Bush claims executive privilege on CIA leak

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
Hopefully this isn't a repost - I searched and didn't see it.

Looks like the GWB&Co administration is going to sweep another scandal under the rug with their 'executive privilege' play. I guess I shouldn't be surprised anymore but I can't help feeling disgusted. When are the people in power going to be held responsible for breaking the law?

Story here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...p_on_go_pr_wh/cia_leak

By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 10 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - President Bush has asserted executive privilege to prevent Attorney General Michael Mukasey from having to comply with a House panel subpoena for material on the leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity.

A House committee chairman, meanwhile, held off on a contempt citation of Mukasey ? who had requested the privilege claim ? but only as a courtesy to lawmakers not present.

Among the documents sought by House Oversight Chairman Henry Waxman are FBI interviews of Vice President Dick Cheney.

They also include notes about the 2003 State of the Union address, during which President Bush made the case for invading Iraq in part by saying Saddam Hussein was pursuing uranium ore to make a nuclear weapon. That information turned out to be wrong.

Waxman rejected Mukasey's suggestion that Cheney's FBI interview on the CIA leak should be protected by the privilege claim ? and therefore not turned over to the panel.

"We'll act in the reasonable and appropriate period of time," Waxman, D-Calif., said. But he made clear that he thinks Mukasey has earned a contempt citation and that he'd schedule a vote on the matter soon.

"This unfounded assertion of executive privilege does not protect a principle; it protects a person," Waxman said. "If the vice president did nothing wrong, what is there to hide?"

The assertion of the privilege is not about hiding anything but rather protecting the separation of powers as well as the integrity of future Justice Department investigations of the White House, Mukasey wrote to Bush in a letter dated Tuesday. Several of the subpoenaed reports, he wrote, summarize conversations between Bush and advisers ? are direct presidential communications protected by the privilege.

"I am greatly concerned about the chilling effect that compliance with the committee's subpoena would have on future White House deliberations and White House cooperation with future Justice Department investigations," Mukasey wrote to Bush. "I believe it is legally permissible for you to assert executive privilege with respect to the subpoenaed documents, and I respectfully request that you do so."

White House spokesman Tony Fratto said Bush invoked the privilege on Tuesday.

Waxman said he would wait to hold a vote on Mukasey's contempt citation until all members of the panel had a chance to read up on the matter.

The Bush administration had plenty of warning. Waxman warned last week that he would cite Mukasey with contempt unless the attorney general complied with the subpoena. The House Judiciary Committee also has subpoenaed some of the same documents from Mukasey, as well as information on the leak from other current and former administration officials.

Congressional Democrats want to shed light on the precise roles, if any, that Bush, Cheney and their aides may have played in the leak.

State Department official Richard Armitage first revealed Plame's identity as a CIA operative to columnist Robert Novak, who used former presidential counselor Karl Rove as a confirming source for a 2003 article. Around that time Plame's husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, was criticizing Bush's march to war in Iraq.

Cheney's then-chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, also was involved in the leak and was convicted of perjury, obstruction and lying to the FBI. Last July, Bush commuted Libby's 2 1/2-year sentence, sparing him from serving any prison time.

Libby told the FBI in 2003 that it was possible that Cheney ordered him to reveal Plame's identity to reporters.
___
Associated Press writer Lara Jakes Jordan contributed to this report.
 

ayabe

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2005
7,449
0
0
Pretty much the status quo.

Like Cheney claiming executive priv when asked for his visitor logs and then later claiming not be a part of the executive branch with regards to preserving emails and such.

 

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
3
0
Why didn't Clinton claim executive priviledge to that pussy he banged..

Fuck Bush... There IS a special place in hell for trash like him and his administration.. You republicans are real assholes for letting this man fuck up our country like he has.. thanks and your childrens children thank you too
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: dahunan
Why didn't Clinton claim executive priviledge to that pussy he banged..

He did. A court overruled him, one of his own appointees was the judge IIRC. I don't think that will happen here though.

ps. neither ever admitted that they banged, so it's possibly true they "only" had oral :)
 

5to1baby1in5

Golden Member
Apr 27, 2001
1,236
102
106
Originally posted by: dahunan
Why didn't Clinton claim executive priviledge to that pussy he banged..

Fuck Bush... There IS a special place in hell for trash like him and his administration.. You republicans are real assholes for letting this man fuck up our country like he has.. thanks and your childrens children thank you too

It's called the "Dried Out Corn Cob Enema Room."
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: Robor
-snip-
When are the people in power going to be held responsible for breaking the law?

