Executive Privilege or Smoke Screen?

I do believe the President has the right to invoke Executive Privilege to withhold documents from Congressional Oversight. But only in limited circumstances. The current attempt by the Obama Administration clearly is outside those limited bounds.

Jeff Goldstein has a nice take on the folly of the current attempt to play “hide the documents” from Congressman Issa’s committee.

The key bit? From Issa’s letter to the President in response:

In his letter, the Attorney General stated that releasing the documents covered by the subpoena, some of which he offered to the Committee hours earlier, would have “significant, damaging consequences.”  It remains unclear how — in a matter of hours — the Attorney General moved from offering those documents in exchange for canceling the contempt vote and ending the congressional investigation to claiming that they are covered by executive privilege and that releasing them — which the Attorney General was prepared to do hours earlier — would now result in “significant, damaging consequences.”

4 thoughts on “Executive Privilege or Smoke Screen?”

  1. I don’t like this anymore than anyone else, BUT, everybody needs to make up their mind about what the policy should be. REMEMBER, this is for both parties and not when it is politically beneficial. I cannot be critical of this and accept the things that happened during the last Administration. We are talking about policies, not people. The problem is on both sides, the more you know, the madder you’ll be. Remember, if this comes down on things that could be considered as “Infringing upon the powers of the President of the US, even as the Commander of the US Military”, then so be it.

    1. Without getting into specifics about parties and personalities, you should examine each individual case of executive privilege on its own merits, and judge accordingly. Each one should be examined in a vacuum.

      In this specific instance, the materials requested are solely internal documents from the Justice Department, relating to the coverup of an operation by an Agency which is part of that department. The White House has consistently denied having any part – or even knowledge – of the operation in question. The Justice Department claims that the operation was the misguided rogue plan of (relatively) low-level supervisory personnel. (Of course, they also spent quite a lot of time claiming that it never even happened, before they admitted that was a lie, then they claimed for quite a while that nobody except those involved knew about it, before they admitted that was a lie as well.)

      So, if the White House has absolutely zero connection to the case – as is claimed by both the WH and the Justice Dept – then how can Executive Privilege credibly be asserted?

      (Of course, this could be another birth certificate issue – fan the flames for as long as possible, then under intense pressure reveal documentation that shows you to be free and clear, then fan the flames further as people claim that even the proof offered is fake.)

  2. The obama regime’s actions of hiding documents behind executive privledge are tantamount to an admission of guilt.

    Everyone paying attention knows it, that is why the wicked witch of san fransisco and her ilk are making so much noise over it. To me, that noise is the evidence there indeed is a grand criminal conspiracy for sedition, treason and murder.

    Anyone who actively took part in this travesty needs to walk the steps of the gallows.

    Anyone who is an accessory should die of old age in prison.

Comments are closed.