• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/226]

Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

"Odds are a guy like Issa would just forward them on to Fox News"??? What evidence do you have to support this silly notion?

What did you think he wants the documents for? That's the whole point of this thing. He wants to make Obama look bad. Period. How could he do that without releasing the information to the press? I mean, I can't say he would do it for sure. But I don't see how it would make sense to roll the dice on an ultra partisan nut like Issa who is clearly grandstanding for the conspiracy nuts.
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

What did you think he wants the documents for? That's the whole point of this thing. He wants to make Obama look bad. Period. How could he do that without releasing the information to the press? I mean, I can't say he would do it for sure. But I don't see how it would make sense to roll the dice on an ultra partisan nut like Issa who is clearly grandstanding for the conspiracy nuts.

What's wrong with making any politician, especially one with an immense amount of power, "look bad"? In fact it's the duty of every citizen pursue any indication of wrongdoing and not concern themselves whether the politician might "look bad"!

Mister, if there is an ultra partisan nut anywhere, it's you. That's the only type who would want information kept secret from the people and not released to the public.
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

What's wrong with making any politician, especially one with an immense amount of power, "look bad"?

Nothing. Never said there was. Re-read my post I guess.

Mister, if there is an ultra partisan nut anywhere, it's you. That's the only type who would want information kept secret from the people and not released to the public.

Er what? You think that the only type who would not want the cartel to get the details of our campaign against them would be a hyper partisan? Um, I'm pretty sure you can think up one or two reasons that would be a bad idea, no?
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

Classified information comes in many levels. Operational details against a campaign against the cartel is probably amongst the information you need to be the very most careful with. People in the DOJ who have access to that kind of information get years of training, they only keep it in physical files in ultra secure facilities or ultra secure computer systems that are not connected to the outside world in any way. The DOJ never releases the names of anybody who has access to that kind of information. If you just hand it over to a Congressional committee, literally, unpaid 19 year old interns get access to it, and the cartel would know every one of their names because it is all public record. Congresspeople have no training, no secure bunkers to keep their files in, just normal office computers hooked up to the internet...

Now, some times information that highly secure has been shared with Congresspeople. For example, leading up to the Iraq war, Bush brought in one senator and one representative from each party to much more secure briefings on some of the most secret stuff. Obama brought in members of both parties on the Bin Laden killing. But, that is a VERY different thing than this. Who those folks are is carefully negotiated by the parties and the administration. They're usually moderates. They're people that everybody trusts. They often, if not always, have had a top security clearance in the relevant area previously for some reason or another because they were in the military or the DOJ or something previously. I mean, if you want to, say, send in McCain and Kerry to review the documents, I'd be totally fine with that.

But Issa is a whole different deal. He is not John McCain. He's a hothead. He's a Joe McCarthy. A scandalmaker. That's his schtick. Trying to manufacture scandals for the conspiracy nuts. Nobody trusts him, nor should they. Turning ultra sensitive information over to a guy like that would get a lot of people killed for no reason other than to fuel his headline grabbing spasm. And turning it over to a whole committee, that should never happen.

What movie did you get that from?
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

Nothing. Never said there was. Re-read my post I guess.

I questioned what's wrong with making a politician look bad and you replied "nothing", Okay, since that's been established why did you mention it in the first place?

Er what? You think that the only type who would not want the cartel to get the details of our campaign against them would be a hyper partisan? Um, I'm pretty sure you can think up one or two reasons that would be a bad idea, no?

There are thousands of State secrets in DC so having another about Mexican drug cartels is rather small potatoes. What do you fear about this information?

Obama and his hack are playing CYA, that's all.
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

I questioned what's wrong with making a politician look bad and you replied "nothing", Okay, since that's been established why did you mention it in the first place?

It doesn't seem like you're following. I was explaining why Issa would release the info.

There are thousands of State secrets in DC so having another about Mexican drug cartels is rather small potatoes. What do you fear about this information?

That is totally absurd. People like members of the house do not have access to operational information about any criminal enforcement stuff, and certainly nothing of the magnitude of the details about our campaign against the cartel, informant names, pictures of our undercovers, who knows what.
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

It doesn't seem like you're following. I was explaining why Issa would release the info.

Right. And then you said there was nothing wrong with that. I agree.

That is totally absurd. People like members of the house do not have access to operational information about any criminal enforcement stuff, and certainly nothing of the magnitude of the details about our campaign against the cartel, informant names, pictures of our undercovers, who knows what.

Is it your understanding that members of Congress are not privy to international secrets? In fact they always have been privy to State secrets.

The only danger regarding security leaks has been the Obama White House.

