About This Series | Chapters:

A Strong Push From Backstage

By Jo Becker and Barton Gellman
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, June 26, 2007; Page A01

Air Force Two touched down at the Greenbrier Valley Airport in West Virginia on Feb. 6, 2003, carrying Vice President Cheney to the annual retreat of Republican House and Senate leaders. He had come to sell them on the economic centerpiece of President Bush's first term: a $674 billion tax cut.

[Photo]
When the president announced his economic package the day after this Cabinet meeting in January 2003, Cheney had one more thing to add. Corbis

Cheney had spent months making sure the package contained everything he wanted. One thing was missing.

The president had accepted Cheney's diagnosis that the sluggish economy needed a jolt, overruling senior economic advisers who forecast dangerous budget deficits. But Bush rejected one of Cheney's remedies: deep reductions in the capital gains tax on investments.

The vice president "was just hot on that," said Cesar Conda, then Cheney's domestic policy adviser. "It goes to show you: He wins and he loses, and he lost on that one."

Not for long.

As the Republican lawmakers debated in a closed-door session at the Greenbrier resort, the vice president revived the argument, touting his idea as a way to energize a stock market battered by scandals such as Enron. House allies inserted Cheney's cut into their package. But that came at the expense of one of Bush's priorities: abolishing the tax on stock dividends.

Cheney has changed history more than once, earning his reputation as the nation's most powerful vice president. His impact has been on public display in the arenas of foreign policy and homeland security, and in a long-running battle to broaden presidential authority. But he has also been the unseen hand behind some of the president's major domestic initiatives.

Scores of interviews with advisers to the president and vice president, as well as with other senior officials throughout the government, offer a backstage view of how the Bush White House operates. The president is "the decider," as Bush puts it, but the vice president often serves up his menu of choices.

Cheney led a group that winnowed the president's list of potential Supreme Court nominees. Cheney resolved a crisis in the space program after the Columbia shuttle disaster. Cheney fashioned a controversial truce between the legislative and executive branches -- and averted resignations at the top of the Justice Department and the FBI -- over the right of law enforcement authorities to investigate political corruption in Congress.

And it was Cheney who served as the guardian of conservative orthodoxy on budget and tax matters. He shaped and pushed through Bush's tax cuts, blunting the influence of Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, a longtime friend, and of Cabinet rivals he had played a principal role in selecting. He managed to overcome the president's "compassionate conservative" resistance to multiple breaks for the wealthy. He even orchestrated a decision to let a GOP senator switch parties -- giving control of the chamber to Democrats -- rather than meet the senator's demand for billions of dollars in new spending.

On the home front, the vice president is well known for leading a secretive task force on energy policy. But in a town where politicians routinely scurry for credit, Cheney more often kept his role concealed, even from top Bush advisers.

"A lot of it was a black box, and I think designedly so," said former Bush speechwriter David Frum. "It was like -- you know that experiment where you pass a magnet under the table and you see the iron filings on the top of the table move? You know there's a magnet there because of what you see happening, but you never see the magnet."

A 'More Effective Role'

When Bush tapped Cheney to be his running mate seven years ago, he chose a man who had put a great deal of thought into how a vice president can transform himself from a funeral-trotting figurehead into a center of real power.

[Photo]
RELATED STORY
Expanding Authority for No. 2 Spot
In 1980, as Ford was being wooed to run for vice president, Cheney played a key role in re-imagining the job. More »
Photo: President Bush and Vice President Cheney check their watches in the White House on Jan. 26, 2001, following the ceremonial swearing-in ceremony for Secretary of State Colin Powell. (White House via Reuters)

As President Gerald R. Ford's chief of staff in the 1970s, Cheney saw firsthand how White House policies got shaped -- and how a vice president such as Nelson Rockefeller could become so marginalized as to be dumped from the ticket. Former Army secretary John O. Marsh Jr. said Cheney knew that he needed to control the process by which the president makes choices to ride "the rushing river of power" that winds through the West Wing to the Oval Office.

"Dick's major concern, one of them was, and I agree, that there needs to be a greater and more effective role for the vice president," Marsh, a longtime Cheney friend, said in an interview. "He holds the view, as do I, that the vice president should be the chief of staff in effect, that everything should run through his office."

In Bush, Cheney found the perfect partner. The president's willingness to delegate left plenty of room for his more detail-oriented vice president.

"My impression is that the president thinks that the Reagan style of leadership is best -- guiding the ship of state from high up on the mast," said former White House lawyer Bradford A. Berenson. "It seems to me that the vice president is more willing to get down in the wheelhouse below the decks."

When the space shuttle Columbia disintegrated over Texas on Feb. 1, 2003, for example, Bush was consumed with concern for the families of the seven dead astronauts. That left Cheney to make the first critical decisions about the future of manned spaceflight.

Even as the vice president and others were grappling with the invasion of Iraq, Cheney crafted a solution to the most pressing problem facing the space program, said former NASA administrator Sean O'Keefe, a Cheney protege.

With its shuttle fleet grounded, the space agency had no way to resupply the crew aboard the international space station, including two Americans. Russia was demanding $100 million to take up the slack. But Congress had barred space-related payments to Moscow unless the administration could certify that the Russians were not transferring banned technology to Iran for nuclear, biological or chemical weapons. Getting the law changed would take time, and could "open up a can of worms" with no guarantee that the result would be to the administration's liking, O'Keefe said.

The vice president's solution, he said, was to get around the law by cutting the deal as a barter. The Russians wouldn't charge the United States for the costs of flying to the space station, and in return, the Americans wouldn't charge the Russians for their share of some operating and equipment costs.

The vice president then took the lead in persuading the State Department to go along with the plan, which never came to public attention. "He helped frame how to do this without a major diplomatic dust-up," O'Keefe said.

[Photo]
RELATED STORY
Taking on the Supreme Court Case
When it came to vetting potential nominees, the vice president steered the selection committee. More »
Photo: The president meets with Supreme Court justices on Oct. 3, 2005. A day earlier, Cheney learned, through a Bush aide, that the president had nominated White House counsel Harriet E. Miers for a spot on the court. (AP)

Last year, Cheney was behind another unprecedented and controversial deal that inserted the White House into an ongoing criminal probe.

When the FBI seized files from the office of Rep. William J. Jefferson (D-La.) as part of a bribery investigation, House Republican leaders erupted. With a number of their own members under investigation for other matters, they charged that the search violated the Constitution. They demanded the return of the files.

Cheney quickly gravitated toward the House's position, aides said, but Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales; his top deputy, Paul J. McNulty; and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III threatened to resign if forced to hand over evidence they believed had been properly collected under a warrant.

White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten called a meeting on May 25, 2006, to resolve the political and legal crisis. The president's lawyers and congressional liaison were in the room, and so was Cheney. Once again, it was the vice president who came up with a solution, according to a participant. Cheney's plan met his goal of keeping the files from federal investigators. The files would be placed under seal for 45 days. Within hours of the meeting, Bush made Cheney's recommendation official. As often happens in government, delay was decisive. Jefferson was indicted earlier this month on 16 counts of bribery, racketeering, fraud, money laundering and obstruction of justice. But nearly half of the files remain off-limits, tied up in legal disputes.

Taking Options 'Off the Table'

Cheney's influence is manifested not just in crisis but also through his extraordinary involvement in the daily machinery of the White House.

The vice president chairs a budget review board, a panel the Bush administration created to set spending priorities and serve as arbiter when Cabinet members appeal decisions by White House budget officials. The White House has portrayed the board as a device to keep Bush from wasting time on petty disagreements, but previous administrations have seldom seen Cabinet-level disputes in that light. Cheney's leadership of the panel gives him direct and indirect power over the federal budget -- and over those who must live within it. [Read then-OMB Director Joshua Bolten's memo about the review board.]

Mitchell E. Daniels Jr., who served as Bush's budget director from 2001 to 2003 and is now governor of Indiana, said that during his tenure the number of times a Cabinet official made a direct budget appeal to Bush "was zero," which aides from previous administrations found "stunning," he added.

Daniels said he chalked that track record up to "the respect people had for the vice president." Cabinet members, he said, recognized that if the board didn't agree with them, "then the president wasn't likely to, either."

It is well known that Cheney is usually the last to speak to the president before Bush makes a decision. Less so is his role, to a degree unmatched by his predecessors, in steering debate by weighing in at the lower-level meetings where proposals are born and die.

Cheney, Bolten said, is a vocal participant at a weekly luncheon meeting of Bush's economic team, which gathers without the president. As the most senior official in the room, Cheney receives great deference from Bush's advisers.

Wise officials vet their proposals in advance. White House budget director Rob Portman, for instance, sought Cheney's counsel as he was putting together the budget for the upcoming year, using him as a "sounding board" on issues as varied as defense spending and tax reform.

"He never, ever has said to me, 'Do this.' Never. Which is interesting, because that might be the perception of how he operates," Portman said. "But it is 'What do you think of this?' Well, he's the vice president of the United States -- and obviously I'm interested in his point of view."

Perhaps more important than Cheney's influence in pushing policies is his power to stop them before they reach the Oval Office.

When Edward P. Lazear, chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, broached the idea of limiting the popular mortgage tax deduction, he said he quickly dropped it after Cheney told him it would never fly with Congress. "He's a big timesaver for us in that he takes off the table a lot of things he knows aren't going to go anywhere," Lazear said.

Lazear, who is otherwise known as a fierce advocate for his views, said that he may argue a point with Cheney "for 10 minutes or so" but that in the end he is always convinced. "I can't think of a time when I have thought I was right and the vice president was wrong."

But Cheney is careful to choose which issues deserve his attention, preferring not to dissipate his influence. "Dick Cheney learned early on to say no to things that were peripheral to his primary interests or assignments," said his longtime friend David Gribbin.

Current and former White House officials say that the vice president has largely steered clear of hot-button issues such as stem cell research and Bush's "faith-based" initiative to funnel more federal money to religious groups. He is also savvy enough, they say, to retreat when the president expresses strong personal views.

Cheney sided with conservatives who wanted to urge the Supreme Court to reverse a landmark ruling that permitted affirmative action. But, former officials said, he did not press the case when the president, who as governor of Texas had run a state university system, made it clear that he intended to take a more limited and nuanced legal position.

Word of a Cheney loss seldom leaks, a trait that has further endeared him to Bush -- and that has served to exaggerate his influence. Former Cheney and Bush aides described several domestic policy defeats that never reached public notice.

Cheney shared conservative trepidations about the president's signature education initiative, the No Child Left Behind Act, which gave the federal government more control over K-12 education. He has griped privately to confidants, such as economist and CNBC host Lawrence Kudlow, about the administration's failure to control spending. And in robust internal White House discussions, he raised concerns about the cost of the administration's decision to expand Medicare to include a new multibillion-dollar drug entitlement, but bowed to the political reality that the president had to fulfill a campaign promise.

"At least in my area, he didn't have a 100 percent batting average," said Conda, the former domestic policy adviser.

In each case, however, Cheney was a loyal soldier, instrumental in helping to sell the president's policies on the Hill and to the Republican base.

"Dick once told me that our president is a 'big-government conservative,'" said former senator Phil Gramm (R-Tex.), in a recollection disputed by Cheney's office. "Now, Dick keeps his opinions to himself whenever he disagrees with the administration, as he should. But I believe that Dick is a small-government conservative."

'A Spine Quotient'

When Sen. James M. Jeffords (Vt.) threatened to bolt the GOP during negotiations over the president's 2001 tax package, senior Bush advisers and Republican senators were deeply split over whether to buy him off. It was a momentous decision -- a Jeffords defection would toss the Senate to Democratic control for the first time since 1994.

But in a contentious internal debate, the vice president forcefully argued that the administration should not capitulate by giving Jeffords the billions of dollars in special-education funding he sought, recalled O'Keefe, at the time deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget.

O'Keefe said Cheney argued that the White House should not sacrifice conservative principle in the face of Jeffords's threat by scaling back tax cuts dear to the GOP base in order to create an expensive new mandate. Gramm, who confirmed that account, said there would have been no end to such demands if the president had caved.

"The principle was 'Hell, we can't go around funding programs based on what some individual might do,'" said Gramm, who worked closely with Cheney during the negotiations.

By the end of the critical meeting, O'Keefe said, the divided group presented Cheney's view as the consensus recommendation to the president. Bush's $1.35 trillion tax cut passed, and Jeffords defected as promised.

Such stands by Cheney were not uncommon, said Bolten, the White House chief of staff. Cheney often stepped in if he sensed the administration was softening its commitment to Republican "first principles," Bolten said, and he was "a pretty vigorous voice for holding the line on spending and for holding the line on tax cuts." Longtime Cheney adviser Mary Matalin said the vice president brings a "spine quotient" to internal debates.

Cheney's power derives in part from meticulous preparation paired with a strong will to prevail. He knows what he wants, and as one rival put it, Cheney and his staff are "just ferocious negotiators."

The vice president regularly convenes a kitchen cabinet of diverse outside economic experts, often before the president is about to make a major decision. Members of the group describe a man who enjoys the nitty-gritty of economics, poring over charts of obscure data such as freight-car loadings and quizzing experts on the subtle ways the government can influence the economy.

"With the president it was much shorter. It's 'Marty, what do you think of where we stand today?'" said Martin Feldstein, a Harvard economics professor and the president and chief executive of the National Bureau of Economic Research. "It's also a less technical presentation."

R. Glenn Hubbard, Bush's former chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, said of Cheney: "I'd have conversations with him that were at a level of detail that those with the president were not."

In the weeks following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, as the White House was putting together an economic recovery package, Cheney gathered his kitchen cabinet, frequently interrupting the experts as he furiously jotted notes on a stack of cards embossed with the vice presidential seal. What kind of tax cuts are needed? Cheney wanted to know. How big?

A few days later, Cheney was "on fire" when he met with the president, Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, later told Conda. Cheney had decided that the best way to shake business leaders out of their post-attack paralysis was to let them immediately write off the cost of new plants and equipment. After hearing him out, Bush made Cheney's idea a centerpiece of his plan.

In previous administrations, such initiatives typically have been generated by the Treasury Department or the White House economic team. But Cheney has made the vice president's office a hub of tax policy, enabled by the fact that "this president appears to want to have Treasury take the orders from the White House," said John H. Makin, an economist and an informal Cheney adviser.

All this put Cheney in a position to outflank some of Bush's top advisers, and even his old friend Greenspan, to shape the administration's signature tax package: the 2003 cuts that Cheney sold at the Greenbrier resort in West Virginia.

'The President Made the Call'

As far as Greenspan knew, the vice president agreed with him on the danger of the tax package Bush was contemplating. The Federal Reserve chairman worried that the sheer size of the cuts would drown the federal budget in red ink.

[Photo]
When Bush met with Alan Greenspan, Cheney was almost always present. Behind the scenes, the vice president took steps to undermine a study the Federal Reserve chairman gave him that could threaten the 2003 tax cuts. AP

Cheney and Greenspan met regularly, far more often than the Fed chief met with Bush, according to interviews and Greenspan's calendar. And when the president did meet with Greenspan, Cheney was nearly always in the room.

The vice president and the Fed chairman had formed a close bond when both served in the Ford administration. The Fed chief saw the vice president as a conduit to a president he did not know nearly as well, someone he could trust to fairly present his views to Bush.

So Greenspan sent Cheney a study by one of the central bank's senior economists showing that big deficits lead to higher long-term interest rates, according to a person with firsthand knowledge. Higher rates, Greenspan believed, would wipe out any short-term benefit from a tax cut.

In subsequent meetings with the Fed chief, Cheney never took issue with the study. What Greenspan did not know was that, behind the scenes, the vice president took steps to undermine an argument that could threaten the big tax cut he favored. Conda, the vice president's aide, said Cheney asked him to critique the study. Conda attached his own memo arguing that the Fed's analytical model was flawed. He said "it wasn't my job to know" what Cheney did with the paperwork, but noted that Greenspan's study did not gain traction inside the White House.

Aside from Greenspan, Cheney had faced down opposition from many of the administration's senior economic voices, including Daniels, Treasury Secretary Paul H. O'Neill and Commerce Secretary Donald L. Evans. They believed that the economy was recovering and that a deep tax cut wasn't needed. Daniels said he worried that it would undermine the GOP message of fiscal discipline.

Cheney, however, pressed his argument that the economy needed a jump-start. He wanted not only to reduce the tax on dividends but also to cut the capital gains tax and accelerate income tax breaks for top earners, according to Daniels, Conda, Hubbard and others. Conda said Cheney subscribed to the view of supply-side economists that when government cuts taxes the economy grows, generating additional tax revenue that largely offsets the losses from lower tax rates.

The standoff came to a head in late November 2002, during a meeting in the Roosevelt Room.

O'Neill continued to oppose the tax cut on grounds that the government was moving toward "fiscal crisis," irritating Cheney. "The vice president really got a sense of where O'Neill was coming from and surmised it was a problem," Conda said. The following month, Cheney would demand O'Neill's resignation.

Bush sided with Cheney on the dividends tax but thought it would be better to eliminate it altogether. The president was cooler on the capital gains tax, according to Conda and others. And having campaigned on a platform of compassionate conservatism, he expressed doubts about giving another income tax break to the wealthiest Americans, particularly because they would benefit the most from the elimination of the dividends tax, Hubbard said.

But by the time Bush publicly announced his tax package on Jan. 7, 2003, Cheney lost on only one major count. The president included no reduction in the tax on capital gains. [Read the legislation: As first introduced in the House | As passed by Congress.]

"There was a question of priorities and how to fit things in," said Karl Rove, Bush's chief political adviser. "And ultimately the president made the call."

It was then that Cheney doubled back at the Greenbrier retreat.

"We were deciding how to proceed," recalled Rep. Adam H. Putnam (Fla.), now the third-ranking Republican in the House. "Are we going to put all our eggs in the dividends basket, or are we going to move on capital gains? As I recall, he was a very strong advocate on both counts, but particularly capital gains in terms of its potential to unleash the economy."

In the end, the House decided against eliminating the dividends tax cut, as Bush had wanted, choosing instead to just reduce the rate to make room for a capital gains cut.

Bill Thomas, the California Republican who guided the final bill to passage as chairman of the House tax-writing committee, said he and Cheney go way back and "use each other in the best sense," with the two men deciding which one will make a proposal and which will speak up in its support.

In the case of the capital gains proposal, Cheney pitched it to the Greenbrier gathering. Thomas pitched it to the White House, and he credited the vice president with persuading Bush to go along. "That," Thomas said, "is why the administration changed its position."

The vote in the Senate was 51 to 50. Cheney, exercising his only formal power under the Constitution, cast the tie-breaking vote.

Staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.

About This Series | Chapters:
[Photo]

Cast of Characters

Read about the important people in and out of government who have had an impact on Vice President Dick Cheney's career.

Dick and Lynne Cheney.

Cheney's Personality

Dick Cheney's colleagues, friends, and acquaintances shared stories with Post reporter Bart Gellman.

[Photo]

Cheney's Life & Career

Starting as a junior aide on Capitol Hill, Dick Cheney built an unmatched Washington resume as White House chief of staff, House minority whip and secretary of defense.

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



So exactly when did the Washington Post become aware that the president is little more than a figurehead - and why was that information withheld until now?

Posted by: uberblonde | June 25, 2007 10:24 PM

Oh well, this only confirms our President is a mere cherrleader and not a leader. Or should I just say our president is a scock puppet and our vice president his his hand up his @@@.

Posted by: snman37922 | June 25, 2007 10:26 PM

I simply do not know what to say.

I feel like the 'Miracle at Philadelphia' is well and truly dead.

It was a nice place.

Posted by: nealkas | June 25, 2007 10:45 PM

Last night I felt angry after reading the second installment. Tonight I'm feeling sadness that our country has come to such a sorry pass. I've always thought the team of Bush-Cheney had no business in the White House, but the element of schadenfreude I expected to feel when the rest of the country caught on is totally absent tonight.

Never have I been so ashamed and so afraid for my country. What were people thinking?

Cheney needs to go now.

Posted by: sherirogers | June 25, 2007 11:02 PM

Last night I felt angry after reading the second installment. Tonight I'm feeling sadness that our country has come to such a sorry pass. I've always thought the team of Bush-Cheney had no business in the White House, but the element of schadenfreude I expected to feel when the rest of the country caught on is totally absent tonight.

Never have I been so ashamed and so afraid for my country. What were people thinking?

Cheney needs to go now.

Posted by: sherirogers | June 25, 2007 11:04 PM

Cheney has his own kitchen cabinet and makes major decisions considering advice from his own "experts." And he rejects the advice of the Bush's cabinet and other appointed officials, all senate approved officials. He decides who shouldn't be on Bush's team and gives out pink slips.

Why even have a president if the shadow presidency controls the reins of our government? This is not my America and not the government I want.

Posted by: rosejjohnson | June 25, 2007 11:12 PM

The blame rests on two groups. The evangelical right. They believe the cr*p in the Bible, they'll believe anything, and they ate up the plateful Rove and Bush fed them. The Republican party, which is just now coming to realize the full implication of their support of the Bush Crime family. Any possibility that they believed in constitutional principles, a strong defense, balance of power, balanced budget...it's all been revealed as a sham to get power. Not power for average Americans, power for the wealthy elite, the Haliburtons, the Enrons. They are responsible, more than half the country knew it in 2000 before Bush was installed. The rest kept quiet and let it happen. It's their shame.

Posted by: thebobbob | June 25, 2007 11:18 PM

Dick Cheney is Dr. Strangelove.

And you were worried about Karl Rove.

Posted by: ncf109 | June 25, 2007 11:31 PM

Why not call him what he is. The President of the United States.

Posted by: sbundley | June 25, 2007 11:34 PM

Disgraceful...this is not a good man. (Quoting the Dick's wife)

Posted by: cooltx75 | June 26, 2007 12:02 AM

This is a great series... and very scary.

Our Executive Branch is severely dysfunctional. At this time in history we don't have the luxury of coasting and just waiting for the Bush Administration to be over...

Congress should take action.

Posted by: stswork | June 26, 2007 12:07 AM

It had to come. Two days of unrelenting shredding of the Vice President. Day three?

He becomes the savior of all that is good and right.

Posted by: rareinc3 | June 26, 2007 12:11 AM

This is a dispassionate description of how Cheney is the powerful nexus of the Cheney administration. We can admire someone who knows how to get government to act. But our admiration evaporates when we realize that Cheney is rewarding the rich and powerful at the expense of the future.

Cheney's legacy will be $3.5 TRILLION in new debt over the two terms of the Bush administration. This is not a first principle of small government. To put that in perspective, the federal debt was under $6 trillion when Bush took office.

Have you no shame, Mr. Cheney?

Posted by: boscobobb | June 26, 2007 12:27 AM

cheney's stooge found that the study from the federal reserve was "flawed" ... how convenient.

Posted by: chefwiggum | June 26, 2007 12:34 AM

cheney's "complaints" about the administration's spending, when he controlled the budget with his leadership of the budget review board, are just too amazing -- i trust that the authors included this tongue-in-cheek

Posted by: chefwiggum | June 26, 2007 12:37 AM

"Cheney's power derives in part from meticulous preparation paired with a strong will to prevail. He knows what he wants, and as one rival put it, Cheney and his staff are "just ferocious negotiators.""

why all the nonsensical pyschoanalysis? your series establishes pretty well how he prevailed -- its because he was given the portfolio of the entire federal government and everyone either knew it, or were cut out of the loop so entirely that their voice didn't matter.

bingo, his voice "prevails" in policy disputes. wow, how amazing his will must be.

Posted by: chefwiggum | June 26, 2007 12:41 AM

The Democrats are too whimpy and weak-kneed to take action on impeaching either of these liars and theives. At this rate the will loose the 08 election and we will be stuck with this bunch of neo-nazi, faith-based, illogical miscreants for all time. Hiel Cheney!

Posted by: craiggger | June 26, 2007 12:58 AM

This evil piece of sh*t should be sent to gitmo to rot for the rest of his miserable, worthless little life. People like the current administration have proven time and time again throughout history to have destroyed thier own nations.

Posted by: craiggger | June 26, 2007 01:01 AM

This evil piece of sh*t should be sent to gitmo to rot for the rest of his miserable, worthless little life. People like the current administration have proven time and time again throughout history to have destroyed thier own nations.

Posted by: craiggger | June 26, 2007 01:01 AM

This evil piece of sh*t should be sent to gitmo to rot for the rest of his miserable, worthless little life. People like the current administration have proven time and time again throughout history to have destroyed thier own nations.

Posted by: craiggger | June 26, 2007 01:01 AM

This evil piece of sh*t should be sent to gitmo to rot for the rest of his miserable, worthless little life. People like the current administration have proven time and time again throughout history to have destroyed thier own nations.

Posted by: craiggger | June 26, 2007 01:01 AM

This evil piece of sh*t should be sent to gitmo to rot for the rest of his miserable, worthless little life. People like the current administration have proven time and time again throughout history to have destroyed thier own nations.

Posted by: craiggger | June 26, 2007 01:01 AM

This man is a war criminal; that he seems perhaps to lessen Bush's responsibility for what these neo-cons have done is no surprise to anyone who's been paying attention, but it doesn't change the fact that all these people and their minions have perverted the course of justice and spat upon the our constitution. Impeach for High Crimes against our nation.

Posted by: emervyn | June 26, 2007 01:03 AM

Investigate, Impeach, Imprison.

Posted by: craiggger | June 26, 2007 01:12 AM

These "Angler" articles are really wonderful. Six and a half years too late, for some aspects, but then again, what could any of us
have believed that long ago.
We will only be able to read them in The Washington Post, as
no other media outlets will "pick them up," or report on them in any way, shape, or form. So, let us enjoy ourselves in our outrage
and real and true patriotism.
We can hope that some people in Congress actually read the
WaPo with a sense of seriousness. But, don't count on them
saying anything other than, oh well, who reads the WaPo except us and we already knew this administration was entirely corrupt and we have been going along with it all along.
The American people don't care, after all, 41% of them believe that Saddam did 9/11 (Har har, ain't that the beatinest come-off??? Ho HO)
Neverthless, I really and truly thank the reporters who did all
this work. You have provided a service to the country in it's
greatest time of need. Thank you, thank you, thank you.
I will continue to read you.

Posted by: cms1 | June 26, 2007 01:36 AM

In celebration of Vice Cheney's wise and guiding hand being also involved in domestic policy issues, the Mayor of San Francisco has just recently signed 2 Executive Orders aimed at 'global warming.'


FOLLOWING PRECEDENT SENT IN THE ABOVE ARTICLE, THE MAYOR OF SAN FRANCISCO HAS ANNOUNCED THE ISSUANCE OF TWO EXECUTIVE ORDERS AIMED AT HELPING THE ENVIRONMENT.

1. The first E.O. issued SERIOUSLY RESTRICTS the distribution and availability of BOTTLED WATER in San Francisco, due to issues surrounding disposal of millions of empty plastic bottles in land fills in the San Francisco area.

'Unnamed sources' have confirmed, however, that medical studies undertaken by several Russian scientists that were recently published in The Moscow Journal of Medicine, CONFIRM that when marijuana users are denied access to 'pure' bottled water and must instead rely on 'fresh' tap water, use of marijuana can be expected to increase 'exponentially.' So while it appears that bottled water producers will be adversely impacted in San Francisco, the Marijuana Growers and Distributors Association of California [MGDAC] advised that they were happy with the Mayor's decision, the equities considered.

2. The second E.O. addressed the frequency of both licit and illicit sexual activity in San Francisco and again its focus was on 'global warming.' Recently released studies undertaken by the Sam Huston Institute of Technology [S.H.I.T.] surprisingly revealed that the heat dissipated into the atmosphere from sexual activity, in some instances, could be so considerable that it is now believed that the basis for extended periods of SMOG around the San Francisco area, is the result of automobile exhaust, heat generated from sexual activity as well as possibly political verbiage.

Accordingly, for married couples and those otherwise living in a committed relationship, sexual activity is henceforth to be restricted to no more than once per week. For single individuals, who were presumed to be 'somewhat' more sexually active, sexual activity was restricted to no more than once daily.

WE CONCLUDE THAT SAN FRANCISCO'S TWO NEWLY ENACTED EXECUTIVE ORDERS WILL HAVE A POSITIVE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.


Posted by: brucerealtor | June 26, 2007 01:39 AM

In celebration of Vice Cheney's wise and guiding hand being also involved in domestic policy issues, the Mayor of San Francisco has just recently signed 2 Executive Orders aimed at 'global warming.'


FOLLOWING PRECEDENT SENT IN THE ABOVE ARTICLE, THE MAYOR OF SAN FRANCISCO HAS ANNOUNCED THE ISSUANCE OF TWO EXECUTIVE ORDERS AIMED AT HELPING THE ENVIRONMENT.

1. The first E.O. issued SERIOUSLY RESTRICTS the distribution and availability of BOTTLED WATER in San Francisco, due to issues surrounding disposal of millions of empty plastic bottles in land fills in the San Francisco area.

'Unnamed sources' have confirmed, however, that medical studies undertaken by several Russian scientists that were recently published in The Moscow Journal of Medicine, CONFIRM that when marijuana users are denied access to 'pure' bottled water and must instead rely on 'fresh' tap water, use of marijuana can be expected to increase 'exponentially.' So while it appears that bottled water producers will be adversely impacted in San Francisco, the Marijuana Growers and Distributors Association of California [MGDAC] advised that they were happy with the Mayor's decision, the equities considered.

2. The second E.O. addressed the frequency of both licit and illicit sexual activity in San Francisco and again its focus was on 'global warming.' Recently released studies undertaken by the Sam Huston Institute of Technology [S.H.I.T.] surprisingly revealed that the heat dissipated into the atmosphere from sexual activity, in some instances, could be so considerable that it is now believed that the basis for extended periods of SMOG around the San Francisco area, is the result of automobile exhaust, heat generated from sexual activity as well as possibly political verbiage.

Accordingly, for married couples and those otherwise living in a committed relationship, sexual activity is henceforth to be restricted to no more than once per week. For single individuals, who were presumed to be 'somewhat' more sexually active, sexual activity was restricted to no more than once daily.

WE CONCLUDE THAT SAN FRANCISCO'S TWO NEWLY ENACTED EXECUTIVE ORDERS WILL HAVE A POSITIVE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.


Posted by: brucerealtor | June 26, 2007 01:40 AM

It just gets scarier and scarier. Impeach NOW.

Posted by: taid | June 26, 2007 01:44 AM

Billions in tax cut, earmarks for religious charities, tax moneys to church establishments - hey, seems like they got everything they wanted. The weapons makers are having a hay-day, too. That's what happens when you let people pick their buddies to fill positions of influence. I am in utter confusion about why Cheney and Gonzales are still part of government and demand respect? Where is the spirit of JUSTICE?
Stem cell research cannot be funded, but wholesale slaughter is morally justified? These contradictions are signs of the great American Mental Disorder.

Posted by: NMremote | June 26, 2007 02:11 AM

One wonders what brand of "Christianity" this man professes.
The missing keywords here are: Katrina, Iraq, Katrina, Iraq...
Cheney's devotion to the rich makes it clear that, in the VP's twisted mind, there is no room for average and poor Americans, or for the casualties sustained in Iraq by our troops and their families, or the Iraqis. For Cheney, they just don't exist.

It is terrifying to think that this man's influence will be felt long after he has gone to the place he deserves. The three most recent decisions emitted by the Supreme Court effectively give corporations even more deciding power in elections, evaporate the division between church and state, and provide one more gag on freedom of expression. Oh, and before that, The Supreme Court agreed that humble healthcare providers--the ones who sit by our elderly, bathe, wash and feed them--aren't entitled to overtime...

