The always-creative team of Dick Cheney and his lawyers are at it again.

The lawyer for US vice-president Dick Cheney claimed [Monday] that the Congress lacks any authority to examine his behaviour on the job.

The exception claimed by Cheney's counsel came in response to requests from congressional Democrats that David Addington, the vice-president's chief of staff, testify about his involvement in the approval of interrogation tactics used at Guantanamo Bay.

Ruling out voluntary cooperation by Addington, Cheney lawyer Kathryn Wheelbarger said Cheney's conduct is "not within the [congressional] committee's power of inquiry".

"Congress lacks the constitutional power to regulate by law what a vice-president communicates in the performance of the vice president's official duties, or what a vice president recommends that a president communicate," Wheelbarger wrote to senior aides on Capitol Hill.

I see.

So, last year, Dick Cheney couldn't be regulated by executive-branch rules because, he said, he's not actually part of the executive branch. This year, Dick Cheney can't be regulated by the legislative branch, either.

Dan Froomkin asked yesterday, "How far will Vice President Cheney go to shield himself and his office from public scrutiny?" Far enough, apparently, to conclude that Cheney answers to no one but himself.

From Froomkin's report:

Cheney's latest claim came in a response to a House Judiciary Committee request for vice presidential chief of staff David S. Addington to testify about his central role in developing the administration's torture policies.

Cheney lawyer Kathryn L. Wheelbarger wrote back: "Congress lacks the constitutional power to regulate by a law what a Vice President communicates in the performance of the Vice President's official duties, or what a Vice President recommends that a President communicate in the President's performance of official duties, and therefore those matters are not within the Committee's power of inquiry."

As it happens, that was only one of three startling responses in Wheelbarger's letter.

She also wrote: "The Chief of Staff to the Vice President is an employee of the Vice President, and not the President, and therefore is not in a position to speak on behalf of the President."

Disregard, for a moment, the fact that Addington wasn't actually asked to speak on behalf of the president - but about his "unique information and perspective." Contrary to Wheelbarger's central assertion, Addington actually does work for the president. When he took over the job previously held by Scooter Libby - who has since been convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice in the Valerie Plame CIA leak case - Addington also inherited Libby's title as "assistant to the president."

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) was unimpressed with Wheelbarger's "legalistic and argumentative response," and is threatening to subpoena Addington.

Stay tuned.