Executive Privilege means we got a helluva lot to hide from you evil citizens

[BOSSHOG]

A wise DUer, and I can't recall, who once posted a wonderful thought:

If a person who advises the President of the United States does not want their advice made public, they should not be advising the President of the United States.

And please lurkers jump in here and splain this one to me. Several months ago, tony snow and dan bartlett both said bush never had any conversations with anyone about the attorney firings, so which conversations must be exectively privileged? Or is this just more trick fucking of the constitution by members of the party of integrity? (with your support and agreement of course.)

[AwakeAtLast]

1. Yup, that "Executive Privelege" needs to be shoved up *s a$$

in the form of criminal charges being filed.

I would go a step further than that wise DUer: If the President doesn't want EVERYTHING he does made public, he shouldn't be the POTUS.

Isn't that the simple lesson of the primaries? :shrug:

The next month should be interesting. ;)

:hi:

[BOSSHOG]

2. Why would a president want to keep secrets from his bosses, us?

(Literal classified information notwithstanding.)

I saw a picture in the Times Picayune of New Orleans last week showing two church groups from Seymour Indiana helping build homes in the city. Thank ya'll Hoosiers. Its greatly appreciated.

[AwakeAtLast]

3. I will say "You're welcome" for them

Acutally, my Dad went down with a different church group (he lives in So. IL) the last week of March. He couldn't believe the amount of work left to be done. They did what they could for a week, and I think he may go back.

All I can do right now is give you a hug :hug:

[vixengrl]

4. Executive privilege is about the weakest thing you could claim--

and history says so. There's nothing in the Constitution giving it to the chief executive or his branch, or even the Cabbalistic, mystical, super-secret Fourth Branch Cheney belongs to. It's of recent coinage, I believe. And it's more honored in the rejection than the granting of--Nixon tried to claim it with Watergate, waived it. Reagan tried to claim it with Iran-Contra, and waived it, and then Clinton did, too. (Uh, credit to: http://www.pensitoreview.com/2007/03/21/nixon-waived-executive-privilege-in-watergate-so-did-reagan-in-iran-contra/ )

Ultimately, they all caught on--

The appearance of a cover-up makes things look bad.

Now, Bush, Cheney, et al, always look bad, but, do they really want to push executive power, get knocked down, and then really look like smacked butts? They could only truthfully think of going all the way with that weak and bug-chewed figleaf if...

they were really covering up something.

So I reckon.