Dear God, what does the future hold for this country?

Posted by: FedUp1 | June 26, 2007 02:52 AM

Re Cheney and the Supreme Court: Don't forget to read, Taking on the Supreme Court Case," also in this issue. That's when my hands started to shake.

Posted by: FedUp1 | June 26, 2007 03:06 AM

Blah, blah, blah.
You're four years late and billions of dollars short.
Find something else to write about. You're boring me to death!
Try some unbias reporting sometime.

Posted by: writeaway777 | June 26, 2007 03:48 AM

I just feel - all we felt is right - BUSH is an idot! How do you American election system get such a supid guy becoming your president?

Be careful of your next election, get someone have BRAIN and good heart!

I am not American but USA does have great impact to all other countries and I do care! I wish you all the best for a good leadership in next turn.

Posted by: CHENTING71 | June 26, 2007 04:03 AM

Somehow this seems to just to me to be a series to take the blame off the Bush family and try to pin everything that's gone wrong on Cheney. Well, the Bush family has been responsible for policy matters for years. I'm not buying this tripe.

Cheney may be a total jerk, but he's just the fall guy. It's just too convenient to say that all the wrongheaded policy of this administration originated with Cheney.

NO SALE.

Posted by: Perry3 | June 26, 2007 04:15 AM

The article and comments about Cheney are very interesting. For me the worst thing about Cheney is his part in the 9/11 cover-up of the prior warning of the 5th September 2001 which should have prevented 9/11 happening. To me it is either Dick Cheney or Rupert Murdoch are the most disloyal and dangerous people on the planet. The use of Tony Blair in the UK (also involved in 9/11 cover-up) for various projects is difficult to understand.

Posted by: mikexxxxnolan | June 26, 2007 04:29 AM

A critical question millions of Americans must now be puzzling over is, "HOW HAS IT BEEN POSSIBLE FOR VICE PRESIDENT DICK CHENEY TO ARROGATE UNTO HIMSELF SUCH AUTHORITY AND POWERS THAT NORMALLY ONLY THE PRESIDENT CONSTITUTIONALLY SHOULD EXERCISE?"

The simple answer must be that because President George W. Bush was a neophyte unfamiliar with the workings of the Federal bureaucracy when he assumed the presidency, Dick Cheney, exactly the opposite of George W. Bush because he had spent most of his adult life in government and was therefore a master in the workings of that government, took advantage of George W. Bush by practically taking over in matters and issues that needed thorough and serious presidential consideration and decision.

Dick Cheney may not always have had his way, but it is now plain for all to see that he had his way most of the time on many vital and critical issues--domestic and foreign-- that came before George W. Bush for decision.

That Dick Cheney was able to deliberately put then Secretary of State Colin Powell and then National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice completely "out of the loop" on a matter over which by law they had jurisdiction--and that George W. Bush supinely allowed him to do so!--is a good measure of the nature and extent of Dick Cheney's influence then on George W. Bush.

That influence has been evil and pernicious. It has led to several momentous catastrophic missteps, misjudgments and mistakes, such as the preemptive and unilateral invasion and occupation of Iraq, the torture of "combatants" at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, the "rendition" of "combatants" to several European countries, the warrantless (and therefore illegal) spying on Americans on US soil, the selection of Halliburton to perform "contract work" in Iraq which has resulted in corruption and the loss of billions of US taxpayer dollars, the unprecendented aggrandizement of power by the President at the expense of the Congress, and the packing of Federal courts by "strict constructionist" and "originalist" Republican justices like John G. Roberts, Jr. and Samuel Alito.

The list goes on and on.

Posted by: MPatalinjug | June 26, 2007 04:57 AM

A critical question millions of Americans must now be puzzling over is, "HOW HAS IT BEEN POSSIBLE FOR VICE PRESIDENT DICK CHENEY TO ARROGATE UNTO HIMSELF SUCH AUTHORITY AND POWERS THAT NORMALLY ONLY THE PRESIDENT CONSTITUTIONALLY SHOULD EXERCISE?"

The simple answer must be that because President George W. Bush was a neophyte unfamiliar with the workings of the Federal bureaucracy when he assumed the presidency, Dick Cheney, exactly the opposite of George W. Bush because he had spent most of his adult life in government and was therefore a master in the workings of that government, took advantage of George W. Bush by practically taking over in matters and issues that needed thorough and serious presidential consideration and decision.

Dick Cheney may not always have had his way, but it is now plain for all to see that he had his way most of the time on many vital and critical issues--domestic and foreign-- that came before George W. Bush for decision.

That Dick Cheney was able to deliberately put then Secretary of State Colin Powell and then National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice completely "out of the loop" on a matter over which by law they had jurisdiction--and that George W. Bush supinely allowed him to do so!--is a good measure of the nature and extent of Dick Cheney's influence then on George W. Bush.

That influence has been evil and pernicious. It has led to several momentous catastrophic missteps, misjudgments and mistakes, such as the preemptive and unilateral invasion and occupation of Iraq, the torture of "combatants" at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, the "rendition" of "combatants" to several European countries, the warrantless (and therefore illegal) spying on Americans on US soil, the selection of Halliburton to perform "contract work" in Iraq which has resulted in corruption and the loss of billions of US taxpayer dollars, the unprecendented aggrandizement of power by the President at the expense of the Congress, and the packing of Federal courts by "strict constructionist" and "originalist" Republican justices like John G. Roberts, Jr. and Samuel Alito.

The list goes on and on.

Posted by: MPatalinjug | June 26, 2007 04:58 AM

So now we know who is actually running the country-it's not Bush, who seems to be the "silent partner" in all these meetings and policy making.
Guess that the election was actually for re-electing Cheney.
Does it get any worse? When do the American people actually get to vote for a President, not his VP?
Because Cheney has gotten away with this stuff for 6 years, I doubt that anyone who comes into the office from now on will not have the same powers-seeing how Cheney expanded them to exclude the President.
Now I know why I didn't vote for either of them at any time.

Posted by: maryhilton | June 26, 2007 04:59 AM

This is truly terrific reporting.
WHERE WAS THIS KIND OF REPORTING BEFORE THE 2004 ELECTION?!!?

Cheney has been working our government to his own advantage ever since he ran out of Vietnam deferments. I guess he learned a whole heck of a lot more than we knew, working in Dick Nixon's adminstration.

Posted by: freespeak | June 26, 2007 05:24 AM

this is nothing new; it has been known for years- a book on Cheney was written years ago.
why is the WashPo just starting to wake up now?

Posted by: inedal | June 26, 2007 05:25 AM

this is nothing new; it has been known for years- a book on Cheney was written years ago.
why is the WashPo just starting to wake up now?

Posted by: inedal | June 26, 2007 05:26 AM

this is nothing new; it has been known for years- a book on Cheney was written years ago.
why is the WashPo just starting to wake up now?

Posted by: inedal | June 26, 2007 05:26 AM

this is nothing new; it has been known for years- a book on Cheney was written years ago.
why is the WashPo just starting to wake up now?

Posted by: inedal | June 26, 2007 05:26 AM

this is nothing new; it has been known for years- a book on Cheney was written years ago.
why is the WashPo just starting to wake up now?

Posted by: inedal | June 26, 2007 05:26 AM

this is nothing new; it has been known for years- a book on Cheney was written years ago.
why is the WashPo just starting to wake up now?

Posted by: inedal | June 26, 2007 05:26 AM

I wonder, have Rove and Cheney ever clashed on an important issue? It would be like Alien vs Predator.

Posted by: roger.antaya | June 26, 2007 05:27 AM

The redoubtable, previously voluble Mrs. Lynne Cheney, uncompromising and sanctimonious right-wing presence on talk shows, has long been suspiciously silent. I don't miss her, but is that the shadow of a pterodactyl I see circling above us lo these past six years? This may be an airborne administration spotter, or her absence may signal Rovian strategy to keep more provacative, troubling expressions of right thinking out of public view of all but the most reflective or paranoid among us.

Posted by: jstonewp | June 26, 2007 05:46 AM

I realize many view Dick Cheney's powers with alarm, but to anyone with knowlege of Texas' political history, it's not all that surprising.

When Reconstruction ended, after the Civil War, the "liberal Yankees" were thrown out of office and a new, conservative constitution was drafted. This said that the real power in government rested with the lieutenant governor, NOT the governor.

I know . . . it seems odd, but a lot of things about Texas are odd; that's the way it was set up, tho.

As regards the strange case of Mr. Cheney:

The neocons really wanted Dickie to head the ticket (after Dole's 1996 run) but, let's face it -- he just didn't have the right charisma. So, pliable, marketable, George W. was summoned to fill the head of the ticket spot, with the understanding that Dick would be running the ship and making ALL the key decisions. Dubya would merely be the guy they pushed out for photo-ops and schmoozing the public.

You see, it was all set up to work just like the Texas model -- George out front, selling the product, while Dick choreographed everything from the background, out of sight, and out of control.

Karl Rove and Karen Hughes remain as the key marketeers in this constitutional scam, but make no mistake, Dick makes the calls, they just sell the product.

None of this is at all mysterious to me. I'm both amused and disillusioned that it has taken over 6 years for anyone in the MSM (or anywhere) to bring these facts to light.

And I'm not so sure the authors of this series have connected all the dots yet, either. Cheney IS and always HAS BEEN the prez, and everything we see regarding his arrogance and eff-you attitude reflects his confidence in his position as such.

I guess the real question is, what are we going to do about it? Wait until he declares a national emergency and grab the dictatorial powers set out in Bush's May 2007 memo (reminds one of 1933 Germany -- yikes!), depend on the gutless wonders in Congress to finally rein these spoiled brats in, or do we, the people, have to rise up and have a revolution?

Posted by: nads1 | June 26, 2007 05:54 AM

Clearly Bush is nothing more than a figure head, and not a good one at that. Bush and Cheney are reviled everywhere they go in the world. As for Republicans, they're a bunch of cowards and traitors - cowards because they refuse to stand up to this administration, traitors because they put their party above the Constitution and welfare of the country. Shame on them. These last six years have been a nightmare, and there's no relief in sight. I fear for what kind of country is being left for my children and whether we'll be able to undo so much damage.

Posted by: ggwalt123 | June 26, 2007 06:03 AM

How about a follow up series that George Bush Jr. has been the most effective Vice President since Dan Quayle?

Posted by: rook01 | June 26, 2007 06:12 AM

The vice-president is a "partner"? If what you describe is accurate, and I believe it is, then Bush is the vice-president, and Cheney is the president. Bush's naivete and lack of subtlety make him a perfect target for Cheney's byzantine mind. Bush hasn't had a chance, has he? And Cheney hasn't been satisfied to stay in one area and undercuts the president on so many issues that it is dizzying to comprehend. So little time left, Dick, so many plots to hatch and guide to fruition. So many people to intimidate.

I have always been suspicious of a group working by consensus--this process is ripe for intimidating others and shaping their cooperation, especially when they know the person has the president's ear, and head, and heart, and, oh, yes, his soul. While Bush runs around looking into the soul of Putin and getting money to faith-based initiatives, Cheney stays focused on policy and has shaped the "Bush policies" to his philosophy.

Any discussion of Bush's administration in the future must include Cheney's secret machinations. If Powell called Rumsfeld the rubber glove man, then Cheney must be the proctologist.

Posted by: Hannahjones | June 26, 2007 06:24 AM

Americans should be saying to Cheney: "You're with us, or you're with the enemy".

Posted by: 489362 | June 26, 2007 06:44 AM

In the end we all die so I guess it is justice served. I only hope that God grants me one wish and that is to watch as these false Christans try to enter into heaven and God asked them what part of free will did you not understand, and then sends them to their reward. I just want to see there faces then he can do to me what ever he wants all my dreams will have come true.

Posted by: antonio3 | June 26, 2007 07:07 AM

It is curious how the press gathers its skirts and sashays their
sweet opinions as well as calculated inuendo about Cheney as
legislative particulars come into view. It seems all too convienent,
my dear Horatio, and yet the feeling is- he's a swashbuckling
pirate hero to the silent minority that still thinks stealthy surges can win the day for the media war. I see nothing but deciet and
illegal behavior coming from the White House, overshadowing
the greed and avarice of these transplanted CEO's, and it is so unsavory that impeachment is considered. Resigning is my personal path of choice, yet the joy boy's have enough fear threat to keep reality from the door. Every word of defense of this administration is contrived to echo buzz words and
hidden cues for capitalist dogma, extracted from biblical example, without the moral implications. The American Family
needs to budget and dole out monies for infrastructure, secuity and social stabilty and curb the war spending and the spying
on its citizens, as well as projection of energy for the future,
rather than planning on the mini armageddon that will relieve
the complexity of governing 'All the People, All the time'.
Industry certainly needs NO tax cuts, and neither do the people. We need more balanced laws in the bankruptcy, investment, insurence, lending and mortgage industries, laws that do not
eliminate the bottom tier of peoples for the profit of operators.
In my youth it was commonly held that the profit margin was a set figure, a constant, rather than "get what you can" which is
like kill them all and we'll sort it out later... Now IS later, and the capitalist penchant for competition is the very illusion
that needs repeal. we are unique beings on a unique planet
and should be making the most of the ride.

Posted by: bebeyond49 | June 26, 2007 07:10 AM

As with Iraq, Cheney's legacy in the Bush tax cut will live long after he departs. He helped grow our national debt in order to keep the good times rolling on Wall Street. Soon it will be time to pay the piper. But don't worry Republicans; Dick has so poisoned the political waters that it will be a Democratic President who will have to clean up the mess.

Posted by: fultonda | June 26, 2007 07:17 AM

To Becker, Gellman and the WaPo: It is not enough to simply thank you for these pieces. This sort of journalism is the very life's blood of our republic, and we cannot survive without it. I know it took a huge commitment to produce, but our very lives depend on this. We have been hovering in grave condition for too long now; I am angry, as are so many others, that this was not written earlier, but I am so grateful that we are now getting the transfusion of truth that we must have to survive. Now our leaders must be truthful and brave and face what must be done to protect our democracy from people who would usurp it for their own agenda, however right and patriotic they see themselves.

Posted by: joydavid22 | June 26, 2007 07:28 AM

I wish people would read this article as it is written and not put their own bias slant to it. The article says "Word of a Cheney loss seldom leaks, a trait that has further endeared him to Bush -- and that has served to exaggerate his influence."

Cheney is not the President and the article gives many examples where Bush made decisions that Cheney was against (i.e. No Child Left Behind).

Cheney is more conservative than Bush and he has used his Washington connections and experience to try to cut through the bureaucracy and get things done. He may have used the rules to his advantage and the courts may not agree with his lawyers interpretation of Constitutional law, but there are no impeachable offenses here, and the Dems know it, and their lawyers know it, and that is why they will never pursue it.

The same mindset that believes the US was behind the 9/11 attacks is the same kind of liberal conspiracy mindset that believes Cheney is some kind of a monster. He is a conservative, which I guess to the left makes him a monster since they wanted to impeach Reagan and every other Republican president.

I regret that Cheney is not going to run for President in 2008. The interrogation issue alone would get him elected. Americans are in favor of using whatever means possible to protect the innocent from those that are truly evil, the terrorists.

Posted by: jayh63 | June 26, 2007 07:41 AM

Ask cheney two questions, Why weren't there any jets scrambled on 9/11 when Norad's sop is when any commercial jet goes off course jets are scrambled right away to see what the problem is.
Secondly, Why when the pentagon has at least 100 cameras surrounding it were there no "good" pictures of the "plane" hitting it ?

Posted by: timechange28 | June 26, 2007 07:49 AM

Supply side voodoo economcs. Cheney was given the info that tax cuts for the very wealthy would cause a longer term downside. So he sits on this info, supresses it or tries to swiftboat it because it goes against his belief in suppy side voodoo economics or because it does not reward the wealth class enough. Have we ever seen this with the CEOs of our employees? There is almost a religion that believes that only the few chosen shall have any power and thus we must give everything to these chosen ones and they then get to shower crumbs to the dogs that lick their hands. Well I know that 99% of the work done out in the real world is done by 99% of the employees of our self annointed lords. In something that professes to be a democracy we should never tolerate CEO types at the helm of government. The contempt Cheney has for the common man is self evident.

Posted by: ricinro85212 | June 26, 2007 07:51 AM

Isn't it time to ask what the point of all of this has been? The man's facility as a tactician is obvious and he's no doubt been highly effective to his own ends.

But what are the ends? America has not recovered its legitimacy and is perceived as exercising it, not to any principled end--including at this stage, a neo con end, but convulsively; it has not brought democracy to the middle east; its economy is structually flawed and this group, the Bush group, has not been able to institutionalize its ideology in the American system.

At this time, except for decay until times and the Administration have changed, nothing more can be done; and with that vacant and doomed policy and governmental end, the Vice President's continuing, cunning exercise of his situational skills, in any historic sense, resembles nothing so much as the fabled, febrile sound of one hand clapping.

In a way, the pathos is tragic.

Posted by: tantallon1 | June 26, 2007 08:04 AM

I do not recognize my country now. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are trashed by this administration. If I were to visit another country, I would be ashamed to admit that I am American.

Being from the United States of America used to be something to be proud of, but no more. No longer are we leaders of the free world. We have sunk to the level of countries we once derided as being under the leadership of a dictator.

In 70 years I never thought once that we could sink so low. Now I feel that if we do not call for the impeachment of both Cheney and Bush, we will never rise above their evil thoughts and deeds.

Posted by: Utahreb | June 26, 2007 08:09 AM

The blackest mark on American History, the most corrupt and morally banrupt politician to ever darken the Aermican Government. Impeach is too good and I hope that his health fails and he has nightmares for the pain, suffering, blood and death he has inflicted on the world for his own gain. If he is human, highly doubtful, I hope he suffers for the rest of his life.

Posted by: lndlouis | June 26, 2007 08:09 AM

The blackest mark on American History, the most corrupt and morally banrupt politician to ever darken the Aermican Government. Impeach is too good and I hope that his health fails and he has nightmares for the pain, suffering, blood and death he has inflicted on the world for his own gain. If he is human, highly doubtful, I hope he suffers for the rest of his life.

Posted by: lndlouis | June 26, 2007 08:09 AM

The blackest mark on American History, the most corrupt and morally banrupt politician to ever darken the Aermican Government. Impeach is too good and I hope that his health fails and he has nightmares for the pain, suffering, blood and death he has inflicted on the world for his own gain. If he is human, highly doubtful, I hope he suffers for the rest of his life.

Posted by: lndlouis | June 26, 2007 08:10 AM

The blackest mark on American History, the most corrupt and morally banrupt politician to ever darken the Aermican Government. Impeach is too good and I hope that his health fails and he has nightmares for the pain, suffering, blood and death he has inflicted on the world for his own gain. If he is human, highly doubtful, I hope he suffers for the rest of his life.

Posted by: lndlouis | June 26, 2007 08:10 AM

Another yawn day of comments from the liberal left.

I know the concept that people of good conscience can have differing opinions never seemed to occur to the pea brain left, but guess what, good people can have different opinions than the liberal left.

To liberals, for someone to get elected that is not from the left must be proof that the American public is stupid, or the election was stolen, or,,, or,,,, or. Always an excuse on why nobody listens to them and why they are marginalized.

Guess what liberal left, YOU SHOULD BE MARGINALIZED for your simplistic notions on how things should be!

Under difficult circumstances Bush and Cheney have done a remarkable job. Mistakes have been made, as have been accomplishments in seven years.

Who knows what style the next President and VP will have. Will it be a hand in every minor and mundane detail like Carter, a poll a day like Clinton to make decisions, or a CEO managerial style like Bush and Reagan. Who knows?

The only truth is the liberal left will still be whining about something!

Posted by: bcarte1 | June 26, 2007 08:11 AM

GEORGE HERBERT HOOVER BUSH: Dick, the entire country is clamoring for your resignation. I'm not sure I'm going to be able to fight them all off.
DICK CHENEY: You better, bubbie, or you can forget about any support next election from the American National Socialist Party. And the Klan, too.
GHH BUSH: Well, I'm open to any suggestions, of course...as usual.
DC: To be honest, I've noticed the same annoying rash of complaints you have, and I've given the matter considerable thought. This is a simple problem with a ready solution.
GHH BUSH: I hope your solution includes getting rid of that "What Would Machiavelli Do?" T-shirt you wore at the last barbecue.
DC: Be serious now, bubbie. Here's what we have to do. You write a presidential signing statement deputizing all Halliburton employees. We'll call them the Liberty League, and divide them into Patriot Platoons, which will broken down into Security Squads. The Patriot Platoons will patrol state and city government meetings and report any suspicious Liberal and anti-war activity. The Security Squads will administer "America-enhancing Attitude Adjustments" to any suspicious detainees, and also any actual perpetrators if we catch them. The Security Squads will also be responsible for book burnings and Pre-Schooler America-enhancing Attitude Adjustments, which will exclude water boarding. Probably. All the Halliburton CEOs who were deputized will have special duties related to Funding--can't do all this on the tax dollar, sorry bubbie. The funding will be divided into Friendly Funding which will include voluntary donations from all our good petrochemical and pharmaceutical associates, and Unfriendly Funding or extortion. I know--but our "Tune in to America Initiative" will require installing video surveillance software in every household TV and infrared fencing around every Democrat residence. Big bucks there, bubbie. Razor wire's not cheap, either. I calculate it will take at least three years for the Liberty League to achieve its primary objectives in the US, then another two years for Mexico and three more years for Canada. We're calling it the "Enhanced Security and Prosperity Partnership for North America." The "enhancement" is the extra troops North Viet Nam is supplying, and the tactical nukes we're getting from Iran. Well, there it is, bubbie. What do you think?
GHH BUSH: It's pretty awesome, Dick. I have to admit I'm really impressed. But I don't see how we can keep working on all this after the next election.
DC: What election?

Posted by: valleyforge | June 26, 2007 08:26 AM

WHEN THE DEMS BECAME THE MAJORITY, SPEAKER PELOSI SAID IMPEACHMENT WAS OFF THE TABLE, NO DOUBT BECAUSE "KICK START DICK" WOULD HAVE BECOME PRESIDENT IN NAME AS WELL AS IN FACT. HOWEVER AT THAT TIME SHE MADE NO MENTION OF IMPEACHMENT OF THE VICE PRES. BEING OFF THE TABLE AND IF ANYONE EVER DESERVED IMPEACHMENT IT IS DEFINITELY DICK CHENEY......OR DOES HE HAVE TO GET AN "AIR START" IN HIS OFFICE TO STIR CONGRESS INTO ACTION?

Posted by: J102343 | June 26, 2007 08:30 AM

C'mon folks!
What's with all the bleating? You voted for this team...twice!!

Is it Dick's fault that Bush isn't bright enough to be able to focus on the myriad details in numerous policy areas?

Is it Bush's fault that he got elected president even though he was manifestly unqualified....and then even after 4 years of seeing what he had to offer, we decided to torture the poor fellow by making him have to serve a second term?

Someone had to pick up the slack and no one else was willing to do so, so good ol' Dick Cheney took it upon himself to guide the ship of state.

And for this he is ridiculed and disparaged in this paper....and yet, even now, when we all know the dirty dealings do we see anyone in Congress really willing to take on Cheney??

No, of course not....we just want to sit around and gripe about this poor old man with his failing heart and his iron will.

But this is a dick that doesn't care. He will force apart the lips of intransigence and will pentertate to the source of the matter and will deliver with explosive force to everyone's satisfaction.

Way to go, Dick!

Posted by: asiajohn | June 26, 2007 08:34 AM

sigh. thank you ralph nader, we owe it all to you and your ego.

Posted by: jimfilyaw | June 26, 2007 08:49 AM

WaPoo got all of its information, not from investigative reporting, but from their online comment sections. They cut n' paste our comments into their dick Cheney series.

Posted by: kevinschmidt | June 26, 2007 08:59 AM

Posted by: nickthimmeschearthlinknet | June 26, 2007 08:59 AM

WaPoo got all of its information, not from investigative reporting, but from their online comment sections. They cut n' paste our comments into their dick Cheney series.

Posted by: kevinschmidt | June 26, 2007 09:00 AM

Sometimes some of the people will think it's all fine and they can do anything they want to do whilst neglecting the position that calls for 'public' service. God knows the difference as well as the whole Trinity so be not amazed that escape from reality cometh forth as nothing, not one thing, gets by the Father and he knoweth the hearts of men and the spirit of their existence. Oh, of course he knows the letter also and also knows the USA firsters versus those with prophetic reality as they chose other gods. Oh Zionist, you have not fooled all and surely not Him and the one who sent Him. www confidentialsources com where links to reality of fact are found.

Posted by: abroadventure | June 26, 2007 09:11 AM

In a programmer article such as this we should be exploring the
concept of NON-professional politicians rather than the notion of
secret, insider trading, in effect, of agendas, purposes, profits and illegal activity, to be hidden. Its enough that there is the need for the country to be led, rather than having this shadow conspiracy reflection in every move, so that the people are MISLED, robbed,
lied to and sold out at every turn. this is a particular technique of the republican party, whose purpose has been to aggrandise big and bigger business to the detriment of the workers, or in simpler terms: slavery, but the kinder and gentler type, as well as reducing or removing civil rights, human rights and government services to the lower half of the population while
whoring after laws that serve only the Imperial, entitled and
self appointed grand klaxons of the hate organizations, dividing the peoples, subverting the peoples and clearly not the
intention of the founding fathers. This is no more a democracy than England a Monarchy, but the house of lords here are lying lawyers legislating ONLY their own success, at the expense of the people. Karl and Dick utilize timeworn cliches to describe the greedy down low behaviors intimated in "using each other
to the best effect" . The facts are they are driving this country into the ground and eliminating any education that could lead to introspection on life, hstory and reality. We now have the
Plantation of excesses where the field workers live in half million dollar shacks with all the services, and the disposable people are ignored as they die in the street. Those who go to the moon and into space are princes of death for the rest, and war is something we inflict on those who refuse our desires.
there is no need to spend billions on space travel or greed wars
except to get the kickbacks on contracts and tell each other they are carrying the country. This sham ends only when the lower tier of the economy fails and humanity is subverted once again by the Machiavellian lunacy

Posted by: bebeyond49 | June 26, 2007 09:12 AM

A credible bio about Cheney's legendary characteristics, flaws & failures was published in 2004 by journalist John Nichols. Called DICK: THE MAN WHO IS PRESIDENT (The New Press), it was routinely ignored by the Mainstream Media, including The Washington Post. (They are pretty late to this story, which is hard to fathom as he has been a mover/shaker for some time.) Mr. Cheney's long history is worth noting. What we are seeing is his apotheosis, and it isn't pretty...unless you think fascism is pretty.

Posted by: tdisante | June 26, 2007 09:21 AM

It becomes clearer every day that the true President is the Dick Cheney and our Dear Leader is simply a puppet selected by Cheney and his gang of henchmen for his simple mind (and that is generous)and easily stroked ego. Mind you, the Dems collectivly are even bigger wimps than the President for letting this happen even after they siezed power of the congress. 2008 needs to replace them all and bring back true democracy to the U.S.

Posted by: rcc_2000 | June 26, 2007 09:25 AM

Lawyers use a Latin phrase, "Res ipsa loquitor," which means "The thing speaks for itself."
Bush is a trivial moron, and Cheney is in control from behind the scenes, with no accountability. Their actions over the past six years speak all too clearly to these truths.

Posted by: H5N1 | June 26, 2007 09:35 AM

So much for the "Checks and Balances" written into the Constitution. How can one evil, power hungry miserable excuse for a human being get away with this crap?

Because our lazy, corrupt, do nothing, incompetent 109th and 110th Congress'and their leaders, are more concerned with graft, greed and listening to the their handlers on K-street. Their only loyalty is to the lobbyists for the special corporate interests that have bought and paid for them.

What is really scary is that our incompetent puppet, President George W. Bush still has the power to start another war. With a war monger like Dick Cheney pulling Bush's strings, the prospect for a nuclear war is even greater.

Congress must exercise their "Oversight" responsibility and Impeach this dangerous tyrant now!

Posted by: Justicein2008 | June 26, 2007 09:35 AM

So much for the "Checks and Balances" written into the Constitution. How can one evil, power hungry miserable excuse for a human being get away with this crap?

Because our lazy, corrupt, do nothing, incompetent 109th and 110th Congress'and their leaders, are more concerned with graft, greed and listening to the their handlers on K-street. Their only loyalty is to the lobbyists for the special corporate interests that have bought and paid for them.

What is really scary is that our incompetent puppet, President George W. Bush still has the power to start another war. With a war monger like Dick Cheney pulling Bush's strings, the prospect for a nuclear war is even greater.

Congress must exercise their "Oversight" responsibility and Impeach this dangerous tyrant now!

Posted by: Justicein2008 | June 26, 2007 09:37 AM

Bwahahahah. Hold the line on spending? Bwahahahaha. Small gov'mint cornservative? Bwahahahah. Cut taxes to get more tax revenue? Bwahahaha. You guys are killin' me. And he took the choices to President George J. Le Petomane? Work, work, work. Work, work, work.

Posted by: Bluetexan | June 26, 2007 09:41 AM

Both Perry3 and asiajohn make a good point - whatever Cheney's yen for power, he can only go as far as George Bush will allow. That Bush lacks any capacity for analysis or grappling with complexities and cheerfully hands the details off to Cheney's office gives Dr. Strangelove his power base. Still, Cheney singularly lacks any notion of restraint in aggrandizing power to the executive, risking a fascist taint of what is supposed to be representative governance. I suppose the kooks of the far right can make an argument that Congress cannot or will not govern, lest they make choices that cost them their individual power - sadly, that argument contains a great deal of truth as well. Ultimately, though, we in the electorate allowed ourselves to be snookered by a plausible nonetity into voting to put him in office and keep him there when we should have known better. In a backhanded fashion, George Bush and the chaos of the past six years may have done us all a favor; if we learn to look past the packaging of television ads and sound bites in choosing our leadership hereafter, Bush will have done a great service simply through his dim wits and ineptitude.

Posted by: clare_d_loon | June 26, 2007 09:47 AM

google this:

Unimpeachable - A Bush/Cheney Tribute

Posted by: jimprues | June 26, 2007 09:58 AM

He is pure evil! If you know what to look for he has the mark of the beast! This man will go down in history as a master mass murderer! There is nothing but greed and evil in his being! He is no better nor any worst than Hitler!

Posted by: aishablack1 | June 26, 2007 10:00 AM

He is pure evil! If you know what to look for he has the mark of the beast! This man will go down in history as a master mass murderer! There is nothing but greed and evil in his being! He is no better nor any worst than Hitler!

Posted by: aishablack1 | June 26, 2007 10:00 AM

Cheney has become our little Dictator...In the U.S. this is not suppose to happen. It happens in Iraq and North Korea, but it is NOT suppose to happen in the United States of America. He has become so powerful that he has created a new country here in the United States... a fourth branch not subject to any review. We are no longer the country of our forefathers. Means justify the ends...whose ends?...we are suppose to be a Democracy not a dictatorship of the executive run by the oil companies! Paranoia, fear, greed, and secrecy have always been the tactics of famous dictators.
The principles of the Constitution that I teach at school stress "consent of the governed", amendment process, checks and balances which were put in to avoid the monarchy of that King George. OUR Constitution has been so highly respected by other countries for over 200 hundred years. No longer...But President..WHO is our President?..has allowed this to happen.. he was aware of this change of our Constitution or he was "out to lunch" (which seemed many times, literally, since he was not at many of those meetings) Either way, President Bush is shameful. Cheney makes me cry... GET RID OF CHENEY NOW..but he is so powerful...I fear he will still control things from his home...and Bush will let him.

