Maybe if Biden read us...

was trying to make a valid point about the expansion of Executive wartime power, but got his Constitutional points twisted up somewhere?

The unitary executive is simply a recognition, from the first sentence of Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, that the "executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America." For the umpteenth time, it is not a theory that the president's power is somehow enhanced, at the expense of Congress, during wartime. It is merely a recognition that there is only one (i.e., uni-tary) executive and that any efforts by Congress to give executive authority to someone other than the President is unconstitutional. It is not a theory about the balance of power between the branches, but a statement about the authority of the president within the Executive Branch. The "notion" that a "unitary executive" means that "in time of war, essentially all power, goes to the executive," is indeed dead wrong. But it's Biden's misconception of that theory that is wrong, not Cheney's.

I think what a lot us took issue with over the last eight years were the numerous attempts by the Exceutive branch to regard legit Congressional actions as impositions on the Executive power (FISA, anti-torture measures, etc). I think certain people got things mixed up with regards to the theory that supposedly justifies this. They say the unitary executive theory, but they probably mean something else. Of course, BIden being a constitutional expert makes his gaffes that much more embarrassing...

Help me out here.

ADDED: Reading your earlier point again Simon, I think you pinpointed the issue Biden was trying to complain about ("the robust executive), but he hits the wrong target.

The Gaffe-O-Matic is not adjustable. It has only one setting.