[no gnu taxes]

President Obama is claiming executive privilege in refusing to give certain documents to Congress concerning the "Fast and Furious" operation.


The Justice Department requested that Obama assert the privilege in refusing to turn certain documents over to Congress concerning the botched gun-smuggling operation.
The news comes as House Republicans consider holding Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt over the Fast and Furious dispute.



CAPTION

By Brendan Smialowski, AFP/Getty Images

In a letter to Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, a Justice Department official said executive privilege applies to documents that explain how the department learned of problems with the investigation.


"I write now to inform you that the President has asserted executive privilege over the relevant post-February 4, 2011, documents," writes Deputy Attorney General James Cole. "We regret that we have arrived at this point, after the many steps we have taken to address the Committee's concerns and to accommodate the Committee's legitimate oversight interests regarding Operation Fast and Furious."


Republicans said they are stunned by the president's move, while Democrats on the oversight committee accused GOP lawmakers of carrying out a political witch hunt.


"The president's assertion of executive privilege creates more questions," said Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind. "That brings into question whether Eric Holder knew about it and how much the president knew about it."


The investigation into the operation was spurred after Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, inquired into whistle-blower allegations that the government had allowed the transfer of illegally purchased weapons that were found at the scene of the murder of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.


Grassley slammed the White House on Wednesday for the move.


"How can the president assert executive privilege if there was no White House involvement?" Grassley said in a statement. "How can the president exert executive privilege over documents he's supposedly never seen? Is something very big being hidden to go to this extreme?"

[Sam Odom]

... But Bush

[Sam Odom]

"How can the president assert executive privilege if there was no White House involvement?" & "How can the president exert executive privilege over documents he's supposedly never seen?"

[ChalkyDog]

Comparing that operation to Watergate. Genius. I love it.

The real issue here is how everything can be hidden under the veil of national security. Not even the Supreme Court, as conservative as it is, will mess with that.

[crustyme]

... But Bush

guilty conscience?

[Sam Odom]

Wasnt a big fan of Bush... Just heading off your usual retort Okay , Obama is on par with Bush. We get it

[crustyme]

White House invokes executive privilege for Rove in attorney firings
EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE


August 01, 2007|From Ed Henry CNN Washington Bureau


The White House invoked executive privilege to keepKarl Rove from having to testify Thursday.
The White House has invoked executive privilege to keep President Bush's top political adviser, Karl Rove, from having to testify Thursday about the firings of at least eight U.S. attorneys.
Rove, "as an immediate adviser to the president," can't be ordered to testify and has been told not to appear, White House Counsel Fred Fielding told the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The committee called Rove and his deputy, Scott Jennings, to testify Thursday morning.
The White House says it is trying to protect the president's ability to receive candid advice and offered to let top aides discuss the firings only if they were not placed under oath and no transcript was taken.

"It is regretted that the committee has forced this action, as the president's offer of accommodation to you and to the House Judiciary Committee could have provided information being sought in a manner respectful of presidential prerogatives and consistent with a spirit of comity," Fielding wrote.
But Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, accused the White House of trying to cover up Rove's role in the firings. He questioned why Rove discussed the matter publicly when the issue first made news, but now "is suddenly unable to talk it about when he is under oath."
"Mr. Rove has given reasons for the firings that have now been shown to be inaccurate, after-the-fact fabrications," Leahy said in a statement issued Wednesday evening. "Yet he now refuses to tell this committee the truth about his role in targeting well-respected U.S. attorneys for firing and in seeking to cover up his role and that of his staff in the scandal."
Mark Paoletta, a lawyer for Jennings, told CNN his client will appear before the Judiciary Committee but would refuse to answer questions he feels are covered by executive privilege. Former White House political director Sara Taylor testified under similar circumstances in July.
The White House already has invoked executive privilege to block previous testimony by Taylor and former White House counsel Harriet Miers, who skipped a hearing in the House two weeks ago, and to keep Chief of Staff Josh Bolten from turning over documents subpoenaed as part of the inquiry.
The panel voted to cite Miers and Bolten for contempt of Congress for failing to comply with subpoenas. The decision on whether to pursue any action on those citations lies with the Justice Department.

http://articles.cnn.com/2007-08-01/p..._s=PM:POLITICS

[McBa1n]

I say we burn him. Fake right wing outrage go! Troll is a troll.

From news article:
Also, the White House points out to reporters that President George W. Bush asserted executive privilege six times, while Bill Clinton did so in 14 instances, "both of whom protected the same category of documents we're protecting today (ie after-the-fact internal Executive Branch materials responding to congressional and media inquiries - in this case from the Justice Department). In fact, dating back to President Reagan, Presidents have asserted executive privileged 24 times. President Obama has gone longer without asserting the privilege in a Congressional dispute than any President in the last three decades."

[crustyme]

Wasnt a big fan of Bush... Just heading off your usual retort Okay , Obama is on par with Bush. We get it

nice try.

[Sam Odom]

nice try.

[Sam Odom]

White House invokes executive privilege for Rove in attorney firings

... But Bush

Also, the White House points out to reporters that President George W. Bush

... But Bush

[McBa1n]

Question - is the right wing this morning talking about on the issue calling Obama a liar because he promised transparency?
I've seen a lot of that this morning. Usually the fake outrage machine has all the drones in lock step saying the same thing. Just wanted to know.

[no gnu taxes]

Obama Blasts Bush For "Hiding Behind Executive Privilege"

CNN’S LARRY KING: “Do you favor executive privilege or should Karl Rove and others in that like position be forced to testify before the House or Senate?


