PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Dick "I am Untouchable" Cheney forced to preserve documents.


Chiefs_Mike_Topeka
09-21-2008, 08:12 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/20/cheney.lawsuit/index.html

Who will be suprised if they end up being destroyed or "lost" regardless?

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Vice President Dick Cheney must preserve a broad range of records from his time in office, a federal judge ordered Saturday, ruling in favor of a private watchdog group.


Dick Cheney and the Bush administration were sued to ensure that presidential records are not destroyed.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly found that the records are not excluded from preservation under Presidential Records Act, which gives the national archivist responsibility over the custody of and access to the records at the end of a president's final term.

The Bush administration had sought a narrow interpretation of the act to allow for fewer materials to be preserved by the National Archives.

"Defendants were only willing to agree to a preservation order that tracked their narrowed interpretation of the PRA's statutory language," Kollar-Kotelly said in her order. This position "heightens the Court's concern" that some records will not be preserved without an injunction.

Cheney chief of staff David Addington has told Congress that the vice president belongs to neither the executive nor legislative branch of government, AP reported. Instead, he said, the office is attached by the Constitution to Congress. The vice president presides over the Senate.


The lawsuit -- naming among its defendants Cheney, the Executive Office of President and the National Archives and Records Administration -- was filed by the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, commonly known as CREW.

In response to the ruling, Cheney spokesman James R. Hennigan said that "we will not have any comment on pending litigation," according to The Associated Press.

The judge's order is the most recent setback to the Bush administration's position on openness of executive branch records.

In December, a federal judge ruled in another CREW lawsuit that the White House cannot hide behind a shield of privilege over release of its visitor logs.

U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth concluded that the information was a public records request, subject to Freedom of Information Act disclosure of "agency records."

The White House had claimed exclusive control of the documents, subject to the complete discretion of the president over their release.

CREW sought the visitor records of prominent conservatives James Dobson (Focus on the Family), Wendy Wright (Concerned Women of America) and seven others, including the late televangelist Jerry Falwell.

KILLER_CLOWN
09-21-2008, 08:42 PM
I only hope the administration still has those records.

splatbass
09-21-2008, 08:44 PM
I bet they shredded them a long time ago.

HonestChieffan
09-21-2008, 08:45 PM
Non issue, go to bed

patteeu
09-22-2008, 06:42 AM
Dick Cheney owns you.

penchief
09-22-2008, 06:53 AM
The republican party's all about transparency.

tiptap
09-22-2008, 06:54 AM
If the documents have been shredded, then Cheney and company should be prosecuted for their destruction. Period.

RaiderH8r
09-22-2008, 11:59 AM
Nancy should just send in Sandy Berger to smuggle them out in his underwear. He has ninja like abilities.

jidar
09-22-2008, 12:06 PM
What ever happened to transparency in government? I thought we got a lot of that back with Clinton but it only takes a few years to be undone apparently.

Of course nobody on either side of the political spectrum would bet any money that those records ever come out regardless of the ruling. We all know how full of shit this administration is.

Redrum_69
09-22-2008, 12:07 PM
satan loves dick
cheney

jidar
09-22-2008, 12:09 PM
Non issue, go to bed

way to live up to your name you ****ing liar

BigCatDaddy
09-22-2008, 12:09 PM
I heard he is going to be indicted in 2 weeks.

penchief
09-22-2008, 12:12 PM
I heard he is going to be indicted in 2 weeks.

Impossible. He shredded all the evidence.

KILLER_CLOWN
09-22-2008, 12:12 PM
I love all the neocon comebacks, is "yer dumb" next?

patteeu
09-22-2008, 02:00 PM
I love all the neocon comebacks, is "yer dumb" next?

What kind of "comebacks" are you looking for? Something equally as witty as Cheney=Satan no doubt.

KILLER_CLOWN
09-22-2008, 06:18 PM
What kind of "comebacks" are you looking for? Something equally as witty as Cheney=Satan no doubt.

Something with a little more substance, although that was worth repeating. ;)

WilliamTheIrish
09-22-2008, 06:41 PM
Cheney chief of staff David Addington has told Congress that the vice president belongs to neither the executive nor legislative branch of government, AP reported. Instead, he said, the office is attached by the Constitution to Congress. The vice president presides over the Senate

It's comments like this that really set me off on this administration. When critics claim the administration is aloof or feels they are above the law, these type of comments play right into their hands.

Mr. Laz
09-22-2008, 06:45 PM
oh plz ..... anything really damaging were destroyed long ago.

whoman69
09-22-2008, 06:58 PM
So he refuses to testify about meetings with oil companies due to executive privledge but now claims he is not part of the executive branch?

Garcia Bronco
09-22-2008, 08:16 PM
It's comments like this that really set me off on this administration. When critics claim the administration is aloof or feels they are above the law, these type of comments play right into their hands.


Actually....technically...Cheney has an argument, the Constitution does not specfically say that the Vice President is in the executive. But I would argue that the 12 amendment implies that it is, and least we forget the VP is designated as the person that assumes command should the worst happen. While he may have a technical case, no one is going to swallow it.

Chiefs_Mike_Topeka
09-22-2008, 09:07 PM
What kind of "comebacks" are you looking for? Something equally as witty as Cheney=Satan no doubt.

Not looking for a come back; but what is your opinion on the matter? Should an adminstration have to be forced to comply with transperency? As a citizen of this great country do you agree that your elected officials be required to produce documents showing what they have been "up to"?

patteeu
09-23-2008, 05:10 AM
Not looking for a come back; but what is your opinion on the matter? Should an adminstration have to be forced to comply with transperency? As a citizen of this great country do you agree that your elected officials be required to produce documents showing what they have been "up to"?

I think there are valid arguments on both sides of this issue. Confidentiality fosters honesty in terms of advice offered and work product produced. OTOH, transparency helps prevent corruption and gives the public a chance to understand exactly what happened in an administration.

To the extent that there is a law that requires retention of documents, the administration should follow the law. That doesn't mean that they can't take a good faith legal position that the law doesn't apply in some circumstances, though. And when there is a dispute, the courts get involved. That's just the way our system works.

I don't know the issues in the lawsuit or the rationale of the decision so I don't have an opinion about whether the court got this one right, but until I see something that makes me think otherwise, I'll assume it did.