The link above is to the concept of "Separation of Powers" of the USA Consitution. It was designed for Checks and Balances of powerful people. Realizing that is the understanding that Dick Cheney could never have one foot in each branch of government.
A basic 'run down' on the importance of the three branches of government. The USA Constitution when taken aside and out of context to the Declaration of Independance and Bill of Rights can be dangerous. The USA Consitution "set up" the government in 'the spirit' of the Declaration of Independance. The Bill of Rights was to 'clarify' the 'rights' guaranteed under the Consitution and expand on them.
So, considering the sturcture of the new American government was to secure the rights of individuals from their government or perhaps better said as a result of their government, the most powerful branch of government was always supposed to be a 'representative legislature' designed to carry out the will of the people of the USA. The other branches of government 'have a function' based in the laws passed by the majority of the legislature. Without the legislature the Judiciary and Executive Branches wouldn't have a function. Their actions are dictated by the Legislative Branch.
In the case of the Vice President, which has dearly little function except to stand ready to assume the Presidency should that person no longer be fit to serve; the 'function' is 'lent' to the Senate, as it's President, to resolve a tie. That 'action' is 'a service' to the country by the Executive Branch. In other words, for the Legislative Branch to 'function' beyond it's own politics there has to be a 'check and balance' or literally an equally divided Senate could 'deadlock' the process of legislation forever. That is why the Executive Branch 'lends' it's Vice President to the Senate. It's a 'check and balance' to the best interest of the country.
If the current Vice President continues to attempt to resturcture the 'power balance' of the Executive Branch as it 'manifests' in it's role in the Senate then there is dearly nothing saying the Senate Pro Tempore, and more than likely as well, The Speaker of the House has an equal right to lay claim to rights in the Executive Branch and therefore should have the ability to conduct business within the White House to be prepared to take over the Presidency if they are called upon.
Is Mr. Cheney ready to deal with that reality as he attempts to cover up his "W"rong doings in the name of powers of the Vice President? I doubt it. See, if Cheney can state he has a foot in two branches of government there is nothing preventing others to make the same claim. What Dick Cheney is attempting is unconstitutional, although the Robert's Court in collusion would state differently. The backlash from such a decision in regards to the other branches of government may very well destroy the USA Constitution in it's entirety.
As far as 'the place' for the Judiciary. It simply adjudicates the laws. It doesn't write the laws but ensures the laws are fairly applied to the people of which their 'representation within legislation' demands same. The laws are due to 'representation' of the people, not the 'rule' of a ruling class. Huge difference.
The Executive Branch is simply that and no more. They are Executives that carry out 'the will of the people.' They abide by the legislation and carry out 'the business' of the nation, both internationally and domestically. The President can also propose legislation according to the needs of the nation 'as realized' by the Executive Branch in it's 'function.' But, the Executive Branch can't pass legislation. Here again, the 'veto' power of the Executive Branch is to be sure the 'will of the people' is honored. The 'veto' is a check and balance.
The 'idea' that Cheney actually has powers of Legislators is an outrageous statement. This 'limited vote' in the Senate carries no 'consistency' and cannot have a daily brevity to the legislation. He is simply 'called up' to serve the people in the role of the President of the Senate. He is not empowered to 'affect' legislation on a regular basis. His assertions to anyone whom loves this country is obvious. In saying that some would say whom loves this country more than the people in the Executive Branch? My reply? Are you serious? The country belongs to the people. The people love this country more than any 'representative' to the three branches of this government has a right to lay claim.
I'm sorry, but, there is one characteristic that reigns true of the Bush Executive Branch and that is anarchic self-righteousness. It's unforgivable. I have heard how every president has the opportunity to do all kinds of clemecy and pardons. This president has sent our military to war without reason against another sovereign country. When Bush exonerated Libby from paying a price that the judicial system leveled as a responsible reaction to the severity of the crime as the 'Lies of Libby' disabled Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald from taking the case forward.
Libby's false testimony caused the case to languish in uncertainty. As a result the only way the 'CIA Outing Case' could go forward was to a conclusion was to find Libby a liar and prosecute him for the crimes he committed. This is not political vengence. This has nothing to do with politics. It's about an Executive Branch that does not adhere to 'The Rule of Law' and instead plays by it's own rules. The crimes Libby was convicted of are all very serious reasons to prosecute. "The Truth" is the foundation our laws are built on, without it our judicary is compromosed.
So, with that I'll get on with the week, but, sadly in reflection on the poor health of our nation from all aspects.
I TOLD YOU SO ! Basically, Bush didn't find it difficult to grant a pardon. He found it difficult not to. He's playing politics. The Oval Office went to a lot of trouble to 'roll out' the Libby clemency. They prepared a statement by the president that was released at the same time the information was released. It was carefully worded to include compassion for the family, etc., etc. He even 'gently' indicted the system as being to harsh in it's conviction. Bush is dead "W"rong about that.
The "Lies of Libby" are significant and should have been met with the strongest penalties. The act of outing a CIA agent vindictively as a former Ambassador wrote an Op-Ed in hopes he could reach the nation about, and here again, 'the truth' of his work in Iraq and Niger is unconcionable. It was done to threaten every member of the government's intelligence community that the same will happen to them if they decided to tell 'the truth' to the nation. Literally, the act of outing Plame could have been a death sentence. She was in the USA when it happened but other agents could have been outed while in a country whereby they could be killed easily. I mean what the Oval Office did was simply outrageous.
Bush won’t rule out pardon for Libby (click here)
Calls the decision 'difficult' and says he considered many factors in letting the conviction and fine stand.
Calls the decision 'difficult' and says he considered many factors in letting the conviction and fine stand.
WASHINGTON -- One day after canceling the 30-month prison sentence of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, President Bush declined to rule out an outright pardon for Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff."I rule nothing in or nothing out," Bush told reporters today after visiting wounded troops at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.Bush said the decision to commute Libby's sentence was "very difficult." He said, "I considered his background, his service to the country, as well as the jury verdict."In commuting Libby's sentence, Bush let stand the convictions for perjury and obstruction of justice in conjunction with the CIA leak case. The other terms of Libby's sentence -- two years' probation and a $250,000 fine -- still stand. A pardon would leave Libby with a clean slate: no convictions and no probation or fine.Libby, 56, was Cheney's chief of staff and a powerful figure inside the Bush White House during the buildup to the Iraq war....
