DC/DC

(White House/David Bohrer; caption)

Another day of idiocy on Dick Cheney's visit to Australia. This time he's an equal partner with John Howard regarding David Hicks, the Gitmo detainee. Here's Howard --

And I have asked that within the constraints of the separation of powers in the United States system between the executive and the judicial process that the trial be brought on as soon as humanly possible and with no further delay.

Thus showing that he has no understanding of the problem with Guantanamo -- that it's entirely an executive branch operation, with everyone held there at the discretion of George W. Bush and whatever procedures he establishes. The detainees have no virtually no access to the US judicial system, as reaffirmed by this week's US Appeals Court decision.

Cheney at least was a bit smarter about this issue --

Mr. Hicks is near the head of the queue, if I can put it in those terms. He has been charged. The question that happens now -- or the issue that arises now is under our procedures there is what's called a convening authority. This is a quasi-judicial function inside the Department of Defense -- a judge, in effect -- who will make the decision based on the charges that have been presented as to whether or not a commission should be convened for the purpose of trying this individual, in this case, Mr. Hicks. We cannot interfere with that process. It is a judicial process. And we're not allowed to call over and say when are you going to be through, or what are you going to decide. We can't influence it. That would be a violation of the procedures.

Thus what the Military Commissions Act established was a shadow "separation of powers" within the executive branch, but it's a fiction. For one thing, does anyone believe that Dick Cheney would hold off picking up the phone to a Pentagon official if he really wanted to? Anyone in the CIA's WMD division can answer that question. Anyway, Dick Cheney believes that the president as commander-in-chief has essentially unlimited powers in wartime, especially over military matters like these trials.

One more thing. The sole US concession to Howard is that Hicks can serve any sentence in an Australian jail, which would put Australia in the position of enforcing a penalty determined by a process that would not meet its own legal standards. Somewhat surprisingly, Cheney dealt with the other contingency --

And of course, if he were not found guilty, then he'd presumably be returned to Australia having been found innocent.

But wouldn't he still be an enemy combatant, as the previous Combatant Status Review Tribunal said he was? By the way, Australian Labor Party -- above is your first campaign poster. What is that bird over Cheney's head?

[2 additional notes: Attaturk visually elaborates on that bird, and why, exactly, does Cheney's plane really need to stop in Singapore?]