You said not to make personal attacks. What do we do when we realize people of trust have manipulated us and abused their power? Who can we turn to and trust?
For Heaven Sake, Cheny's abuse of power is no where near the same league as a guy who could not be faithful to his wife!

Beth McKenzie-Mohr

Posted by: B.McKenzie-Mohr | June 26, 2007 10:04 AM

Anyone ready to move to Iceland?

Posted by: styll | June 26, 2007 10:04 AM

styll --

I was thinking Canada, especially when Cheney gets ready to attack Iran.

Iceland sounds good, too.

Posted by: nads1 | June 26, 2007 10:28 AM

If rich, white, business men want to stimulate the economy is it any coincidence that the main economic beneficiary of that process are going to be rich, white, business men?
I appalled at how naive the vice president and his advisers are.
You could give the same tax breaks to the bottom earners in this country and it would stimulate the economy as much. Since the super wealthy are likely to have their capital more mobile it may not necessarily stay in this country. It will for sure only go to certain parts of the country which are already prosperous.
The low wage earners will use their small tax breaks in their poorer neighborhoods and stimulate local businesses, generate more local taxes and pay into school taxes in poor districts, all in all it would target the neediest parts of the under preforming economy for capital infusion which will create jobs and other opportunities.
The shame is the opposition is so inept it can not clearly present a the better option than the further consolidation of wealth and power that will inevitably uncut most citizen's trust in our system.

Posted by: xerxes | June 26, 2007 10:29 AM

If you look beyond Cheney to the larger picture, the Executive branch is amazingly incompetent - just look at their "everything's fine" handling of Iraq until 2006 and their "heckuva job" with Katrina, plus any number of smaller bureaucratic bungles like the attorney firings. Has Cheney's demand for control paralyzed the rest of the Executive? Or is he just "effective" because of the incompetence, which exists for other reasons such as cronyism and party hackery? No doubt he has gotten his agenda through, yet if you pull away from the picture one click, you see an Executive that time and again just can't execute. So the Cheney phenomenon should be viewed against that backdrop.

Posted by: crozetproject | June 26, 2007 10:30 AM

I've been following this series. To date, the writers seem timid with respect to actually calling Cheney for what he is--a megalomaniac bent on throwing the Constitution in the garbage can for his own ends. The picture being painted is a sympathetic one of a poor, misunderstood, much maligned patriot who is not appreciated in his time.

This man is dangerous to the Constitution, and thus to the country. He uses fear, manufactured by the so-called war on terror which was launched after a convenient "Pearl Harbor-like" event, to manipulate the population. Of course, the population, if it was not so ignorant and fundamentally bigoted, would not be so easily manipulated by fear.

In any event, I am severely disappointed. Perhaps the explanation is that the writers have legimate reason to fear the reincarnation of the National Socialist Party that is the current administration. I fear we will soon lose our democracy all in the name of preserving it. Let us hope we do not let this cabal cancel the 2008 elections in the name of national security, and under the slogan: "We have to suspend Democracy in order to preserve it."

Posted by: map529 | June 26, 2007 10:31 AM

The article appears extraordinarily well documented - but who knows: Cheney clearly cannot answer and present his view ...

At any rate the main issues are of a constitutional nature, and about the formal structures and protocols that frame decision making in our government.

We have an executive branch, with all decisions converging to the pen of that single wo/man - the president. A person or a group indeed controlling the final stages of the network of communications and thought surrounding the president can in effect divert or control the many processes, and significantly affect the necessary checks and balances in place. That single wo/man at the top, even assuming that s/he were truly exceptional (!!) has only one brain, and comes with the limited perspective attending any single human. Implicit in what we call a good presidency, is the hope that that single brain, that single mind, is complemented with a well functioning process that branches out to a multiplicity of perspectives, expanding and supporting the decisions that eventually bear the president's signature; and that also at times may mitigate or even oppose some of his personal choices. An essential property of our government, and which makes this country better than, say, Venezuela or Russia, is that the people in power are vetted, and are not capable to divert for their own agenda the decision machine that they lead.

The essential question is thus of an abstract nature - there is a grey zone surrounding the way business is done at the top. This uncertainty fulfills some positive purpose: the prerogatives of the president and of the administration he puts in place after each election are to impart a style and a direction that may be significantly different than his predecessors - one wants to preserve that freedom in style and execution. On the other hand, and as this review illustrates, a system that is left to operate without enough self-awareness and feedback is subjected to the possibility of "network sickness" - an entity or group of entities perverting the free flows that one would desire in a healthy decision community.

Moving towards solution:
One way is to legislate more constraints onto the executive. This may come. But instead (or in support of) of such approach, it may be very helpful to develop methods and tools increasing the self-awareness of the dynamics at the top. Due process requires the president as all decision makers to keep a schedule of whom they meet. Such information is material for review processes. What does not exist, is a methodology to assemble all the pieces of the decision making puzzle. As an extension to the governance processes in place, and to attend to the problems illustrated by the current vice-presidency, one could envision a "visual" mechanism of checks and balances, linking the various document flows, the various interventions on such flows, and even less visible issues such as the attendance lists, and "who was attending the preparatory meetings that led to adoption of a document".

Attending such information gathering process, there could be a governance process that would measure all these flows, and represent to the president how well he is served by the starlike administration that connects to him and serves him. This process could also represent to which extent a person or a group of persons controls the flow of processes.

That would be a remarkable tool. In my sense, the development of such tool would naturally impel a president to develop better structures. It would as well over time provide fodder and material for constitutional improvements of the decision making processes at the top.

This is a field of Political Science that in my view is begging for strategic tools. Much as computers boosted productivity in ways unforeseen 30 years ago, the undertaking of such self-aware mechanism may unleash an explosion of improvements in our governing structures.

saaackkk@yahoo.com

Posted by: saaackkk | June 26, 2007 10:35 AM

After yesterday's hit piece,in which the writers implicitly expressed in every paragraph righteous indignation that Cheney would order subordinates to treat murdering psychopathic terrorists the way they deserve to be treated, this is an improvement.

Today's piece makes Cheney sound like the Hillary Clinton of the Bush administration: someone with an invisible hand in everything.

But there are two important differences: unlike Hillary, Cheney was elected and he is extraordinarily competent.

Posted by: theduke89 | June 26, 2007 10:36 AM

Response to message Posted by: saaackkk | June 26, 2007 10:35 AM

Your proposal is ridiculous. As if any President would want some neutral bureau observing and evaluating the way he does business and then be subjected to inevitable politically motivated leaks that would attend such oversight.

It's a preposterous idea no matter how clever and innocuous the language used makes it seem.

The people at the top of government, like anyone else, deserve privacy and confidentiality. What you are proposing is a spy operation of sorts on the Presidency.

It's an idea that will never fly, no matter who happens to be President. It is a proposal that every presidential candidate would either sneer or laugh at, depending on whether they believed it was a serious proposal or not. My guess is that most would look at it as a joke.

Posted by: theduke89 | June 26, 2007 10:50 AM

Response to message Posted by: saaackkk | June 26, 2007 10:35 AM

Your proposal is ridiculous. As if any President would want some neutral bureau observing and evaluating the way he does business and then be subjected to inevitable politically motivated leaks that would attend such oversight.

It's a preposterous idea no matter how clever and innocuous the language used makes it seem.

The people at the top of government, like anyone else, deserve privacy and confidentiality. What you are proposing is a spy operation of sorts on the Presidency.

It's an idea that will never fly, no matter who happens to be President. It is a proposal that every presidential candidate would either sneer or laugh at, depending on whether they believed it was a serious proposal or not. My guess is that most would look at it as a joke.

Posted by: theduke89 | June 26, 2007 10:52 AM

Why is the Post devoting a series to this scum?

Posted by: vtflyygirl | June 26, 2007 10:58 AM

So, violating the Hatch Act, the DoJ and Cheney "compromise" by noisily sealing the records after implicating a Democrat? Never mind it remains a breach of powers separation.

That's not a concession to moderation.

The tax cut will be looked back as the major economic flaw of the new century's policy aside from deregulating Enron. Cheney profits with the help of Ken Lay then passes a tax cut for the richest to recover the market interests he did effect?

As for NASA, there's several trillion missing that could of had more to do with Cheney having something to do with it.

What, did Gilligan Bush drink a memorial beer and let Skipper Cheney solve that issue?

So, retired Sen. Phil Gramm(now a lobbyist) says Cheney is a 'little government'' conservative. Give me some of what you're drinking, and don't talk about it over the phone or email because Cheney's watching.


So, we find out the most unfair tax cut in history was not enough for Cheney. Inform me how anyone stood up to him?

If tax cuts cause growth, there should be no taxes. The premise of one shows how the existence of any taxes whatsoever reduces possible unlimited growth. Oh, you say Cheney has subsidies he wants in place to prop his own portfolio?

Bush wanted compassionate tax to keep up campaign promises, says a stenographer of the man who's not a nation builder.

How many ways can you bend over backwards to try and spin anything AWOL's krewe has done as being compassionate?

Not only that, Greenspan was with Cheney more than admitted, and most of the media finance mouthpieces were consultants as well. Do tell, perhaps they share Halliburton stock...

We find out Bush the chickenhawk is afraid to stand up to the man who chose himself to be Vice Preznit. In other news, leopards don't change their spots. Bush filed standing up to Cheney right next to his Air Guard records, both will be scrubbed of any mention in the future...

Posted by: MrMurder | June 26, 2007 11:03 AM

My god, is there ANYTHING this maniac hasn't sullied with his touch? I guess he really IS the brains behind this administration.

Posted by: jjreding | June 26, 2007 11:16 AM

"... but Attorney General Alberto R. GONZALES; his top deputy, Paul J. McNulty; and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III threatened to resign if forced to hand over evidence they believed had been properly collected under a warrant."
-GONZO, threatening to resign on a point of PRINCIPLE? What a jokester. You should have been a comedian Gonzo!

-Although every American would do well to read this series, the sad fact is 90% of them will be unaware or barely aware of the Cheney revelations, while the same % will be mesmerized by every trivial detail about
Paris' release from prison, and about the guy who allegedly murdered his pregnant girlfriend (Scott & Laci Peterson redux).

-CheneyBushCo. have gotten away with murder for 6.5 years 'cause Americans prefer infotainment, sports, and porn diversions instead of critical evaluations of their leaders.

Yes, the press deserves some blame (it was the media which enabled the successful scurrilous swift-boating of Kerry, instead of exposing the real face of CheneyBushCo.)...but the public deserves even more blame for choosing willful ignorance over responsible edification.

The media just feeds the public pretty much what it wants: "junk food".
Irresponsible Americans are killing themselves and causing global havoc, due to their narcissistic over-indulgence in edible junk food, and in the media/mental equivalent of junk food.

Posted by: Bobjb2002 | June 26, 2007 11:19 AM

this series leaves me with only one question: what exactly is the "elected commander-in-chief" doing (all day long) he doesn't read, he doesn't watch the news and he most certainly doesn't do the deciding....so what is it that he actually does except sign his name to anything put in front of him...."lord love a duck" y'all this is "MACHIAVELLIAN'!!!!!!!

Posted by: dottierb | June 26, 2007 11:33 AM

Bush = PINO

Gore for '08!

Posted by: claire2 | June 26, 2007 11:33 AM

Maybe Bush is the decider ('specially w/the lackluster congressional showing) and cheney is the menu writer, but there is only one thing on the carte and the bill reads eat it or off the pasture with the rest of the American public.

I wonder who chose whom for the roles of pres vice pres. Somehow I think it was Dick that chose the puppet not George that chose the puppeteer.

This article points time and time again to the fact that Cheney's head is firmly embedded in the executive branch of the White House and not the Senate and to think otherwise would be to suffer from firmly embedded encephalanus.

This guy's office should be transparent not invisible. He only cares about the rich.

Posted by: glenglish | June 26, 2007 11:34 AM

Vtflygirl, I share your sentiment in describing Cheney but am jumping for joy the WaPost FINALLY got off of their dead behinds to do the job of reporting on the abuse of power many of us have been aware of for years now. Too long did the editorial staff publish the bland press releases of the administration as "hard news" rather than working for a living. Better to see the subversion of our system, however sickening, than have the process undermined by vermin in the dark spaces.

Posted by: clare_d_loon | June 26, 2007 11:47 AM

Take heart, we are only a battery away from freedom (no pun intended).

and remember, inr Cheney's view, the only difference between an "real" combatant with Geneva Convention protection and an "illegal" combatant is that one has a tailor and the other doesn't.

Posted by: grossman1 | June 26, 2007 11:52 AM

This series is phenominal. Perhaps the electronic media is merely waiting for the series to end but I am, once again, stunned that this isn't a major continuing story. How do Americans allow this to happen much less continue? I have forwarded it to my federal representatives...although they are on my side...and all of my out of town colleagues. Wonderfully written and researched. Thank you for making up for the Post's past listlessness on this administration.

Posted by: cicero2 | June 26, 2007 11:54 AM

We Americans will find out which US Senators are patriotic and which are turncoats willing to sell out our country and surrender to illegal aliens and the multinational corporations that employ them.

S.1348-S.1639 bills are nothing less than Corporate Welfare and AMNESTY.

Posted by: tucanofulano | June 26, 2007 11:57 AM

The Constitutional corrective for this overreaching by the Executive Branch is a Congress that reasserts itself. If this Congress can't do this, then the '08 Congress had better step up to the plate, or our Constitutionally limited government model is kaput.

Posted by: crozetproject | June 26, 2007 11:58 AM

We need to protest but I do not know how to organize it!! IMPEACH NOW!!!

Posted by: swtexas | June 26, 2007 12:01 PM

We need to protest but I do not know how to organize it!! IMPEACH NOW!!!

Posted by: swtexas | June 26, 2007 12:01 PM

"When do the American people actually get to vote for a President, not his VP?"

What makes you think there will be a next election?

We have an ALL volunteer military that RABIDLY supports the Chump in Charge.

A HIGHEST court in the land which gave away the last election.

An ABSOLUTE minority of people who give a c#ap at all.

Game Over

Posted by: RetCombatVet | June 26, 2007 12:06 PM

We either have a very weak president or a president who agrees with all the actions of his vice president. Not acceptable choices to me.

Posted by: maryjazayeri | June 26, 2007 12:11 PM

Bush and Cheney, The puppet and the puppeteer!

Posted by: shadyman | June 26, 2007 12:14 PM

Why in the name of honest science is this article coded to show up in my WaPo Science RSS blog? Is this a nefarious scheme to imbue your science audience with the Post's unique MSM brand of politics?

Posted by: Youngmac | June 26, 2007 12:22 PM

Granted that Cheney's a megalomaniac. But I did get a good laugh to read that he gets advice from Larry Kudlow. What a howler! Kudlow -- CNBC's candied fop who actually thinks Reagan is Jesus (actually better than Jesus but shhhh). At least Cheney never has to pay for a shoeshine since Kudlow drops by for a regular boot-licking. Some kitchen cabinet.

Posted by: CallMeLiberal | June 26, 2007 12:29 PM

The review of Cheney's management of his... er, this Administration's... tax policy wouldn't be complete without mentioning this says-it-all comment, made in 2002 when O'Neill was warning that growing budget deficits threatened the economy: "Reagan proved deficits don't matter," Cheney said. "We won the midterms. This is our due."

There you have it. So strong is this man's sense of entitlement that he can actually say deficits don't matter. Yeah, he's clever, and detail-oriented... and delusional.

Posted by: BlueHue | June 26, 2007 12:30 PM

Response to message theduke89 | June 26, 2007 10:52 AM

Theduke - I appreciate comments.

1. As I wrote in saaackkk | June 26, 2007 10:35 AM, all executives are presently subjected to rules by which they must note whom they meet. There is nothing new to it. Think about it, this is how the Washington Post was legally able to gather the information presented: all this information is already legally in the public domain.

