subpoena

[Realitycheck]

It really doesn't change the discussion. They most likely didn't want to do what he was telling them to do, regarding the questionable wiretaps, because they had issues with the legality of it. The issue was talked about with his advisors along with the lawyers that didn't comply. The two issues are one and the same. They probably have all kinds of evidence leaning towards this issue outside of the advisorial proceedings. They are probably just looking for a smoking gun in an area that doesn't belong to them.

 

The Attorney General at the time, John Ashcroft, is probably the one technically most at fault, though the president very easily could have ordered it to happen, despite advice to the contrary, however everyone involved seems to be sticking together.

[bascule]

That's the way it's being spun on the liberal side of the blogosphere.

 

It's apparently being "spun" the same way by the House Oversight Committee:

 

http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1371

 

The Vice President asserts that his office is not an “entity within the executive branch.”

 

The language comes from the Executive Order regarding the handling of classified information

 

The counterpoint from the right seems to be that he's not saying that he's not part of the executive branch, but rather than he's part of two branches, being president of the senate.

 

If he is an entity within the executive branch, then the executive order pertains to him. He's arguing it doesn't, because he's not an entity within the executive branch.

 

If "Office of the VP" belongs to sets "legislative" and "executive", and a rule applies to set "executive", then the rule applies to the set member "office of VP", regardless of what other set memberships "Office of the VP" may have.

 

I couldn't find the specific language Cheney's office used, but it's specifically claimed by the House Oversight Committee that he has asserted that he is not an entity within the executive branch, the only sensible way that he could claim the aforementioned executive order would not apply to him.

 

Why anyone would think that this should make him immune from a congressional subpoena directed at one of those branches is beyond me. Logically one would this would make him more susceptible to congressional subpoena.

 

Methinks the purveyors of the uncited conservative spin you're referencing lack a basic knowledge of set theory.