Feinstein Takes On White House Leaks | RealClearPolitics
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

No, in fact, I'm wanting you to believe that they do. And...he is responsible for them. He can't claim that he didn't know about it; Holder can't claim he didn't know about it; and invoke EP. :shrug:

That's exactly the point.
good to hear
then that means you were wrong to post this:
Like I said, the only way that the "Documents in Question" are protected under Executive Privilege, is if they concern the actions and communications of the President himself. That doesn't extend to the entire Executive branch, which includes most of the organs of the federal government.
[emphasis added]
because if the executive staff is following the directions of the executive, then their work is also covered under executive privilege
thanks for the admission
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

Right. And then you said there was nothing wrong with that. I agree.

You aren't thinking clearly. I am saying that Issa would possibly release the information because he wants to make Obama look bad. If there is anything in there that when presented out of context would get Issa in the headlines or make Obama look bad or get conspiracy nuts fired up, odds are that he would release it. That isn't why it is bad to release it, that is why he would release it.

Why it would be bad to release it is obvious. People would be killed, informants would be compromised, the operation would be undermined, etc.

Is it your understanding that members of Congress are not privy to international secrets? In fact they always have been privy to State secrets.

No kiddo. I know exactly what kind of information they get access to. It's basically just the same stuff any citizen gets for most of them, plus congressional research reports. Those aren't generally released publicly, but any senator or representative is authorized to release them and most of them that aren't just too boring to be worth anybody's time to release. Some senators and representatives get access to more secure information. The intel committee members for example. Like I've been explaining. But just your run of the mill member, nothing really that you don't have access to.
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

You aren't thinking clearly. I am saying that Issa would possibly release the information because he wants to make Obama look bad. If there is anything in there that when presented out of context would get Issa in the headlines or make Obama look bad or get conspiracy nuts fired up, odds are that he would release it. That isn't why it is bad to release it, that is why he would release it.

And you correctly said there is nothing wrong with that. We agree.

Why it would be bad to release it is obvious. People would be killed, informants would be compromised, the operation would be undermined, etc.

What evidence do you have that this would actually happen? What do you believe would be released?

No kiddo. I know exactly what kind of information they get access to. It's basically just the same stuff any citizen gets for most of them, plus congressional research reports. Those aren't generally released publicly, but any senator or representative is authorized to release them and most of them that aren't just too boring to be worth anybody's time to release. Some senators and representatives get access to more secure information. The intel committee members for example. Like I've been explaining. But just your run of the mill member, nothing really that you don't have access to.

Well you are know what kind of President is in the White House when even his colleagues are forced to be critical, as the link said, and also to "shut the f--k up". There doesn't appear to be the same problem in Congress or the Senate.
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

Like I said, the only way that the "Documents in Question" are protected under Executive Privilege, is if they concern the actions and communications of the President himself. That doesn't extend to the entire Executive branch, which includes most of the organs of the federal government.
Given that the documents subpoenaed encompass only the time period after 2/4/11, after which the F and F 'scandal' had already broken, and given that Holder assigned an Inspector General to the case sometime in 2/11, and given that Obama spoke publicly about F and F on 3/23/11[sup]1[/sup], then it would be reasonable to assume that the subpoenaed documents would include the actions and communications of the president himself (I would presume he had also been informed of the IG investigation launched in February).

Issa is not looking for documents about F and F, or about the death of Agent Terry (again, shame on the right for using his death, and his family, as a political soapbox), he is looking for documents that might indicate a cover up, an intent to punish whistleblowers, or some other admission of knowledge that has not been made public. In other words, he doesn't give a **** about F and F, he's just trying to find some way to damage the administration after the fact.



1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fast_and_Furious#Investigations_and_fallout
 
Last edited:
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

No, in fact, I'm wanting you to believe that they do. And...he is responsible for them. He can't claim that he didn't know about it; Holder can't claim he didn't know about it; and invoke EP. :shrug:

That's exactly the point.
As noted in my post above, your point is chronologically challenged. During the time frame of the documents requested (and claimed privileged), everybody knew about it.
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

And you correctly said there is nothing wrong with that. We agree.

Why it would be bad to release it is obvious. People would be killed, informants would be compromised, the operation would be undermined, etc.

What evidence do you have that this would actually happen? What do you believe would be released?

You aren't thinking clearly. I am saying that Issa would possibly release the information because he wants to make Obama look bad. If there is anything in there that when presented out of context would get Issa in the headlines or make Obama look bad or get conspiracy nuts fired up, odds are that he would release it. That isn't why it is bad to release it, that is why he would release it.
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

Which part were you unaware of?

The part you mostly got wrong.
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

As noted in my post above, your point is chronologically challenged. During the time frame of the documents requested (and claimed privileged), everybody knew about it.

