[TuringNYC]

Cheney and the well-aligned group he was part of clearly had extensive control, clearly demonstrated by how well he executed the policy in 2001-2005. It is helpful not to think of the current VP (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_Harris) as a comparison as her background [while worthy] was mostly local (SF) and state (CA) -- Cheney on the other hand decades of DC+White House experience (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Cheney) with a strong and almost singular view on Foreign Policy.

W/r/t control beyond the whitehouse, he was publicly part of multiple groups with other key players (e.g., PNAC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_C...) as well as part of non-public "groups" -- Neoconservative. He was clearly effective because his cohorts (Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Elliott Abrams, Richard Perle and Paul Bremer) were also part of the same circles, well placed in the DC foreign policy / defense apparatus, also shared the same singular focus of hawkish Foreign Policy.

It also helped that half the media landscape unashamedly supported the Cheney stance. Parts of other media (NY Times) reduced their critical thinking for several years until the disaster of the Bush administration became clear.

This is also why Comedy Central and the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Show took off during that time -- because they (along with PBS News Hour and NPR) were one of the few consistently thoughtful sources of news during that time. Consider how much easier it is for Cheney to execute policy when the media check-and-balance has disappeared.