Wasn't this already gone over by a Special Prosecutor?

Wasn't there already Grand Juries and a trial?

So the FBI has investigated too?

What more does Congress need do? Keep at it until the *desired* result is reached, or use this *topic* for election year benefit?

OTOH, I for one am damn glad to see them busy themselves with this sutff instead of wasting time on things like high gas prices and illegal immigration etc. [/sarcasm]

Fern
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,947
47,836
136
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: Robor
-snip-
When are the people in power going to be held responsible for breaking the law?

Wasn't this already gone over by a Special Prosecutor?

Wasn't there already Grand Juries and a trial?

So the FBI has investigated too?

What more does Congress need do? Keep at it until the *desired* result is reached, or use this *topic* for election year benefit?

OTOH, I for one am damn glad to see them busy themselves with this sutff instead of wasting time on things like high gas prices and illegal immigration etc. [/sarcasm]

Fern

It was gone over by a special prosecutor who said that he couldn't complete his investigation due to widespread perjury by executive branch officials, who were of course pardoned after shielding everyone else. Are you trying to say that because the executive has been able to thwart previous investigations through perjury that we should stop investigating something that is clearly a crime?

I also do not understand the whole 'Congress is wasting it's time instead of doing important things' argument. This reminds me a lot of that stupid joke that people try to say every time scientists come up with a new viagra pill or something when people say "JESUS SCIENCE, WHY ARE YOU WASTING YOUR TIME ON THIS INSTEAD OF CURING CANCER!?" Congress, like science, can do more then one thing at the same time. In addition, most of the actual work that makes bills go through, solves issues like gas prices, illegal immigration, etc does not take place on the floor of the House or Senate and it is very rarely stalled due to lack of time to talk about things. Therefore, Congress investigating this and holding hearings or whatever isn't really a big deal at all. I for one welcome it, as this is yet another chance to reign in an executive gone berserk.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,098
5,639
126
Saddam Hussein was more cooperative and open to investigation than this Admin.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: Robor
-snip-
When are the people in power going to be held responsible for breaking the law?

Wasn't this already gone over by a Special Prosecutor?

Wasn't there already Grand Juries and a trial?

So the FBI has investigated too?

What more does Congress need do? Keep at it until the *desired* result is reached, or use this *topic* for election year benefit?

OTOH, I for one am damn glad to see them busy themselves with this sutff instead of wasting time on things like high gas prices and illegal immigration etc. [/sarcasm]

Fern

We are talking about the same people who went after Clinton for getting a BJ, right? Anyway, maybe you don't have a problem with the Bush administration and their excessive use of executive privilege but I do.

FWIW, gas prices are up everywhere and we are still among the lowest in the world.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels. I can't tell you what I am doing because it might piss off Al-Quida. Its all for your own good. We will take away your consitutional rights to save you from yourself.

Seig Heil GWB, Seig Heil GWB, don't doubt him or you will be most distressed.
 

CrackRabbit

Lifer
Mar 30, 2001
16,641
58
91
Originally posted by: 5to1baby1in5
Originally posted by: dahunan
Why didn't Clinton claim executive priviledge to that pussy he banged..

Fuck Bush... There IS a special place in hell for trash like him and his administration.. You republicans are real assholes for letting this man fuck up our country like he has.. thanks and your childrens children thank you too

It's called the "Dried Out Corn Cob Enema Room."

I don't know if any of you have seen the older Adam Sandler movie "Little Nicky" there is a scene that shows Hitler's eternal punishment in hell, every day he is forced to wear a pink tutu and have pineapples shoved up his ass.
I hope that there would be something like that for Mr. Bush. :)

But I digress, this is SOP for these guys. Something should of been done about it years ago but no one had the balls then, and it is far to late to grow a pair now.
 

Drakkon

Diamond Member
Aug 14, 2001
8,401
1
0
Originally posted by: CrackRabbit
Originally posted by: 5to1baby1in5
Originally posted by: dahunan
Why didn't Clinton claim executive priviledge to that pussy he banged..

Fuck Bush... There IS a special place in hell for trash like him and his administration.. You republicans are real assholes for letting this man fuck up our country like he has.. thanks and your childrens children thank you too

It's called the "Dried Out Corn Cob Enema Room."