OBAMA: “Well, you know, I think we'll -- we'll determine over the next several weeks how this administration responds to the very appropriate call by Patrick Leahy, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, to have these individuals come in and testify. You know, there's been a tendency on the part of this administration to -- to try to hide behind executive privilege every time there's something a little shaky that's taking place. And I think, you know, the administration would be best served by coming clean on this. There doesn't seem to be any national security issues involved with the U.S. attorney question. There doesn't seem to be any justification for not offering up some clear, plausible rationale for why these -- these U.S. attorneys were targeted when, by all assessments, they were doing an outstanding job. I think the American people deserve to know what was going on there.”

[Sam Odom]

[MUHerd37]

So much for transparency.

[Thor4140]

What did he do out one of our very own CIA agents? I can't think of anything more despicable than that just to pull off a farce of a war and shut down anyone that say's something negative about it.

[McBa1n]

To be fair, it is a legitimate thing to discuss, due to the radical hyper-partisanship. Now, if say, neocons like the OP were fair and actually read history... And also held neocons to the same level of perfection than is required of the current President.
Sure, it's funny, but none of the neocons held the same fake outrage for someone of their party protecting war criminals.

Just saying, if it's about what team you're playing for, then it's no longer political. It's something worse.

Incidentally, in this episode, I don't like that Obama is exercising a RIGHT AND A FREEDOM that ALL Presidents get to protect an incompetent schmuck. But it's also important to know, in history, how others have used the same powers. Also, all people lie. You've already lied to yourself, on average, at least 5 times today. If you looked in the mirror, you may have lied more to yourself.

[Sam Odom]

So much for transparency.

But Bush...

You would think ObamaBots would realized that they cannot defend Obama on his own, standing alone, without comparing him to Bush. Bush!!! A guy they hated. Where is the CHANGE or HOPE ?

[Thor4140]

Sammy we all know u are a Bush nut hugger so ur little silly game to hope no one mentions Bush is hilarious. I wouldn't want anyone to show i was a hypocrite over and over again either. If u don't want to be a hypocrite maybe u should stay out of these type of threads because im sure when Bush did this u were no where to be found. So sit back and keep on listening to nit-wit neo-con radio, smoke your corn cop pipe, and continue to drink your Schlitz beer.

[Thor4140]

To be fair, it is a legitimate thing to discuss, due to the radical hyper-partisanship. Now, if say, neocons like the OP were fair and actually read history... And also held neocons to the same level of perfection than is required of the current President.
Sure, it's funny, but none of the neocons held the same fake outrage for someone of their party protecting war criminals.

Just saying, if it's about what team you're playing for, then it's no longer political. It's something worse.

Incidentally, in this episode, I don't like that Obama is exercising a RIGHT AND A FREEDOM that ALL Presidents get to protect an incompetent schmuck. But it's also important to know, in history, how others have used the same powers. Also, all people lie. You've already lied to yourself, on average, at least 5 times today. If you looked in the mirror, you may have lied more to yourself.

You can't be fair with Sammy. He doesn't accept blame very well. He needs to show us his post of outrage with Bush before he comments on something Obama did that was similar. Since he won't and can't, he will continue playing the childs game of "lets not mention Bush"

[crustyme]

WASHINGTON — Mitt Romney scuttled the Massachusetts government's long-standing affirmative action policies with a few strokes of his pen on a sleepy holiday six months after he became governor.

No news conference or news release trumpeted Romney's executive order on Bunker Hill Day, June 17, 2003, in the deserted Statehouse. But when civil rights leaders, black lawmakers and other minority groups learned of Romney's move two months later, it sparked a public furor.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobile...n_1564644.html

[Sam Odom]

Sammy we all know u are a Bush nut hugger so ur little silly game to hope no one mentions Bush is hilarious. I wouldn't want anyone to show i was a hypocrite over and over again either. If u don't want to be a hypocrite maybe u should stay out of these type of threads because im sure when Bush did this u were no where to be found. So sit back and keep on listening to nit-wit neo-con radio, smoke your corn cop pipe, and continue to drink your Schlitz beer.

and what does all of ^ that ^ have to do with this Obama Admin ? Deflection is a weak tool , very juvenile


BTW-- who outted Valerie Plame ?

[Sam Odom]

You can't be fair with Sammy. He doesn't accept blame very well.

LOL - What did Sammy do

[crustyme]

talk about out of touch.....

[Sam Odom]

crustyme , looks like a bunch of SBRers at a vegas bash

[crustyme]

Wasnt a big fan of Bush...

a hypocrite and a liar.

typical neo-con.

[Sam Odom]

"How can the president assert executive privilege if there was no White House involvement?"

"How can the president exert executive privilege over documents he's supposedly never seen?"

ObamaBots... ^ Those ^ are the real questions

[MUHerd37]

talk about out of touch.....

Oh wow! Romney made money!!!??? How terrible of him!!!

[Sam Odom]

Herd37 , that is just juvenile deflection from crusty

[crustyme]

Oh wow! Romney made money!!!??? How terrible of him!!!

making money and flaunting it are two completely different characteristics.

[MUHerd37]

making money and flaunting it are two completely different characteristics.

Who gives a fukk about flaunting him making money? Is buying a huge house flaunting it? How about buying a Lamborghini? How about wearing nice suits? Such a stupid statement.

[Sam Odom]

making money and flaunting it are two completely different characteristics.

which has what to do with Fast and Furious and now Obama clamming-up?

A little reminder

On February 4, 2011, the Department of Justice denied whistleblower allegations that guns in Operation Fast and Furious had been allowed to “walk” to Mexico and defended the Operation itself. Ten months later, on December 2, 2011, the Justice Department formally withdrew this denial and acknowledged that Fast and Furious was “fundamentally flawed.”

[rkelly110]

crustyme , looks like a bunch of SBRers at a vegas bash

Before they lost all their money.

[King Mayan]

[Sam Odom]