You don't put much thought into things, do you? Of course everyone knew about at the time the documents were requested. Obviously, it's hoped that who knew about it before is detailed in those documents.
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

Given that the documents subpoenaed encompass only the time period after 2/4/11, after which the F and F 'scandal' had already broken, and given that Holder assigned an Inspector General to the case sometime in 2/11, and given that Obama spoke publicly about F and F on 3/23/11[sup]1[/sup], then it would be reasonable to assume that the subpoenaed documents would include the actions and communications of the president himself (I would presume he had also been informed of the IG investigation launched in February).

The documents in question are from an earlier time-frame. Otherwise, there would be no need to cover them up.

Issa is not looking for documents about F and F, or about the death of Agent Terry (again, shame on the right for using his death, and his family, as a political soapbox), he is looking for documents that might indicate a cover up, an intent to punish whistleblowers, or some other admission of knowledge that has not been made public. In other words, he doesn't give a **** about F and F, he's just trying to find some way to damage the administration after the fact.



1. ATF gunwalking scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Details of the cover up are important, and had it been a Republican president, the Dems would be leading the charge, as they so often did when the shoe was on the other foot.
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

The part you mostly got wrong.

Well, if you come up with an argument, by all means post it. Otherwise, I guess you're the one that turned out to be wrong, eh?
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

good to hear
then that means you were wrong to post this:
[emphasis added]
because if the executive staff is following the directions of the executive, then their work is also covered under executive privilege
thanks for the admission

Not so much. Executive privilege extends to the "immediate staff and advisors" of the President, but only when it concerns Presidential involvement.
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

Well, if you come up with an argument, by all means post it. Otherwise, I guess you're the one that turned out to be wrong, eh?

The things you are talking about cross two different types of classified information. You are talking about Law Enforcement Use only information but trying to describe (poorly) controls given to national security information.
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

You don't put much thought into things, do you? Of course everyone knew about at the time the documents were requested. Obviously, it's hoped that who knew about it before is detailed in those documents.
But you realize none of the documents being requested were created prior to 2/4/11, right?

So your hope is that a document created on, say, 3/10/11 captures someone 'important' saying they knew about F and F on, say, 12/13/10?

Holder: Well, Mr. President, in our 3.10.11 briefing today I should mention trouble from Congress in the Fast and Furious investigation, which of course I knew was running guns illegally way back in December of last year . . . . .

That's what the right is looking for? :lamo
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

But you realize none of the documents being requested were created prior to 2/4/11, right?

So your hope is that a document created on, say, 3/10/11 captures someone 'important' saying they knew about F and F on, say, 12/13/10?

Holder: Well, Mr. President, in our 3.10.11 briefing today I should mention trouble from Congress in the Fast and Furious investigation, which of course I knew was running guns illegally way back in December of last year . . . . .

That's what the right is looking for? :lamo

In a very simplistic sort of way, I imagine something along those lines would be well received by the panel. However, despite all your diversions, why do you think they don't want to give the documents over?
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

The documents in question are from an earlier time-frame. [...]
Ah, I think I see your problem. Issa is requesting no documents that were authored prior to 2/4/11, at least with respect to the Holder contempt threat. It was in the homework assignment I posted earlier:

The Committee has made clear that its contempt resolution will be limited to internal Department “documents from after February 4, 2011, related to the Department’s response to Congress.” [...]

READ: Attorney General Eric Holder’s Letter to President Obama Requesting Executive Privilege Over ‘Fast and Furious’ Documents | Fox News Insider
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

Ah, I think I see your problem. Issa is requesting no documents that were authored prior to 2/4/11, at least with respect to the Holder contempt threat. It was in the homework assignment I posted earlier:

No, no. The date of the piece of paper is irrelevant. What they contain is likely to describe who knew what and when they knew it. Why else invoke the EP?

Why do you keep avoiding that last question?
 
Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

In a very simplistic sort of way, I imagine something along those lines would be well received by the panel. However, despite all your diversions, why do you think they don't want to give the documents over?
Who cares what I think? I can assure you that I don't care what anyone else thinks. I'm here to see and participate a rational, fact-based debate (yes, I know -- folly). As I told you before, read the Holder-to-Obama letter; it lays out his reasons without any need to fantasize (which would surely involve partisan conspiracy theories).

Barring any evidence to the contrary, we can only assume that what Holder wrote is the truth. It certainly makes sense -- privileged executive communications, are, well, privileged, and each administration has a duty to defend that privilege. If you think his claim is false, or it should not apply in this case, then your remedy is the court system. If you don't like the concept of Executive Privilege, then your remedy is to lobby your legislators to introduce a constitutional amendment banning it.

If your remedy is to create partisan conspiracy theories, please be advised that I have no interest in them and will not address them.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom