Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Executive privilege seen as leak-case option> WG 10-8-2003

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
hang a left Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-05 06:43 PM
Original message
Executive privilege seen as leak-case option> WG 10-8-2003


Executive privilege seen as leak-case option
Shielding material is not ruled out; Democrats protest
By Wayne Washington, Globe Staff, 10/8/2003

WASHINGTON -- Despite President Bush's repeated pledges of full cooperation, administration officials yesterday refused to rule out invoking executive privilege to shield some documents from Justice Department investigators looking into whether someone in the White House illegally leaked the name of a CIA operative.

Democrats who have complained that the investigation should be handled by a special counsel instead of the Justice Department because of its connections to the White House said the prospect of executive privilege being used shows that more independence is needed.

"Asserting executive privilege would make a farce of the investigation," said US Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts. "That's why we need a special prosecutor, so that we can challenge any coverup."

The very words "executive privilege" evoke memories of scandal-plagued presidents trying to use the power of their office to hide from public view politically damaging information, and White House press secretary Scott McClellan was careful not to use the term. Still, he would not rule out the use of executive privilege, saying: "I think it's premature to even speculate about such matters."

Presidents can invoke executive privilege to shield from public view some aspects of their internal decision-making process. "It's used to shroud advice that's sometimes inflammatory or has been rejected," said Thomas Sargentich, a law professor at American University in Washington, D.C. "Executive privilege is not supposed to be a shield in criminal investigations."
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/10/08/executive_privilege_seen_as_leak_case_option/


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
hang a left Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-05 06:50 PM
Response to Original message
1. Lots more in the article.
snip>

McClellan said Gonzales's office set its own deadline for 5 p.m. yesterday so that it could go through the piles of information to see what information is relevant and should be turned over.

Gonzales's office will also have the opportunity to examine what information, if any, should not be turned over because the administration believes it is protected by executive privilege. The Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, which provides legal opinions on questions with constitutional dimensions, would review any White House claims.

Sargentich, who worked in the Office of Legal Counsel during the Carter and Reagan administrations, said lawyers in that office can make independent judgments, though the attorney general remains their boss and can overrule them.

If the White House asserts a claim of executive privilege, Sargentich said it would be a strong sign that the investigation is heading to the highest levels of the Bush administration, given that the claim can only be used to shield the president's decision-making process.


snip>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
don954 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-05 06:54 PM
Response to Original message
2. oh god, do it - executive privilege please
nothing says guilty like trying to hide behind "executive privilege", can we say Nixon?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joemurphy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-05 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Note that this article is two years old. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hang a left Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-05 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. That is the idea.
I am taking people back to when the investigation first began. I know I forgot. But, I was reminded today when the Gozales-Card article and comments on the news shows came out.

IMO-If in fact the WH did claim executive priveledge over certain documents and other evidence that was supoenaed, then there is a quiet legal battle going on behind the scenes, with appeals to boot. We know Fitzgerald and those in his camp aren't leaking. Why would the WH leak something as damaging as this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aint_no_life_nowhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-05 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
3. Why don't Republicans just proclaim an Emperor "X"
And we never know who our Emperor is or what he does. We never see him. He never gives speeches. No one but the inner circle attends meetings with him. And diebold is discarded as superfluous. Just put in place a secret government where we have no access to any information at all. We might be half way there already.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-05 07:01 PM
Response to Original message
4. My lord... do it, please do it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 02:00 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC