Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

BUSH Is Wrong That Executive Privilege Can PREVENT Aides From Talking

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 (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-10-07 03:51 PM
Original message
BUSH Is Wrong That Executive Privilege Can PREVENT Aides From Talking
Executive privilege may not block ex-Rove aide's testimony, say scholars Michael Roston
Published: Tuesday July 10, 2007

Congressional investigators condemned the White House this week for attempting to block two subpoenaed former Bush administration officials from testifying in the probe into the firing of 8 US Attorneys. But some scholars interviewed by RAW STORY suggested that President Bush's assertion of 'Executive Privilege' may not fully obstruct former Bush officials like Sara Taylor and Harriet Miers from testifying.

"Where Bush has it all wrong is in the assertion that a claim of executive privilege can prevent former aides from talking about a subject generally," said Mark Rozell, a Professor at George Mason University's School of Public Policy.

Referring to former Karl Rove lieutenant Taylor, he added, "There is no reason that Taylor cannot testify, answer any questions that do not trench on presidential confidentiality, and then refuse to answer those questions that indeed would violate confidentiality. Certainly there are some areas that would be protected by executive privilege, even in the case of a former aide. But that is far different than prohibiting her from speaking at all."

In a letter written Saturday to Senator Patrick Leahy, the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Taylor's attorney W. Neil Eggleston suggested that his client would like to testify, but could not.

more at:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-10-07 04:08 PM
Response to Original message
1. That's what John Dean said yesterday. The thugs in the WH cannot stop Taylor from
testifying if she wants to testify. They will have to get a restraining order to stop her IF she chooses to testify. THAT has NEVER been done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ben_meyers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-10-07 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. And if I'm Taylors attorney
I'm telling her to not remember anything so as not to get "Libbyed". I've got to believe that's what is going on. Would have worked for Clinton too, except for that blue dress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Edweird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-10-07 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Then they should stick her in the clink until she "remembers" like they did Susan McDougal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Usrename Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-10-07 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Who gagged Sibel Edmonds?
I should know the answer to this. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-10-07 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. I think it was the FBI. I could be wrong though.
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Usrename Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-10-07 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. I think that's right.
I think she tried to work inside the system and her higher-ups came down on her for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
starroute Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-10-07 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. It was Judge Reggie Walton
And he's got to be righteously pissed at the Bushies right now, so I wouldn't necessarily expect any more of that sort of cooperation from him.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Usrename Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Thanks, it's all coming back to me now.
;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-10-07 05:00 PM
Response to Original message
5. Dont you libruls understand - ALL of her testimony would violate confidentiality
so there. NYA NYA NYA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 12:42 AM
Response to Original message
10. Rove, Rove, Rove, Rove, Karl Rove
Rove, Rove, Rove, Karl Rove
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 Wed May 01st 2024, 02:58 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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