“...for the President to perform his constitutional duties, it is imperative that he receive candid and unfettered advice and that free and open discussions and deliberations occur among his advisors and between those advisors and others within and outside the Executive Branch.”

With this pronouncement, on June 28, 2007, George W. Bush refused to let Harriet Miers, his choice for the Supreme Court, and Sara Taylor, a former political director for him, respond to Congressional subpoenas. He did it again for them one week later.

On July 13, 2007, Bush again invoked executive privilege in refusing to release documents relating to the friendly-fire death of Pat Tillman, noting that certain papers requested “implicate executive branch confidentiality interests...”

Bush invoked executive privilege a fourth time on August 1, 2007, when he refused to allow his “brain,” the nefarious Karl Rove, testify in regard to the mass firings of federal prosecutors. The White House noted, “Mr. Rove, as an immediate presidential advisor, is immune from compelled congressional testimony that relates to his official duties. ...”

So explain to me why Darrell Issa is upset about the White House invoking, for the first time in 3 1/2 years, executive privilege for Eric Holder?

Edward F. Murphy

Mesa

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.