I don't know if any of you have seen the older Adam Sandler movie "Little Nicky" there is a scene that shows Hitler's eternal punishment in hell, every day he is forced to wear a pink tutu and have pineapples shoved up his ass.
I hope that there would be something like that for Mr. Bush. :)

But I digress, this is SOP for these guys. Something should of been done about it years ago but no one had the balls then, and it is far to late to grow a pair now.

I thought it was a french maids outfit? and LARGE pineapples (just watched it last night :p)

The last thing this country needs is another impeachment. back to back would be a disaster for this country and leave us on a bad part of the field internationally. while I'd love to see this stuff investigated something tells me it aint going to happen and look forar4d to january
 

m1ldslide1

Platinum Member
Feb 20, 2006
2,321
0
0
Originally posted by: Drakkon
Originally posted by: CrackRabbit
Originally posted by: 5to1baby1in5
Originally posted by: dahunan
Why didn't Clinton claim executive priviledge to that pussy he banged..

Fuck Bush... There IS a special place in hell for trash like him and his administration.. You republicans are real assholes for letting this man fuck up our country like he has.. thanks and your childrens children thank you too

It's called the "Dried Out Corn Cob Enema Room."

I don't know if any of you have seen the older Adam Sandler movie "Little Nicky" there is a scene that shows Hitler's eternal punishment in hell, every day he is forced to wear a pink tutu and have pineapples shoved up his ass.
I hope that there would be something like that for Mr. Bush. :)

But I digress, this is SOP for these guys. Something should of been done about it years ago but no one had the balls then, and it is far to late to grow a pair now.

I thought it was a french maids outfit? and LARGE pineapples (just watched it last night :p)

The last thing this country needs is another impeachment. back to back would be a disaster for this country and leave us on a bad part of the field internationally. while I'd love to see this stuff investigated something tells me it aint going to happen and look forar4d to january

Sort of like how a criminal trial will just get everybody all riled up and won't fix the wrong thats been done anyway, right? So whats the point?

You have back to back impeachments if its necessary. In this case it sure as hell is necessary, and the man and his cronies need to be imprisoned. Aren't the conservatives the ones who think that harsh punishments work as a deterrent for future criminals? Rational people may know thats bullshit, but I don't understand why conservatives feel this strategy works for drug addicts and not for presidents. :confused:
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
348
126
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: dahunan
Why didn't Clinton claim executive priviledge to that pussy he banged..

He did.

When did Clinton invoke Executive Privilege in the Monica scandal?

There was a court hearing about whether a president should be sued while in office that he lost, but that's not Executive Privilege.

Executive Privilege is a narrow exception for protecting some conversations between the President and his advisors, created by the courts.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
This whole issue is about the FBI inter viewing Cheney over the Valarie Plame matter. As usual the GWB administration claims executive privilege and congress asserts the right to see the transcripts of the interview.

At least in MHO, this is a case where GWB&co are acting like spoiled brats and congress needs to grow some balls. Cite Mukasey, Rove , Bolton, and Miers with comtempt and be done with it. Then send out the Sgt at Arms of the house and arrest the damn Miscreants.

Basically GWB&co is saying the FBI who the congress pays should only report to GWB&co. Bullshit says I, the FBI is being paid with taxpayer money and should be accountable to the Congress, the President, and the American people.

Now if GWB wants to say only he gets access, I might have no problems with it, but if and only if GWB&co funds it all out of their own pockets without a cent of taxpayer money.

But even the worse spoiled brat understands it when their parents cut off his allowance, and that the house can do that also. Congress can simply forget to appropriate the money until GWB&co gets real. The republirats, at best, can filibuster it for all the good it does them. No testimony, no pay for the FBI, the unpaid FBI agents can thereafter take out their wrath on Mukasey and GWB, but it does not get them paid for only working for the people who do not pay them.

Earth to Congress, Earth to Congress, do your constitutional duty and tell GWB no, no, and hell no.
 

Jmman

Diamond Member
Dec 17, 1999
5,302
0
76
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: dahunan
Why didn't Clinton claim executive priviledge to that pussy he banged..

He did.

When did Clinton invoke Executive Privilege in the Monica scandal?

There was a court hearing about whether a president should be sued while in office that he lost, but that's not Executive Privilege.

Executive Privilege is a narrow exception for protecting some conversations between the President and his advisors, created by the courts.


How soon we forget..........

Text
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
With the Bushistas it's all executive privilege all the time, except for when it's a matter of national security... or when it's just gone, lost, like thousands of Whitehouse emails...

Used Whitehouse asswipe is probably covered by either or both principles...
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
348
126
Originally posted by: Jmman
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: dahunan
Why didn't Clinton claim executive priviledge to that pussy he banged..

He did.

When did Clinton invoke Executive Privilege in the Monica scandal?

There was a court hearing about whether a president should be sued while in office that he lost, but that's not Executive Privilege.

Executive Privilege is a narrow exception for protecting some conversations between the President and his advisors, created by the courts.


How soon we forget..........

Text

Thanks for the info on his lawyers pursuing the issue of whether he had the right to use executive privilege. Did that ever go anywhere, was he granted the right and used it?
 
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
Originally posted by: Robor
Hopefully this isn't a repost - I searched and didn't see it.

Looks like the GWB&Co administration is going to sweep another scandal under the rug with their 'executive privilege' play. I guess I shouldn't be surprised anymore but I can't help feeling disgusted. When are the people in power going to be held responsible for breaking the law?

Story here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...p_on_go_pr_wh/cia_leak

By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 10 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - President Bush has asserted executive privilege to prevent Attorney General Michael Mukasey from having to comply with a House panel subpoena for material on the leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity.

A House committee chairman, meanwhile, held off on a contempt citation of Mukasey ? who had requested the privilege claim ? but only as a courtesy to lawmakers not present.

Among the documents sought by House Oversight Chairman Henry Waxman are FBI interviews of Vice President Dick Cheney.

They also include notes about the 2003 State of the Union address, during which President Bush made the case for invading Iraq in part by saying Saddam Hussein was pursuing uranium ore to make a nuclear weapon. That information turned out to be wrong.

Waxman rejected Mukasey's suggestion that Cheney's FBI interview on the CIA leak should be protected by the privilege claim ? and therefore not turned over to the panel.

"We'll act in the reasonable and appropriate period of time," Waxman, D-Calif., said. But he made clear that he thinks Mukasey has earned a contempt citation and that he'd schedule a vote on the matter soon.

"This unfounded assertion of executive privilege does not protect a principle; it protects a person," Waxman said. "If the vice president did nothing wrong, what is there to hide?"

The assertion of the privilege is not about hiding anything but rather protecting the separation of powers as well as the integrity of future Justice Department investigations of the White House, Mukasey wrote to Bush in a letter dated Tuesday. Several of the subpoenaed reports, he wrote, summarize conversations between Bush and advisers ? are direct presidential communications protected by the privilege.

"I am greatly concerned about the chilling effect that compliance with the committee's subpoena would have on future White House deliberations and White House cooperation with future Justice Department investigations," Mukasey wrote to Bush. "I believe it is legally permissible for you to assert executive privilege with respect to the subpoenaed documents, and I respectfully request that you do so."

White House spokesman Tony Fratto said Bush invoked the privilege on Tuesday.

Waxman said he would wait to hold a vote on Mukasey's contempt citation until all members of the panel had a chance to read up on the matter.

The Bush administration had plenty of warning. Waxman warned last week that he would cite Mukasey with contempt unless the attorney general complied with the subpoena. The House Judiciary Committee also has subpoenaed some of the same documents from Mukasey, as well as information on the leak from other current and former administration officials.

Congressional Democrats want to shed light on the precise roles, if any, that Bush, Cheney and their aides may have played in the leak.

State Department official Richard Armitage first revealed Plame's identity as a CIA operative to columnist Robert Novak, who used former presidential counselor Karl Rove as a confirming source for a 2003 article. Around that time Plame's husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, was criticizing Bush's march to war in Iraq.

Cheney's then-chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, also was involved in the leak and was convicted of perjury, obstruction and lying to the FBI. Last July, Bush commuted Libby's 2 1/2-year sentence, sparing him from serving any prison time.

Libby told the FBI in 2003 that it was possible that Cheney ordered him to reveal Plame's identity to reporters.
___
Associated Press writer Lara Jakes Jordan contributed to this report.

As much as anyone wants to proclaim that the UK and EU are less free, our governments are directly responsible, there is no need for anyone to do anything to start an investigation and if there is a reason it will be done, they will be punished for it.

Every citizen, from average bloke to Prime Minister are subjected to the same scrutiny and the same courts, criminals will be indicted in a court of law no matter who they are.