2. What I suggest is to link up available information and offer it to the President as a new "governance dashboard":

* The point is not to gather more information
* Nor is it to disclose information to external panels for 'spy operations'

No - the point is for the president to have some mechanism to assess the healthiness of the networks in support of his/her decision making.

The truth is that it is very lonely at the top. After some point, and especially at times of high opposition, the decision maker is likely to live within a very restricted universe of opinions. In such situations the decision maker (the president) may value to have a heady impartial process (tool) assessing how healthy the network around him/her is.

How would s/he know now?? Calling a review during presidency would be an unheard of process that would leak, and stir immense waves of comments. Instead, the president needs an ongoing low-key process allowing him or her assess network and decision making healthiness, and course-correct.

The engine for change, is not a "spying" perspective. But the perspective that when dealing with complex human issues, knowledge has an inducing capability for solutions.

Take the current Bush/Cheney dynamic. We can of course only surmise the nature of their inner dynamic. But, as has been the case so often in history, we may infer that Bush has become dependent on Cheney - his "eminence grise". Totally hypothetically, as his popularity plummets Bush may be caught in a psychological paralysis: he may realize and seek an escape from his decision dependency, and wish to open up towards other higher powered advisers. But how could he positively even discuss the issue to Cheney. Even at the center of power, you have primal psychology - which is why the primitive concept of "face saving" is present in difficult negotiations, even at the level of nations. The issue for Bush would not be to dismiss Cheney (recall that B. is dependent on C.), but to constructively mitigate Cheney's control. How could Bush even speak of it? What specifically would he request? What would be the "measures" that would sustain change of practice ??

These are very subtle issues. Without an objective tool measuring impact of Cheney onto the system, a besieged decision maker like Bush may end up caught in a deadly paralysis, and not able to change the decision making apparatus that he has become to depend so much upon. Of course this is all speculative. As well, the issue is not Bush, Cheney, Clinton or any specific decision maker.

What we are talking about here are universal issues mingling psychology at the top, cognitive issues of the decision maker and his capability to depend on effective networks, organizational methods to manage networks of people, and the institutional/constitutional frameworks that formalize power relations in our democratic institutions.

All these things are related, as we enlarge our perspective from the mind of the president, to his/her close network, to his/her extended administration, to the legal framework of the constitution.


saaackkk@yahoo.com


Posted by: saaackkk | June 26, 2007 12:35 PM

Many posters seem to focus on Cheney as if he is some sort of abberation when it comes to Republicants. He is the quintessential Republicant and is revered and highly respected by other Republicants.

The Republicants had control of the House of Representatives from 1994 to 2007 and the Senate for just as long with a short break in between.

In 2000, the majority of the American people got it right-- they voted for Al Gore, but the majority of the supreme court, the Fascist Five, Republicants all, voted for Bush, an apostasy that still has not been righted by the American people. Take a close look at the cozy relationship between Goombah Scalia and Cheney and the coup that put a Yale, male cheerleader into the presidency as a front man comes into starker view.

The Republicants had the House and Senate and the court that mattered which thwarted the will of the majority of the people, and through it all the Republicants hung together as they hung our country out to dry.

And now, six years after the coup the WaPo does a story on Cheney painting him as the Dark Lord of the Republicant Camorra strangling democracy in America and people just now express their outrage at just one of the made members of the Republicant Camorra.

The trouble is you could go into the Heart of Darkness that is the Republicant Party, if you dare, and find another thousand just like Cheney. In fact, his number is legion.

Many other Americans who took the time and trouble to look have known about Cheney and the Republicants for a long time.

But now, though my anger at the Republicants has not dissipated, I turn toward the Democrats in the House when our Nation is at its maximum peril and ask, no, DEMAND that they take action. That is what the 2006 election was all about!

And yet, these spineless, over-officious pansies sit on their hands and do nothing.

For just his failure to follow the President's executive order concerning handling classified documents Articles of Impeachment should be voted and sent to the Senate.

If the current Democrats leaders in the House can't be bothered or can't find the time to protect and defend the Constitution in such perilous times they should be booted from power.

Posted by: jmcauli1 | June 26, 2007 12:36 PM

these articles belong in the national enquirer

remember watergate and how you blew a corrupt administration

where have you people gone ?

Posted by: mmdd555555 | June 26, 2007 12:42 PM

It never ceases to amaze me, faced with the facts, so many will try to twist the truth or simply choose not to believe it at all, if it's not directed from their "side". They are the types who view the world myopically in black and white. They are the types who will believe anything they are told, as long as it's from "their side". If you don't believe this, just ask Rupert and the Conservative talking heads. It's sad that these individuals will believe any lie, even when it's proven that it's a lie. This is the reason Cheney/Bush and Co. got their first and regrettably, second term. It amazes me how many gullible people there are out there who are so willing to continue on the Dark Side". The outright deceptions, lies and dirty dealing this administration has gotten away with astounds me. God Save the United States. I guess he's the only one who can.

Posted by: thebram | June 26, 2007 12:46 PM

Notice that on all the broadcast evening news telecasts, not one led with the Cheney story, with the VP stating he's not part of the executive branch; if this constitutional crisis had happened during the Clinton era, it would have been the lead story on ABC, guaranteed.

Posted by: spencer adams | June 26, 2007 12:47 PM

Ok, so elected officials work in ways to give themselves absolute power for self interest. Then WE THE PEOPLE should do the same. Impeachement or Revolution NOW!

Posted by: bbjets | June 26, 2007 12:51 PM

It's refreshing but not surprising to know of the VP's well thought-out (in my opinion) economic activism and intervention. When left to his own devices, W apparently needs lots of help.

Posted by: filoporquequilo | June 26, 2007 12:54 PM

OMG! I'm a Republican and this sickens the hell out of me. Who in the HELL gave Cheney the right to demand someones resignation?

I am so saddened by the fact that we gave this team a second term. So much damage has been done. I only hope we can recover.

I used to gloat how Clinton lied about receiving a BJ...I NEVER wanted him impeached because of the BJ, but because he lied....OK, so he was impeached and he survived.

What our current Administration is doing and has done is much more deserving of impeachment. It is just plain sick how much shadowy deals go on and how hands-off this President seems to be.

I wish there were more independents, because I seriously dislike Democrats, but I now seriously dislike Republicans as well.

As Cartman would say on South Park: "Screw You Guys....I'm Going Home."

Posted by: thebloddletting | June 26, 2007 12:55 PM

Looks like "We, the people" got lost in the shuffle among the wants of the industrialist members of old boys clubs like CFR, Tri-Lats, the Bilderbergers, etc.

With all of Cheney's self-assumed "financial genius," just a couple of questions: 1) Who is gonna bail us out of our deep mortgage to China? 2) What will happen to the U.S. economy when there's no middle-class? Will the rich consumer enough to support it?

Posted by: Brini13 | June 26, 2007 12:55 PM

Wapo.... are you editing the comments now? Shame if you are.....

Posted by: bbjets | June 26, 2007 12:57 PM

my opinion: Cheney is the biggest terrorist on the planet. He certainly scares me to death with his relentless pursuit of power and total disregard for the laws of this nation and the public he serves--oh sorry about that I forgot for a second he serves no one but himself and halliburton.... I consider his actions treasonous as they have been counterproductive to the interests of this nation and against the public good. The only good thing I can say is that he has managed to stay at the top of my die-in-pain list for 7 years straight and that is quite a feat with all the other things going on in the world.....

Posted by: prejeanm1 | June 26, 2007 12:58 PM

The Free Lunch:It seems that some companies in the USA receive, tax cuts, subsidies, and no bid or inflated contracts. I would call that a whopper free lunch. But there will be no free lunch for our children and grandchildren that have to pay the whopper national debt which may be close to 10 trillion dollars by the time Bush leaves office. The Bush misadministration has increased the national debt by almost 50 per cent as of today.Economic espionage agents could not have done a better job of crippling America in the future. Thanks Dick. Thanks George. Thanks goose stepping, lockstepping, rubber stamping Republicans in the House and Senate

Posted by: ghostcommander | June 26, 2007 01:03 PM

While WaPo's Bob Woodward was busy shredding his own credibility while churning out 2 sycophantic tomes containing quasi-inside looks at the machinations of the Bush WH (minus most of the embarrassing stuff Cheney wanted hidden), other MSM media sources were busy providing a platform for the lying, libelous swift boating of John Kerry, thus enabling BushCo's 2nd illegitimate election win.
Thank you 4th Estate!

-If only more of the public had looked just a little deeper, they wouldn't have allowed themselves to be so easily conned by BushCo and by the MSM.

Posted by: Bobjb2002 | June 26, 2007 01:14 PM

This just goes to show who was the sith master and who was the apprentice.

Posted by: dgeise | June 26, 2007 01:15 PM

Instead of impeaching either Bush or Cheney, can we impeach Addington, Cheney's Machiavelli? That way we seriously weaken both the prez and the veep. Good idea?

Posted by: slecsta | June 26, 2007 01:23 PM

Instead of impeaching either Bush or Cheney, can we impeach Addington, Cheney's Machiavelli? That way we seriously weaken both the prez and the veep. Good idea?

Posted by: slecsta | June 26, 2007 01:23 PM

Does this mean Tony Blair WASN'T "Bush's Poodle" afterall, but was "Cheney's Chihuahua" instead?
It seems Cheney and Paris Hilton have similar tastes in pets.
What did poor "Paree" do without her lapdog in the clink? Cheney's in the doghouse now, but what will he do with himself when HE'S a dog in the big house?

Posted by: Bobjb2002 | June 26, 2007 01:33 PM

HOW COULD THIS REPORTER BREATH AND WRITE THIS LOPSIDED ARTICLE BEING BURIED SO FAR UP CHENEYS ASS?I

Posted by: rnvain | June 26, 2007 01:35 PM

Bush's problem is that he has never been allowed to grow up, and liked it that way! Responsibility is something that gave him a stomache ache! He has been our president for over six years, when has ANYONE ever see him take responsibility for anything? He has never been wrong, never has he said he was sorry for anything, and arrogantly said ON CAMERA that he could not think of even ONE mistake he ever made except he should not have made the "Get Osama binLaden dead or alive" remark!! NO wonder Cheney had to take over for him. Our president is basically a spoiled, lazy brat, even at age 60.

I did not vote for bush-cheney, but now I am stuck with them, as all Americans are. I still am not certain whether Cheney was forced into the position of being a shadow president, or if this is WHAT HE HAD PLANNED FOR HIMSELF WHEN HE CHOSE HIMSELF AS BUSH'S RUNNING MATE? Was it his exhalted opinion of himself, megolamania, the super-egomaniac, or his naracissism, or his lust for power that drove him to this madness? Yes, I said madness, because I truly believe he has gone mad. I am certain he truly understood that bush was incompetent. Did he become what he is because he wanted to save bush or steal the presidency from him??? I wonder.

This article is stunning, frightening, and long-overdue. Thank you for bringing it to us, and the world. What we have long suspected, is true.

Posted by: cashmere1 | June 26, 2007 01:52 PM

Fred Hiatt and Len Downie must be in melt-down. Afterall, this a real piece of journalism critical towards the administration. I thought such things were frowned on over at WaPo. Plus, the Free Scooter pieces have trickled down to a precious few. Poor Len. Poor Fred.

Posted by: mimi424 | June 26, 2007 01:54 PM

Cheney is both a draft dodger and a war profiteer. He combines arrogance with incompetence. The problem is that the democrats are not much better. We deserve something better than Bush, Clinton,
followed by Bush, Clinton. I'm afraid for our future.

Posted by: captdenelson | June 26, 2007 01:57 PM

(to repeat)

Technically the issue that precipitated this series, Cheney refusing to be bound by some rules, is relatively minor, he's simply jerking everybody around just for the heck of it, imho.

The central point here is that Cheney is an anomaly* of historic proportions. What is not said is that he is the anomaly* of historic proportions only because GWB is so hopelessly and desperately above his head as president. Somebody had to fill his shoes. Cheney was simply there, although apparently willing very much.

Also to keep things in proper perspective it is important to realize that contrary to some ramblings out there Cheney is not removable, not by a long shot.

To understand that realize that Rumsfeld was dismissed not because GWB found him lacking but because his generals issued the ultimatum, if he stays we won't fight your war much longer. So Bush had no choice. Same with Miers, she had to go because people whose votes got him elected issued an ultimatum too, either she goes and Alito gets nominated or your party can forget any future votes.

Gonzales, a far more sorry disgrace than Rumsfeld ever was, got to stay because nobody had any leverage to exercise with Bush in his case. (parenthetically GOP position in Gonzo affair is particularly disgusting, they are happy to see him losing any chances for SC nomination, but are entirely unconcerned about the damage being done to the DoJ and generally the administration of justice in this country)

Cheney has always been in a far stronger position that Gonzales, not only he has the full US military but also the entire US internal security apparatus fully behind him. They count on him for their budgets, for their overseas adventures (you think it was GWB who sent 3 aircraft carriers to the Gulf?), for their extensive legislative agendas, for their new much expanded police powers, warrantless searches, domestic spying, prisons in 3rd world countries, enhanced interrogation techniques, endless detentions, optional habeas corpus, etc. And legal doctrines to support all that.

He's indispensable to them, the only way he can be removed is by natural causes, so my advice to people who want him gone is do nothing, the nature will take its course, he simply ain't looking too healthy these days, for those who prefer him staying, get him to slow down a bit.

-----
* a sinister anomaly to be more precise

Posted by: jgiergiel | June 26, 2007 02:10 PM

DICK Cheney, HENRY KISSINGER, AND ALAN GREENSPAN....three people who would bore me to death. Their female equivalents.... Mary Matalin, Harriet Myers, and Lynne Cheney. They just got lucky I guess! I often wondered how they ever found spouses who could put up with them...except that Lynne Cheney and DICK Cheney are perfectly suited for each other. They must have GREAT laughs when they are together! Thinking just a little further on this, I can even picture cheney with mary matalin or harriet myers! Amazing! Just lightening up here folks after the anxiety of reading this article!!

Posted by: cashmere1 | June 26, 2007 02:20 PM

It has been painful to read these article's regarding Vice Pres Cheney. It is also very important and fundamental in learning how a dictator works. In college I took Russian History and was amazed at how Stalin stacked the deck in achieving all his aims. (I was mostly amazed he was allowed to. I fully believed that behavior could never happen in America!) He infiltrated EVERY form of government and the results culminated in "TEAR DOWN THIS WALL!"
I'll have to reprint every article and save them for my children. They deserve to understand the strategy.
What I do not understand is why? He has absolutely ruined this country in the name of the rich and powerful. He is already both! What on earth does he get out of it? His name in lights AFTER he dies or what? I do not understand because in order to understand I would have to be like him. I am so fundamnetally different it's pathetic and is exactly why he is where he is and I am not. Who could say why anyone would want to be where he is, most likly in hell.

Posted by: hayes2 | June 26, 2007 02:37 PM

This a good series, yet to so sad to see how weak Pres. Bush really is. Cheney will not be good for Bush's legacy.

Just like Enron, we know for sure now, who's the smartest guy in the room. I feel betrayed. I've never missed voting since eligible in 1964. America was never meant to be run this way. In many way, too, I feel mainstream media has let us down, by not being a better watch dog, sooner.

Posted by: GailS8 | June 26, 2007 02:51 PM

People have to get their information from more than the MSM. AirAmerica Radio, since it first went on the air 3 years ago, has been giving its listeners that "more." Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert on Comedy Central have also been bringing on guests who have more information to share, usually in their current book. Comedy shows are beyond the reach of the White House, so press access cannot be denied if they tell too much.

Question of the day: where exactly is the "undisclosed location" that Cheney and his shadow government have been meeting since the beginning ? We were told by the MSM that staff and others were on a three month rotation. What kinds of activities have been going on there ? And, where is there??

As for Pelosi's statement about taking "impeachment off the table," I think it may have been a secret agreement with the woman who wants so much to be the first woman president. If there was an impeachment, and both Bush and Cheney were removed, Pelosi would become the president and that wouldn't sit well with Mme X, now would it?

Posted by: wide-eyed11 | June 26, 2007 02:54 PM

As in the Pledge of Allegance, the founding fathers created a republic not a democracy. Theoretically, in a republic, the voice of the minority is not to be trampled by the majority. It would appear that the minority, the Bush Administration, has trampled the majority, those who are not Bush supporters, with the use of constant fear tactics.

Where was the "Moral Majority" when President Carter, a God-loving man whose actions are clearly Christian-like, was in office? Can anyone imagine Bush and Cheney helping the poor and building low-cost housing when they leave office? Or maybe volunteering for one of those faith-based organizations? I think not!

For the negative comments some would like to make about past-Presidents like Clinton and Carter, none can claim that they tried to change the Office and its Constitutional powers. This observance comes from one who believes that LBJ and Nixon were SOBs; and who voted for candidates like Ford, Carter, Bush 41, Clinton, and Gore. No party allegiance here. When did it become unpopular to vote for a candidate that is intelligent? Charisma is so superficial ... but, sadly, maybe that describes so much of our society today.

Living in Texas, I got a sick feeling when I learned that Bush *won* the election in 2000. I knew what an idiot he was and was puzzled that the American electorate didn't see his incompetence. However, I wasn't surprised when it was announced that the man who managed his campaign would be named his running mate. It was so obvious that GWB didn't have the brains to do the job and needed someone who would cover his shortcomings. Cheney is the personification of pure evil and greed. Too bad no one has the balls to stand up to him.

Posted by: tlfoster2 | June 26, 2007 02:55 PM

Tax receipts are at all-time historic highs. Isn't it inarguable the tax cuts were a good thing? Deficits are caused by the Gov't spending too much money. Reading through the last three days comments I'm stunned at the 'projection' displayed by commenters.

Posted by: bslocumb | June 26, 2007 03:00 PM

Although most of this information was known, I still find it troubling that Cheney and Bush have knowingly pushed through deep tax cuts despite the warnings and financial experts advice. In doing so it comes at great risk to the financial health of the nation.

Granted the tax cuts did jump start the economy, however by the same token, the fact remains jobs are scarce and people are hurting economically. Some work 3 and 4 jobs just to make ends meet. From all reports the trickle-down theory is pretty much a myth.

Inasmuch as Cheney has a grasp on the inner-workings of Washington and the intelligence to make things happen somewhere along the line he forgot about the people. Instead power is consolidating in the hands of corporations. Thus the ground becomes fertile for corruption. As a result the consequences affect the nation as a whole. But it is the people who end up suffering.

Cheney without doubt is highly intelligent, but lacks wisdom in regards to the importance of balance. His ideology seems to override making sensible policies for the entire country. Catering only to business and the most wealthy his policies do not address the needs of the people and the issues that challenge the nation's future.

While Cheney may be steering the ship, the onus is on Bush to correct this. Iam not holding my breath.

Posted by: serena1313 | June 26, 2007 03:07 PM

More post-Bush revisionism. Actually it's been going on with books & articles published throughout the entire second term. With this series & Seymour Hirsch's piece in the New Yorker on Rumsfeld's role in Abu Graib, the truth is finally coming out. The orders to torture came directly from the top (Rumsfeld, Cheney). And war profiteer-in-chief Cheney doubly rewarded the elite investors in companies such as Halliburton with the capital gains tax cut. Iraq's misery, American soldiers now dead & maimed = Cheney & company's gain.

Posted by: Zacariah | June 26, 2007 03:19 PM

Heaven forbid that the Cheney oil buddies and Bush fat cat friends should have to pay any taxes to support Bush's foolish wars. That is what future generations are for! Run up the national debt and let them pay!

Posted by: wj_phillips | June 26, 2007 03:31 PM

I agree it is very difficult to Impeach....
I agree that less than 2 years are left for the next election....

BUT IT IS VERY VERY IMPORTANT TO IMPEACH CHENEY....AND PUNISH HIM....

1. It would create a deterrence for future wrong doers (the concept of Judicial System)

2. It would send message to the world and salvage the falling reputation of US

Posted by: Maverick2 | June 26, 2007 03:33 PM

To the tiny handful of wingnuts who still think what Cheney is doing is just peachy, this is one truth that is simply irrefutable. As Thomas Paine put it, "It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry."

Cheney's policy of unwarranted secrecy for everything under the sun is completely antithetical to the principles of a transparent government. He is, to put it bluntly, the power-mad, war-mongering sociopath that the Founding Fathers warned us about.

Posted by: myzenthing | June 26, 2007 03:40 PM

Ding, dong the wicked witch, the wicked witch is dead.

Posted by: fwonschik | June 26, 2007 03:40 PM

i think cheney is the father of his grandchild.

Posted by: amazing1 | June 26, 2007 03:58 PM

Ahhh! Now I understand! Dick Cheny is George Bush's own Martin Bormann...

Posted by: ruinedbruin | June 26, 2007 04:10 PM

Reading about the bushies and their dirty tricks and arrogance makes me long for the good ole innocent days of the other Tricky Dick and his minions. I can't wait till these guys get the boot and they get investigated so that we can find out what they were really up to. Oh wait, nevermind...they'll probably shred all the evidence like Dick's buddies at Enron.

Posted by: cmsatown | June 26, 2007 04:29 PM

I love the irony here. The same week that Paris Hilton is released from prison for a simple violation of probation, our Vice President continues to "walk the streets" as a blatant and cocky criminal himself who truly believes that he is exempt from the law. So much for the constituation! LOL

Bottom Line: Cheney is an unprosecuted war criminal. PERIOD! Awwww! to be a republican these days is to also be an accessory and supporter of unlawful behavior. To be ignorant and blind to the truth must be very anxiety-reducing these days. LOL

Posted by: rsmuckler | June 26, 2007 04:42 PM

Cheney does not think he is the 4th branch of government. He thinks he is the entire federal government. He thinks his office of the vice presidency is running the entire show, the real 3 branches be damned.

What are the cabinet officials for if Cheney has all the domestic and foreign porfolios on his desk? What are their roles if Cheney is doing all the heavy lifting. Are they just spokesmodels, much as bush is?

Posted by: ecpclark | June 26, 2007 04:53 PM

I'm sick of our Government run by Cheney and Bush. I used to be proud of country but after hearing the things they have done I think they ought to be impeached. I am no longer proud. Are they above our laws? Our representatives to do what's right, impeach now.

Posted by: jcollier | June 26, 2007 05:02 PM

I'm sick of our Government run by Cheney and Bush. I used to be proud of country but after hearing the things they have done I think they ought to be impeached. I am no longer proud. Are they above our laws? Our representatives need to do what's right, impeach now.

Posted by: jcollier | June 26, 2007 05:05 PM

I really believe people are afraid of Cheney, and therefore refuse to hold him accountable or challenge him on any issue. With all the spying that's gone on, doesn't any one ever wonder who he has the goods on? Cheney has always run the show from behind the scenes and these articles certainly demonstrate that. Bush is little more than a puppet without a conscious who was perfectly willing to capitulate his responsibilities to the more powerful Cheney. It was always pretty obvious that Bush wasn't qualified for the job, yet look how many people voted for him. The powerful Republicans that put him up for the job had to know, but they also knew Uncle Dick would be behind him to call the shots, especially if the going got rough. It's a hell of a way to run a country. What's happened to this country?

Posted by: ggwalt123 | June 26, 2007 05:10 PM

You know, I hate to say that these series of articles makes Dick Cheney look like a decisive, thoughtful Vice President instead of the lying, cheating, warmongering prince of darkness that he is. The mainstream media cowers yet again. You guys are gutless, really. It's no wonder the American public is apathetic. The freakin' journalists in this country don't challenge, question or provide checks and balances on this administration. And know what? Because of this they have made a mockery of the Constitution. Bush might be stupid, but Cheney is evil. They both should be impeached immediately. They do not deserve to serve out their terms.

Posted by: ddellapiana | June 26, 2007 05:23 PM

So, now we know who to blame for the mountain of red ink our gov't. is running up.

Posted by: odin966 | June 26, 2007 05:34 PM


This portion of this study reads very well... meaning that our Vice President is an active, smart, strong leader doing a magnificent job. Bravo Cheney!
Also, just exactly like every other effective politician since, say, the the Greeks and Romans, he pushes for his convictions. So, what's all this "controversy" about? Sounds to me like a lot of turf infighting and jealousy which is really nothing new, is it? I say..."Go, Cheney!" We're lucky to have him where he is.
...Charlie Griffith,
Middletown, Maryland.

Posted by: charlieg | June 26, 2007 06:24 PM

The blogger from Middletown, Maryland has head so far up his @@@ all he can see is Cheney and must smell a little Cheney.

Impeach the SOB Now !!!!!

Posted by: joxjk37 | June 26, 2007 06:48 PM

The blogger from Middletown, Maryland has head so far up his @@@ all he can see is Cheney and must smell a little Cheney.

Impeach the SOB Now !!!!!

Posted by: joxjk37 | June 26, 2007 06:49 PM

please, i've already written my senators, can we AT THE VERY LEAST, enact a law, that these war criminals in future years, not be allowed on US soil, cause if i have to watch them on the news playing golf at pebble beach or torrey pines with say...oj, it's going to make me really sick.

Posted by: micr0minee | June 26, 2007 07:03 PM

Wow. This is amazing. Although the majority of people see Dick Cheney as evil, as do I, there are still some on here that are supporting him, and starting partisan attacks against Hillary. Unbelievable. The Republicans have done so much damage to this country, and it is going to take alot to clean up this mess they have created. As far as the electorate is concerned, the only way Republicans can win the White House, or make any gains in Congress, is if hell freezes over. As one of the MAJORITY of these electorates who feel the same, I will take Hillary, or any other Democrat, over any Republican. Hell, I'll take Bozo the Clown over any Republican.

Posted by: mikebr007 | June 26, 2007 07:03 PM

please, i've already written my senators, can we AT THE VERY LEAST, enact a law, that these war criminals in future years, not be allowed on US soil, cause if i have to watch them on the news playing golf at pebble beach or torrey pines with say...oj, it's going to make me really sick. i might enjoy watching them sweat their golf balls off in the 130 degree heat of the middle east, but at least theyll be close to all their (our) money, and the halliburton hq.

Posted by: micr0minee | June 26, 2007 07:06 PM

OK, let's try this post again.

Dick Cheney is evil. Republicans are morally and ethically corrupt. When times get tough, and all of the bad things that they have done is coming out, attack the liberal media and the Democrats is their mantra. As one of the 70% of Americans who are disgusted with this administration and the Republican Party, I am planning on voting for Hillary, or any other Democrat, that gets the nomimation, OVER ANY REPUBLICAN. Heck, I would vote for Bozo the Clown OVER ANY REPUBLICAN.

Posted by: mikebr007 | June 26, 2007 07:08 PM

Cheney et al have been planning for all of this for decades. George W. had the right name, intellecual disinterest/limitations, was maleable, and easily manipulated. My question is who do we impeach, the puppet or those who have been pulling the strings. To borrow from another set of questions, " If not now, when?"

Posted by: gtg47 | June 26, 2007 07:28 PM

Barton Gellman and Jo Becker, and of course the Washington Post, have brought more respect to the 4th estate than any major American newspaper since this illegal war on Iraq began. I have studied Cheney and his behind the scenes machievellian behaviours for years, reading everything I can put my hands on to understand his role and impact on the nation. When I started reading the first installment, I was thrilled beyond belief that this history and Cheney's most extraordinarily powerful role in determining the history of our country was finally being exposed in such a throughgoing way, and on top of that, was so well written. Thank you very much for putting so much energy and resources into this series, as well as the mainstream weight the Post brings to the debate about the fate of our republic. Please continue to bring us the truth of what goes on behind the scenes in Washington!

Posted by: aweills | June 26, 2007 07:32 PM

I hope the MSM will for once do its duty leading up to the '08 election, and expose those in Congress who enabled CheneyBushCo's abuses.

In part 2 of Angler, it describes that the Supreme Court, even after being stacked by Bush, declared all of the following Cheney policies on detainees illegal:
-Bush's "extraordinary powers": ILLEGAL
-Trial of detainees by Military tribunals:"
-Suspending Geneva C. protections : "
-Torture : "

Voters must sear it into their memories that a compliant Congress, by passing the Military Commissions Act, reversed the Court's reasonable, even handed decision, and restored Cheney's illegal Military Commissions, his claimed right to torture, and other extraordinary powers, okayed secret prisons, and this piece of totalitarianism:
"Without repealing the War Crimes Act, which imposes criminal penalties for grave breaches of Geneva's humane-treatment standards, Congress said the president, not the Supreme Court, has final authority to decide what the standards mean -- and whether they even apply" !!!

With this Act, Congress gives assent to
Presidential dictatorship and gives permission for grave human rights abuses and flaunting of the Constitution by the White(?) House. Cheney enablers must go.

Each Congressman complicit in voting for this Act should have his name and face prominently displayed, mug shot like, as a lawbreaker like Cheney, a traitor to his or her country and to humanity, who deserves to be thrown out of office, and perhaps thrown into jail.

No glossing over of this issue will be acceptable.



Posted by: Bobjb2002 | June 26, 2007 07:36 PM

What I don't understand is that we the american people had the opportunity to vote them out of office and we didn't. I for one never voted for them and I'm proud of my vote because I didn't contribute to put these two crooks in office. The operations of this vp can only be described as machiavellian.Both of them deserve to be impeached but it will not happened. It really makes me very angry to see the manipulation of the system by this one man who was surrounded by enablers.Politics is a dirty game.Many things that happened were clear to me and I'm only an average informed person. It was a matter of using common sense.A clear example was the invasion of Iraq that didn't attack us.No mentioned of the Saudis and still the US is very good friends with them.What do you expect from a CEO of Halliburton. All he cares about is profit and the bottom line. That wasn't going to change. Human nature tells us he will make the rich richer.It is sad state of affairs to see what we have come down to.This is not a good man.

Posted by: tquinones38 | June 26, 2007 07:42 PM

It is obvious the real man in this administration has always been Mr. Dick.
Bush is so incompetent that Dick knew exactly what he was going to get for being the vice president: POWER. Bush still and will only remember his words when he leaves the office: "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!!!!"

Posted by: TechGURU | June 26, 2007 08:17 PM

So the myths are that Bush chose Cheney as his VP or that he allowed Cheney to choose himself for that role. I believe that
Cheney and a handful of oligarchs chose Bush to be their willing accomplice in a coup staged through the Office of the Vice President.

. . . but that's just me.

Posted by: smokinmike | June 26, 2007 08:47 PM

I fail to see how Americans can swallow the arrogance and mean-spirited demeanor of Cheney and his conspiritors. Any time we critize we are "damaging the morale" of the soldiers, we are fed fear-based phrases and dictums with not a ration of truth to them - just to keep us "compliant" and in line... I cannot wish him evil as that is no better than he has wished upon us as citizens - generations will pay for his self-serving agenda and his arrogance and mean-spirited actions. Bush is a puppet - dumb and yet crafty as well - sly like a fox? Mrs. Cheney is also like her Dick Cheney - they deserve each other. She is as mean-spirited and manipulative as is he.
Yale graduates with bush have affirmed that "what you see is what you get" - a president incapable of self-reflection and self-examination. Guess he needed the corruption of a Halliburton president to do his scheming and manipulation as he does not have the smarts to do it himself!
The next generation will pay. The middle east will never be the same nor feel the same about America - our founding fathers must be rolling in their graves at this hypocritical behaviour we see each day with this current government. Idiot President and his "horible human being" VP.

Posted by: davidreedyjr | June 26, 2007 08:51 PM

So Cheney is also responsible for our dismal fiscal policy, which gives even more money to the rich. Why am I not surprised? As we drown in a sea of deficit red, Cheney sneers at anyone who dares cross him. Of course the people interviewed for this article always ended up agreeing with Cheney; anyone who did not was stabbed in the back.

Posted by: gsross | June 26, 2007 09:20 PM

I knew Cheney was the president when he went with Bush to testify before the 9-11 Commission. At the time, I was outraged and amazed by the duo appearance, but it hardly seemed to make a ripple in the media . . .

Posted by: gsross | June 26, 2007 09:36 PM

Now that the Supremes are a wholly owned subsidary of the republican party, there is no hope to reign in this madness in the White House. The republicans have shown their loyalty is only to party, not to Country. Otherwise, why has this lawless President and lawless Vice not been impeached? Our only hope is the Molly Ivin's rotten dead chicken tied around the neck of the chicken-killing dog. With hope, the whole republican bunch will stink so badly they will never again be allowed in power in our government.

Posted by: jc4773 | June 26, 2007 10:44 PM

Well, I don't think anyone can say they're shocked to read the facts presented in this article, but what it is is a factual confirmation of what we've known all along. Cheney is the driving force behind this administration and in fact, I believe, the executive branch is really just a vehicle for a Cheney-represented agenda.

Without Cheney, Bush wouldn't have had the know-how or the gravitas to get done what's amounted to the fleecing of the American people for so long and to such a degree. Cheney's a master bureaucrat and has intimate, perfect knowledge of how to work the American government. I guess that demands some sort of respect on a level, until you realize it comes at your cost. But c'est la, I say. He won't be impeached, or imprisoned, etc. We just have to hope that whomever inherits the executive after Cheney Co. will not be such a talented bureaucrat, but a man just trying to do his time in public service as the Constitutional Congress intended.

Good luck, America.

Posted by: k_henryv | June 26, 2007 10:57 PM

What it amounts to is that bush is lazy, and is satisfied being just a figurehead..."The President", or, "The Decider", or "The Commander Guy". He simply does not enjoy thinking, and is perfectly willing to let Cheney do it for him. Bush calls himself the boss, but he really isn't the boss. He thumps himself on the chest and screams "I am the PRESIDENT!" The American people have been conned, big time, led by the GOP. If bush didn't want to make decisions as the president, he should have resigned. The American people did not vote for Cheney as president. He is there just in case bush should die or become incapacitated, or to cast a vote in the Senate in a tie.

Bush was not qualified to be president, nor was he even qualified to be governor of Texas. The Lt. Governor of Texas made all the decisions, had all the power. Bush did not have to think, even then. The GOP knew this, yet, needed a big name to win in 2000, and USED him!

Cheney told us in 2000 that he was a one-term vice-president. My guess is that he got caught up with POWER and decided to stay on. I wonder how much he has really kept secret, even from bush, and I wonder what bush thinks as he reads this excellent report.... IF he does read it!

We are stuck with bush-cheney because Congress is too lazy or frightened to impeach either of them. Our country is in big trouble. We need someone SMART to help us through this. We need to find a way to punish bush-cheney for the harm they have done to our country and our standing in the world. They have humiliated, and disgusted us.

Posted by: cashmere1 | June 27, 2007 12:47 AM

Once Congress redirects the Iraq war, the focus will be on Bush & Cheney on why we went to war in Iraq.

I don't think Bush & Cheney would want the nation to focus on this issue because it will point directly to Cheney. They would do anything to focus nation on something else.

I think you should look at each member of the House Judiciary Committee DEMS and GOP. Should they be reelected again if nothing is done. I think each memeber should state their views on this issue.

HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Democrats
John Conyers, Chairman, Michigan Howard L. Berman, California Rick Boucher, Virginia Jerrold Nadler, New York Robert C. Scott, Virginia Mel Watt, North Carolina Zoe Lofgren, California Sheila Jackson-Lee, Texas Maxine Waters, California Marty Meehan, Massachusetts Bill Delahunt, Massachusetts Robert Wexler, Florida Linda T. Sánchez, California Steve Cohen, Tennessee Hank Johnson, Georgia Luis Gutierrez, Illinois Brad Sherman, California Anthony D. Weiner, New York Adam B. Schiff, California Artur Davis, Alabama Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Florida Keith Ellison, Minnesota Tammy Baldwin, Wisconsin

GOP
Ranking Member
Lamar S. Smith, Texas Ranking Member, Jim Sensenbrenner, Wisconsin Howard Coble, North Carolina Elton Gallegly, California Bob Goodlatte, Virginia Steve Chabot, Ohio Dan Lungren, California Chris Cannon, Utah Ric Keller, Florida Darrell Issa, California Mike Pence, Indiana Randy Forbes, Virginia Steve King, Iowa Tom Feeney, Florida Trent Franks, Arizona Louie Gohmert, Texas Jim Jordan, Ohio

Posted by: anne_hi | June 27, 2007 01:18 AM

We now know who is most responsible for the crisis in military and veterans health care. 674 billion in budget cuts during a time of war. Yet our service members, veterans and disabled federal law enforcement personnel are left in the street. Remember the "presidential Commission on military and veteran health care". Where has the print media been on this? It would appear as though an expose of the Vice President is worth the column inches. Hoorah for public service.

Posted by: paul94611 | June 27, 2007 01:19 AM

As a moderate dem and a political buff since 1960 I am appalled at this administration. All the principals I learned in school which I thought made America different and great have been violated.I am no dove but this country is begining to crumble as did Rome.I now believe it will be several generations, if at all, before this country can again take its place as world leader.We are fortunate to still have freedom of the press, hail to the Post.

Posted by: retiredbud | June 27, 2007 09:32 AM

I heard co-author Gellman speak about the fascinating legal arguments for Cheney's stated position in our government. Gellman was non-committal but very impressed. Just reporting the facts. This third installment has a subtle but unmistakeable tone of "that Cheney is one smart guy." We don't have a form of government that is supposed to be run by "one" guy and smart does not qualifly as a constitutional modifier. We elect three entities: the house, the senate, the executive. Cheney certainly knows how to wield power, he is rather smug about it. However, nobody elected him to wield any power. He is the VP-a time honored holding room. Gellman may think working the system is cool, but the system is supposed to be open to debate, to be decided by ALL of those who are elected to decide. Cheney sort of stepped into what he perceived as the breach. Bad move. Illegal move. Piss everybody off move. Manipulation and triumph of the will were used by Julius Caesar, Savanarola, Napolean, Rasputin, Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Papa Doc, Kadafi, the old Ayatollah, and on and on right on up to Dick. Cheney needs to go home and relax permanently. No phones or email. Maybe take better care of his heart. He had a long, secret, self-satisfying run and now it is over. George should step down. He has been humiliated enough. Whatever is the matter with his brain that prevents him from thinking and speaking clearly ought to be looked at. The Republicans should sit this next election out. Regroup-learn how to think, maybe read a civics book about Democratic Republics or What the Founding Fathers Taught. If we decide to change the VP's
constitutional role maybe we could look at the Supreme Court's too. Perhaps a Chief Justice should come from the pool of experienced Associate Justices past and present, and not off the street.

Posted by: Gronamox | June 27, 2007 10:40 AM

I heard co-author Gellman speak about the fascinating legal arguments for Cheney's stated position in our government. Gellman was non-committal but very impressed. Just reporting the facts. This third installment has a subtle but unmistakeable tone of "that Cheney is one smart guy." We don't have a form of government that is supposed to be run by "one" guy and smart does not qualifly as a constitutional modifier. We elect three entities: the house, the senate, the executive. Cheney certainly knows how to wield power, he is rather smug about it. However, nobody elected him to wield any power. He is the VP-a time honored holding room. Gellman may think working the system is cool, but the system is supposed to be open to debate, to be decided by ALL of those who are elected to decide. Cheney sort of stepped into what he perceived as the breach. Bad move. Illegal move. Piss everybody off move. Manipulation and triumph of the will were used by Julius Caesar, Savanarola, Napolean, Rasputin, Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Papa Doc, Kadafi, the old Ayatollah, and on and on right on up to Dick. Cheney needs to go home and relax permanently. No phones or email. Maybe take better care of his heart. He had a long, secret, self-satisfying run and now it is over. George should step down. He has been humiliated enough. Whatever is the matter with his brain that prevents him from thinking and speaking clearly ought to be looked at. The Republicans should sit this next election out. Regroup-learn how to think, maybe read a civics book about Democratic Republics or What the Founding Fathers Taught. If we decide to change the VP's
constitutional role maybe we could look at the Supreme Court's too. Perhaps a Chief Justice should come from the pool of experienced Associate Justices past and present, and not off the street.

Posted by: Gronamox | June 27, 2007 10:40 AM

You Americans are really in it up to your necks.

Problem is, so is the rest of the world.

Do you remember we Canadians took care of the people stranded on planes on 9/11?

Your Administration is doing all it can to cause economic hardship to Canada, reneging on the NAFTA, asking us to present a passport as if we were terrorists (when all the 9/11 terrorists were already in the US). If you think lumber is too expensive to rebuild after Katrina, blame the lumber lobby that managed to shut out cheaper wood out of your country on false pretenses. If cuts so well with the conservatives who like to say Canadians are Communists but who don't even know where Canada is located.

Oh and don't forget Mrs. Clinton who repeats that protectionist manure because she knows it pleases the unions who usually support the Democrats. Unions... Teamsters... Jimmy Hoffa... bought or stolen elections...

I don't know if someone will have the courage of reforming your political system, which encourages that kind of corruption and blindness to consequences beyond the next mandate.

Yes, You Americans are really in it up to your necks.

Problem is, so is the rest of the world.

Oh BTW, rejoice, Paris is out of jail.

Posted by: aline_binette | June 27, 2007 11:38 AM

Lobbies, big corporations and special-interest groups have in fact been ruling the U.S. at least since the 60s.

Cheney is their conduit. He also is part of them and profits from the situation.

As long as there is a link between lobbies and campaign financing, this is what you'll get.

Posted by: aline_binette | June 27, 2007 12:19 PM

Re tax breaks: why would the Washington Post use the euphamism "top earners" when it clearly means "the very rich?"

Posted by: dan | June 27, 2007 05:47 PM

Thank you Becker and Gellman for this brave work. As chilling as it is to read, your research makes me have hope again. Thanks to the Post's Editors for publishing this.

Posted by: callahancreative | June 27, 2007 07:23 PM

Mrs. Graham would be proud of you. I cast my Pulitzer vote for WAPO. Shutdown the NYT, LAT and WSJ--the subscription boat has sailed.

Posted by: jvwomack | June 27, 2007 08:46 PM

Federal prison accommodations are too good for this man.

Posted by: westendproductions | June 28, 2007 07:46 AM

The response to the Post's excellent series on Vice President Dick Cheney are quite interesting in that they seem to reflect a lack of understanding of how our system of government actually works. Cheney, long before he became vice president, was interested in expanding the power of the Presidency. Previous presidents and their administrations have also been interested in expanding presidential power, dating back to our first president, George Washington. Cheney simply began his drive to expand presidential powers when he became vice president. The Post series clearly shows that Cheney carefully chose his fights, and selected those that primarily served the interests of corporate America, farmers and ranchers, national security, and the wealthy. He avoided the controversial issues driven by the religious right - such as stem cell research and abortion - but focused, instead on getting conservative judges named to the Supreme Court. He advanced his goals by aggressively challenging current laws, regulations and procedures. Whether he committed any "high crimes and misdemeanors" is questionable, even in light of subsequent court decisions against Bush administration policy decisions. Any competent Democrat elected to the White House would, I presume, follow a similarly aggressive course to enact more progressive policies for the nation. Whether this is done by the President, Vice President or both seems somewhat irrelevant since each administration has its own style of doing business. Calling for the impeachment of the president or the vice president just because you disagree with them, or don't like them - as the Republicans irresponsibly did during the Clinton administration - simply means we'll wind up impeaching every president from here on out. I don't agree with any of Cheney's policy directions, and the courts are beginning to reverse a number of them. But to impeach the vice president just because he knows how to wield power and influence is the height of folly. We do not elect wusses to head our executive branch, whether Republican or Democrat, and we shouldn't start now.

Posted by: schneiderdick | June 28, 2007 02:32 PM

I remember back during the 2000 election that Cheney was credited with bringing badly needed "gravitas" to the Bush/Cheney ticket. What this meant for a lot of people at the time was that he brought the experience of many years of very close service, in a variety of capacities, to the executive of the United States - going back to Nixon. It is so very unfortunate that what "gravitas" has translated into, in the end, is an obvious contempt for the American people (one can almost hear him using the famous H.L. Mencken term "booboisie" in reference to us little people) and an obvious antipathy toward the open and democratic principles (like checks and balances) that are supposed to set our form of government apart from the rest of the world. He has used and abused the trust of those who elected him and triangulated points of power - skillfully - to his own, one has to say obscure, ends. The question I would ask him, if he would deign to take a question from one of the booboisie, would be: how does increased Presidential power actually help us? What exactly did we lose when we sent Nixon packing? How does Bush's being able to do what he pleases when he pleases without any accountability actually help our nation? Because, so far, just the efforts to achieve this scenario has damaged us severely and perhaps beyond repair. God forbid you should succeed any more, Mr. Cheney.

Posted by: finley_58 | June 28, 2007 04:01 PM

I remember back during the 2000 election that Cheney was credited with bringing badly needed "gravitas" to the Bush/Cheney ticket. What this meant for a lot of people at the time was that he brought the experience of many years of very close service, in a variety of capacities, to the executive of the United States - going back to Nixon. It is so very unfortunate that what "gravitas" has translated into, in the end, is an obvious contempt for the American people (one can almost hear him using the famous H.L. Mencken term "booboisie" in reference to us little people) and an obvious antipathy toward the open and democratic principles (like checks and balances) that are supposed to set our form of government apart from the rest of the world. He has used and abused the trust of those who elected him and triangulated points of power - skillfully - to his own, one has to say obscure, ends. The question I would ask him, if he would deign to take a question from one of the booboisie, would be: how does increased Presidential power actually help us? What exactly did we lose when we sent Nixon packing? How does Bush's being able to do what he pleases when he pleases without any accountability actually help our nation? Because, so far, just the efforts to achieve this scenario has damaged us severely and perhaps beyond repair. God forbid you should succeed any more, Mr. Cheney.

Posted by: finley_58 | June 28, 2007 04:03 PM

PLEASE see Michael Moore's movie 'Sicko'. If after seeing it you can give ANY credibility to any candidate of either party, you must sit out the 2008 election.

Of course, the exception to this is Dennis Kucinich who has throughout this 6 year dark asterisk period of our history stood for POLICIES that will save this country from itself.

I have last week contributed $100 to the Kucinich campaign. I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK!

Posted by: rrstevens | July 1, 2007 08:26 AM

PLEASE see Michael Moore's movie 'Sicko'. If after seeing it you can give ANY credibility to any candidate of either party, you must sit out the 2008 election.

Of course, the exception to this is Dennis Kucinich who has throughout this 6 year dark asterisk period of our history stood for POLICIES that will save this country from itself.

I have last week contributed $100 to the Kucinich campaign. I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK!

Posted by: rrstevens | July 1, 2007 08:27 AM

Too Little, Too Late. Too bad this story wasn't written as it was happening. Shame on the Washington Post.

Posted by: GHunt1234 | July 1, 2007 04:00 PM

It become more and more clear why so many federal employees, particularly Defense Department employees have found themselves in the position of being accidental whistleblowers just for standing up and trying to ethically do their jobs! It also explains a lot of the thuggery done to these people to ruin their lives and careers. For more details of some whistleblowers experiences, see http://whistleblowersupport.blogstream.com


Posted by: rcvb | July 3, 2007 09:12 PM

the guy wants a fight at every turn, he wants an american revolution

Posted by: gatriotact | July 4, 2007 08:28 PM

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.



 
 

© 2007 The Washington Post Company