Mar 21 2007

Liberal Ignorance On Executive Privilege

Published by at 1:25 pm under All General Discussions

Some naive folks think the concept of Executive Privilege and the ability of Congress to compel testimony is unsettled law – too bad they forgot about Darth Cheney and his energy task force. The case law there is clear – Congress will lose any and all court battles. If Congress cannot gain access to visitors, they will not gain access to the actual administration’s personnel. There was a lot of debate on this issue at the time and it was all settled in the Administration’s favor. And it took years in the courts. Checkmate.

13 responses so far

13 Responses to “Liberal Ignorance On Executive Privilege”

  1. Soothsayer says:

    You are totally and abyssmally wrong on this issue – AJ – and its because you don’t take the trouble to READ. Vis-a-vis the Cheney matter: the court threw out the suit by the compptroller general because he does not have the personal, concrete and particularized injury required not because of any bogus executive privilege claim.

    In this instance, Congress has the subpoena power. They’re not suing for access through the courts – they are demanding that Rove and Miers APPEAR before them, under oath. If they fail to appear, they may be found in contempt of Congress and jailed. Period.

    As we have seen before -during the Nixon Administration – when the courts ORDERED the tapes be produced, and later when Haldeman, Ehrlichman, John Mitchell, et alii meekly hiked up the Hill to take their whipping, the Congress will examine Mr. Rove and Ms. Miers under oath, in public, and with a transcript.

  2. AJStrata says:


    Do we HAVE to go through your total lack of credentials AGAIN on these matters? That is not what the court said was the core issue. And trust me, it is going to the courts and there it will sit!

    LOL! You’d think you losers on the left would have learned your lessons by now.

  3. Carol J says:


    The Nixon tapes were ordered by the COURTS, yes, NOT the Congress, and just because Congress likes to think it can use it’s subpoena “power” as a blunt instrument any time they feel like it, it is simply not true. They cannot simply ORDER it without “cause” and expect it to be instantly obeyed! That power correctly is held to the judiciary and it always has been. Because of Watergate, Congress arrogantly or ignorantly gave itself that authority and they were not challenged. So now we are stuck with a totally unaccountable Congress. Chuck Schumer or Patrick Leahy claiming that they have that power is not the same as “actually” having the authority. If Congress has evidence of criminal behavior, that needs to be processed through the courts, not Congress…except in the case of impeachable offenses! Are you saying that challenging a Congressional subpoena is now an impeachable offense? Sorry.

    Congress cannot even police and investigate itself…look at the absolutely disgusting mess called the “Ethics Committee” That committee is nothing but a CYA operation designed to cover the likes of William Jefferson, Harry Reid, and anybody else who should look in the mirror before throwing stones! Who in this government has OVERSIGHT over the Congress? Anybody? I thought so!

    Congress has no more power to enforce a subpoena than the President or any Executive Branch official has the power to enforce a subpoena on Congress EXCEPT through the Department of Justice and the Courts and that’s where this is headed. Congress is appointing itself judge, jury, and executioner here!

    Contempt of Congress? I hold Congress in total CONTEMPT!! Somehow I don’t think I’m alone in that.

    Not to mention that the conduct of the Nixon administration was a “CRIMINAL” investigation by Judge Sirica separate from what the Senate’s committee was doing. Of course Congress wanted the tapes, but the only way they were produced was taking Nixon to court.

    Sorry…Congress is not in charge of anything. They’re doing a pretty damn poor job of being in charge of the legislation they are charged with passing but now are on indefinate hold while they hound and persecute the Bush Administration. THAT is not their job…they simply appointed themselves the moral authority and their arogance knows no bounds.

    Sorry AJ. I’ll get off the old soap box now.

  4. Soothsayer says:

    Carol – you are quite simply loony:

    The tapes were subpoenaed by Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox in order to confirm the testimony of John Dean before a Congressional committee – after Alexander Butterfield revealed the existence of a White House taping system under oath during Congressional hearings on the matter – and the Court ORDERED that the subpoena be honored. Just as the Court will order that congressional subpoenas be honored by Rove and Miers.

    AJ – you can knock my credentials – but you’re the guy who can’t convert inches to metrics and who blew the Libby call completely – in spite of all your imaginary DC insider lawyers telling you Libby would walk. Again – you are unable to understand the law:

    The issue in dismissing the lawsuit against Cheney was (and I quote):

    This case, in which neither a House of Congress nor any congressional committee has issued a subpoena for the disputed information or authorized this suit, is not the setting for such unprecedented judicial action

    In other words, had congress subpoenaed the information – the case would not have been summarily dismissed.

  5. Aitch748 says:

    Being called “loony” by Soothsayer is like being called a liar by Bill Clinton.

  6. lurker9876 says:

    Yup, aitch748.

    “Just as the Court will order that congressional subpoenas be honored by Rove and Miers.

    AJ – you can knock my credentials – but you’re the guy who can’t convert inches to metrics and who blew the Libby call completely – in spite of all your imaginary DC insider lawyers telling you Libby would walk. Again – you are unable to understand the law:”

    I agree with AJ that this will go to the court and there it will sit for many years. AJ knew that the jury was going to be very biased, unfair and unjust to Libby. Libby deserve a fair and just trial and did not get it.

    Carol’s point is “Imperial Congress”. That’s it.

  7. lurker9876 says:

    AJ Strata, I found this like to be interesting:

    An Historical Perspective on the Controversy over U.S. Attorney Firings:

  8. Terrye says:


    Are you a constitutional lawyer? I doubt it.

    There is no evidence of an underlying crime and so it is highly unlikely that the court will wave Executive privilege for a fishing expedition. Congress is not superior to the executive branch, it is coequal.

    Now in the old Soviet Union when there was a purge the Politburo could drag anyone in they wanted and have a little show trial before they sent them to the Gulag or shot them, whichever, but in America there are rules, even for the House of Lords, oops I mean the Congress.

    This whole thing just shows how vain and unserious and hysterical and hypocritical the Democrats really are.

  9. AJStrata says:


    You don’t have credentials to knock my friend! This show is over. I noticed the Dems don’t have the spine to issue the subpoenas. Schumer was on CNN pretending that the fact subpoenas were only authorized meant there was still a window to negotiate. He and the Dems know they are out on a limb. You will see, no subpoenas will EVER be issued. This game is over – your just not able to see it.

    And I forgot more engineering and science today than you could hope to grasp in a lifetime. So don’t try and look science savy because I rushed some math on a post. My few mistakes won’t salvage you from your ignorance. Nothing can save you from that.

  10. Carol J says:

    I guess reading 27 books on Watergate, 19 of which I own, and being glued to the hearings on television when I was in college did nothing for my education…but it DID turn me into a rather well informed Watergate junkie er student! LOL! By the way – you said “The tapes were subpoenaed by Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox” Er this may come as a shock, but Cox was appointed by the Justice Department NOT Congress. Cox was under absolutely NO obligation to Congress to turn the tapes over or even to report to Congress on their contents. He could literally tell Congress to blow it out their collective ears! It was Sirica’s (Judiciary) call as to the disposition of the tapes and executive privilege. That’s why this MUST be settled by the courts! Just because it’s called the Judiciary Committee does NOT mean that they are co-equal with the Supreme Court…or even the lowliest district court. Sorry.

    And NO…make that HELL NO…I am NOT defending Nixon. I used to be a John Kennedy Democrat for pete’s sake! Look, all I know is that Congress gave “itself” permission to hold absolute authority over the Executive Branch because of Watergate and unfortunately for us that’s what we’re stuck with…an Imperial Congress (thanks Lurker), beholden to no one! Bush hit the nail right on the head…it’s a “fishing expedition”.

    One more thing, throwing names or spitballs at people you disagree with will not win you debate points, especially here. But that’s probably not what you’re here for anyway. Come to think of it, why ARE you here? Can’t be that much fun.


  11. Terrye says:

    Also in Watergate there was a crime, there is not one here. This is just a show trial so the Democrats can waste time and money going after the Bush administration.

    Trying to compare this to Watergate is useless, this is a plenary not a criminal matter.

  12. Terrye says:

    And sooth, you calling someone a loon would be funny if it were not so sad.

  13. Terrye says:

    And you know something sooth? The American people did not elect the Democrats so that they could live out this bizarre and unhealthy attachment they have to Watergate and Viet Nam. All the time every day it is about revenge, getting even, showing their butts for the TV cameras, but the American people have real concerns and it would be nice if the new Congress could take a break from hounding Bush long enough to at tleast pretend to accomplish something.