred. The president seized the helm when his No. 2 steered toward trouble, as Bush did, in time, on military commissions.” Let me get this right. Cheney circumvented all the normal review processes in proposing and stovepiping the commissions and various other detention policies to the Codpiece, who signed without any review by the pres’ own advisors (just show me where to sign Dick). In time, as it became impossible to do otherwise (even for W), he began moving apart from Cheney’s approach. That is setting his own course? Seems overly generous to me.

    Cheney is so self-evidently evil that the profile should almost write itself, but actually the Post article is in many ways complimentary. He stands on principle. Doesn’t worry about ratings, just trying to do what is right. Manly man, Aqua Velva, man scent stuff. I can’t help but wonder how the same article would be written about a Dem vice president who behaved in the same manner (as if a Dem president would stand for such a thing). Am I just being paranoid here, or do other readers see the same thing?

  • I haven’t read the article, because I assume, based on previous behavior, that a profile of a powerful administration figure in the WaPo is going to be a whitewash. The WaPo has been carrying the administration’s water from the beginning. Wvng’s comment suggests that I was right.

  • Scariest. Most authoritarian. Vice President. Ever.

    Before he can find a pretext to start bombing Iran, Waxman, Conyers and Leahy need to keep shining the light on Cheney, who as Maureen Dowd put it, is “hiding in a secure, undisclosed location in the Constitution.” Quite possibly they would find enough guilt to lead to a Goldwater moment, when he told Nixon that upon impeachment by the House he would have five votes against conviction in the Senate “and I’m not one of them”.

    Should the office of Vice President become vacant, according to the 25th Amendment, the President nominates a replacement that must be confirmed by a majority of both houses of Congress.

  • Impeach Cheney. Then turn him over to international tribunals on charges of war crimes.

  • I think he should be tried for treason and executed, Cheney (along with Rove and others) is literally trying to destroy our democracy.

  • From where I stand, the term “scariest” might itself be a gross understatement. We are witnessing the establishment of a miniature bureaucracy within the bureaucracy; a “sanctum sanctorum;” a “magnum operandi” that operates beyond the conventions of the Constitution. It exists in tandem with an overt criminal enterprise that exists within the WH, a Justice Department that will not do its job, and a legion of shrill, screaming-head talkshow freaks who promote themselves as a “legitimate” media, and who have honed to razor-sharp effectiveness the high art of bending an obvious lie into a palatable, artificial truth.

    At this point, I’m no longer certain that even impeachment itself will eradicate the cancerous infestation that is the Cheney vice-presidency. It is manifesting into a political construct not specifically covered within the confines of the Constitution; thus, there is no provision for adequately dealing with it. And therein lies the great danger; a danger far beyond the defining abilities of a mere word such as “scariest.”

    January 2009 in 19 months from now. By then, we should start to get a good sense of where the Republic stands—either a free and open Democracy recovering from the grievous wounds of the Bu$h/Cheney “Eight Year Reich”—or a brute dictatorship on the eve of its “Second Civil War.” I shall hope for the former of those two circumstances….

  • Somehow I’m not surprised that Dick planned from the beginning to treat the OVP differently. I suspect he hatched his big plan from his office at Hallibutt, seeing some kind of loophole in the constitution (Not Executive branch, not really Lehgislative branch … Hmmmm). It struck me as rather odd on 9/11 when W was flying about, a target, and Cheney was scurried off to his undisclised location … just who is this guy?

    This is a huge unprecidented power grab. This is a White House Coup. The man must be stopped, and he needs to be told clearly that he cannot treat the Constitution, the American people and this country’s reputation with disdain and ignore the law. He needs to be locked up. Congress needs to clarify the OVP for the future to prevent this from ever happenning again.

    There is a wee bit of humor in the idea that he even bothered to take a meeting with Quayle, the model of how the OVP was just a waste of space.

  • …good “public relations” or bureaucratic consensus.

    I think that this is, coincidentally, how Traitor “Dick” Cheney actually views the propriety of the U.S. Constitution. You know, the U.S. Constitution and the Geneva Conventions are just “delicate sensibilities.”

    Real men use the Constitution as toilet paper.

  • George W. Bush says that he’s the “decider,” but he even lies about that. Cheney is really the “decider” and has been since December 2000, when he decided to make himself Vice-President.

    I can’t help wondering:

    If Bush had had the cajones to say “no” to Cheney; if Bush had picked an ineffectual VP like Quayle, or just someone who wasn’t a sociopath; if Bush had been his own man like the tough-talking Texas cowboy that he pretends to be; could Bush have been a better president?

    I think he could and would have been a much better president. He couldn’t have been any worse. To have an evil presence like Cheney lurking in the background in an unaccountable position of power is the worst possible situation when our supposed leader is both weak and stupid.

  • My vote is for scariest ever, but that would have been my vote last week as well. This article has done nothing to change my opinion of Deadeye. The value of the article is not in its scare factor, but rather in some the details which help to illuminate for us the actual real time thinking of these guys. For example,

    Flanigan, with advice from Yoo, drafted the authorization for use of military force that Congress approved on Sept. 18. Yoo said they used the broadest possible language because “this war was so different, you can’t predict what might come up.”

    In fact, the triumvirate knew very well what would come next: the interception — without a warrant — of communications to and from the United States. Forbidden by federal law since 1978, the surveillance would soon be justified, in secret, as “incident to” the authority Congress had just granted. Yoo was already working on that memo, completing it on Sept. 25.

    In real time, these guys were thinking about using the AUMF Afghanistan as the basis for by passing FISA. Any appeal to the inherent constitutional authority of the president in the time of war is little more than post hoc spin.

    Another bit which doesn’t have direct bearing on the Cheney power grab, but is revealing of the nature of the man that is Gonzales is this passage.

    Powell asked for a meeting with Bush. The same day, Jan. 25, 2002, Cheney’s office struck a preemptive blow. It appeared to come from Gonzales, a longtime Bush confidant whom the president nicknamed “Fredo.” Hours after Powell made his request, Gonzales signed his name to a memo that anticipated and undermined the State Department’s talking points. The true author has long been a subject of speculation, for reasons including its unorthodox format and a subtly mocking tone that is not a Gonzales hallmark.

    A White House lawyer with direct knowledge said Cheney’s lawyer, Addington, wrote the memo. Flanigan passed it to Gonzales, and Gonzales sent it as “my judgment” to Bush If Bush consulted Cheney after that, the vice president became a sounding board for advice he originated himself.

    Addington, under Gonzales’s name, appealed to the president by quoting Bush’s own declaration that “the war against terrorism is a new kind of war.” Addington described the Geneva Conventions as “quaint,” casting Powell as a defender of “obsolete” rules devised for another time. If Bush followed Powell’s lead, Addington suggested, U.S. forces would be obliged to provide athletic gear and commissary privileges to captured terrorists.

    To paraphrase the old Life Cereal commercial: Let Fredo signing it. He’ll sign anything! This certainly sheds some light on Fredo’s role in the USA purge. He is little more than a useful stooge.

    While I agree with wvng about the the tone of some of the passages in this article, I still think that it is valuable and should be read. For one thing, we can mine this and the other articles in the series for puzzle pieces which will help us better understand the operations of the Cheney White House.

  • And yet…for all the evil machinations and manipulations and stealth, what are Dick Cheney’s foreign policy successes? Iraq is a disaster, the Taliban has not been vanquished, the Middle East is coming to a boil – this was not his vision. He and the rest of the PNAC crowd were going to transform the Middle East, remember? They had a plan. It required more power in himself and for Bush than ever before, but what have they managed to do with it? Nothing of benefit for the people they purport to serve. I think he sees himself as a powerful man, standing on the top of the world, but he’s looking into a mirror and preening, and not looking out on the disaster he has wrought, because to really see that would mean facing the truth that he is a failure.

    People whose grandiose visions have failed to materialize do not back off and admit their mistakes; they go even bigger, take more risks, see victory and redemption just over the horizon, and see more power and bigger actions as a way to get them there.

    Scariest, and quite possibly, most deranged.

  • Scariest authoritarian leader ever.

    He is the living personification of corruption and power in the same person.

    I don’t think he is incompetent though as much as I joke about it. It depends on the perspective. From the perspective of a democratic republic, Middle East Peace and any sense of humanity, Dick Cheney is an utter and total failure.

    We have to ask ourselves what are Dick’s most important goals?
    1) To turn the executive branch (which he claims he is not part of) into the DOMINANT branch of the guv. Check
    2) To gain power and wealth for himself and secure the place of the oligarchy over the rest of us. Check
    3) To subvert the system via the bureaucracy to prevent an overthrow of the oligarchy’s power structure. Check.
    4) To reverse FDR’s New Deal and transfer wealth from the middle class to the upper class. Not yet, but close.
    5) To secure the world’s 2nd largest oil fields for his oil co buddies. Nope, but no one else is getting the oil either so it is a half check.
    6) To improve Haliburton’s bottom line (to protect his own legacy there since he ended up buying a company that had billions in asbestos liabilities). Check (till the SEC finds out.)

    Under that criteria, Dick has been very competent.

  • I don’t know if Cheney has any Italian blood in him, but I say he has done do much damage to our political culture, we should hang him by his feet! -Kevo

  • Cheney was/is/will be dangerous until he is impeached. And, quite possibly, after conviction.

    I agree with Anne (No. 15) that he is deranged. However, that might be his defense in any legal actions: Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity. Addington and Yoo are probably working on the documents as we speak.

  • On the other hand, blowing off Dan Quayle shows a level of good judgement I would not have imputed to Dick Cheney…

  • Do y’all know the movie “Dave” with Kevin Kline? In the story, he replaced the president who was in critical condition after a stroke and the Chief of Staff, Alexander, thought this was a good way to have secret power. But Dave caught on and realized this was not good – morally and for the constitution. The VP was one who was the traveling ambassador (Ben Kingsley) and turned out to have the best moral compass to serve the public.

    How absolutely prophetic! But, who is our moral compass in the White House? It turns out most likely they are jumping ship. The cancer that is Cheney has the power to infect them all and they want to survive.

    We are now relying on the congress and the senate whom still seem to have infectious parts that prevent any remedy to strongly fight this infection. It will be a slow recovery, but I’m hopeful when the infection is irradicated.

  • Positive to the superlative; he is THE scariest psychopath in charge of USA, ever.

    According to the photo caption in WaPo, his CIA code name is “the Angler”. It should have been “the Ventriloquist”, with Bush as his “Dummy”.

  • I hate to state the obvious, but whatever pretentions we have had about being a democratic republic are now obsolete, and no one, but no one can or will do anything about it. A slow-motion coup has occurred, and our realization of it will also be in slow-motion. The past six–and-one-half years have marked a belleweather from which there is no turning back. It doesn’t matter who gets elected, assuming there is a pretend election in ’08, our course is determined: Doom.

    One fine morning, in the not too far distant future, we will all wake up to learn we are at war with Iran. There won’t be riots in the streets. We will all continue going to the mall, watching football, and driving our SUVs. We will be told that the most patriotic act is to be consumers, and we’ll believe it. A military draft won’t cut it, so the military will ultimately have to mutiny when they can’t sustain the mess Bush/Cheney have created. Whoever has the now meaningless title of President after ’08 will be pushed out, and martial law will be prevail.

    It can’t happen here? Watch. And Cheney will be largely responsible.

  • Comments are closed.