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

j-mac · Jun 25, 2012

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

upsideguy said:
The CREP was centered in the White House.... John Dean was involved in the decision. It was corrupt politics had its highest.

Yep, and the way this looks, it also may be corruption in politics at the highest levels of the WH as well.

Its a wild-ass stretch to come up with the notion that 200 people were killed by a botched program. The deaths of those people had nothing to do with F&F and everything to do with the drug wars. Unless you are suddenly telling its its not people that kill people, but guns that kill people you are really out on a limb that can not hold the weight on inchworm.

Then why the cover up with Executive Privilege? :coffeepap:

j-mac

AdamT · Jun 25, 2012

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

j-mac said:
Yep, and the way this looks, it also may be corruption in politics at the highest levels of the WH as well.

Issa admits that there is no evidence of WH involvement.

Then why the cover up with Executive Privilege?

Separation of powers. Congress does not have the unfettered power to invade the executive branch's deliberative process -- especially not when it appears to be a politically motivated fishing expedition.

OpportunityCost · Jun 25, 2012

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

AdamT said:
Issa admits that there is no evidence of WH involvement.

Separation of powers. Congress does not have the unfettered power to invade the executive branch's deliberative process -- especially not when it appears to be a politically motivated fishing expedition.

Bolded---maybe because he hasnt gotten the documents hes requested---which all changes after the assertion of executive privilige. Thats some mighty fine cherry picking of data there.

ttwtt78640 · Jun 25, 2012

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

AdamT said:
Issa admits that there is no evidence of WH involvement.

Separation of powers. Congress does not have the unfettered power to invade the executive branch's deliberative process -- especially not when it appears to be a politically motivated fishing expedition.

Great argument there. Since Holder will not supply F&F documents there is no eveidence of ANYONE'S involvement, so no problem. No brain, no headache. 2,000 guns walking and 200+ killed with those guns is not in dispute, but to you that is just the way it is, no problem. Rumors of 2,000 "disenfranchised" voters in FL and you want DOJ dispatched quick fast and in a hurry, but that is not partisan politics, that is an EMERGENCY! LOL

AdamT · Jun 25, 2012

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

OpportunityCost said:
Bolded---maybe because he hasnt gotten the documents hes requested---which all changes after the assertion of executive privilige. Thats some mighty fine cherry picking of data there.

Usually we require probable cause in order to justify a subpoena. You don't authorize a massive document search on the theory that the production of documents might give you after-the-fact justification for the search.

AdamT · Jun 25, 2012

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

ttwtt78640 said:
Great argument there. Since Holder will not supply F&F documents there is no eveidence of ANYONE'S involvement, so no problem. No brain, no headache. 2,000 guns walking and 200+ killed with those guns is not in dispute, but to you that is just the way it is, no problem. Rumors of 2,000 "disenfranchised" voters in FL and you want DOJ dispatched quick fast and in a hurry, but that is not partisan politics, that is an EMERGENCY! LOL

Great theory: how can the authorities know if you're doing anything wrong if we don't allow them to toss your home and office?

ttwtt78640 · Jun 25, 2012

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

AdamT said:
Usually we require probable cause in order to justify a subpoena. You don't authorize a massive document search on the theory that the production of documents might give you after-the-fact justification for the search.

There were TWO simple questions asked of DOJ about F&F; WHO authorized the guns walking and WHY? That should be EASY to do, BUT NO, Holder says that information is not available, which is INSANE. You do not run a multi million dollar program, involving hundreds of people, in many locations, in multiple states and with NOBODY in charge.

ttwtt78640 · Jun 25, 2012

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

AdamT said:
Great theory: how can the authorities know if you're doing anything wrong if we don't allow them to toss your home and office?

2,000 missing guns and 200+ people killed with them IS probable cause for concern even in DC.

Karl · Jun 25, 2012

Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

mac said:
Karl said:

[...] I'm just quoting this so that it's clear that -- in your opinion -- use of executive privilege is only acceptable for national security purposes. [...]

Click to expand...

[...] the supreme court agrees with me...that's why they said Nixon had to turn over his taped conversations from the oval office. [...]

They do? Would you care to quote the pertinent section of any Supreme Court decision that you think supports that claim?

upsideguy · Jun 25, 2012

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

ttwtt78640 said:
2,000 missing guns and 200+ people killed with them IS probable cause for concern even in DC.

I see, so these 200 people were killed BECAUSE guns were available? Had these guns not been available these 200 people would be alive? You may want to run that messaging by the NRA before proceeding. They believe its people that kill, not the availability of guns.

You Cons please sort this out and let us know which of these it is as you can't have it both ways.

If we extract the real issue, 2000 missing guns, from the hysterics we see how see this really is.... Given standards set by the previous administrations and congresses, if we don't get excited about $6.6B in cash missing in Iraq or the $3.2T missing at the Pentagon (20% of our national debt, enough to fix every entitlement program running),

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdHLUHwU

who cares about 2000 guns that had an aggregate cost of a couple of hundred thousand. A bad idea, but hardly a crisis. then why are we getting on panties in a bunch about 2000 missing guns? Come on Cons, get a life or at least get real.

Samhain · Jun 25, 2012

Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

Karl said:
They do? Would you care to quote the pertinent section of any Supreme Court decision that you think supports that claim?

http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/104284.pdf

Not Supreme Court cases, but 2 DC Circuit cases have the current set of judicial precedent pretty well set( 1997 & 2004 ). Neither cases support the President's current use of Executive Privilege.

On the point of Watergate, Nixon v. Sirica never went past the DC Circuit.

In Nixon v. Sirica,10 the first of the Watergate cases, a panel of the District of
Columbia Circuit rejected President Nixon’s claim that he was absolutely immune
from all compulsory process whenever he asserted a formal claim of executive
privilege, holding that while presidential conversations are “presumptively
privileged,”11 the presumption could be overcome by an appropriate showing of
public need by the branch seeking access to the conversations. In Sirica, “a uniquely
powerful,” albeit undefined, showing was deemed to have been made by the Special
Prosecutor that the tapes subpoenaed by the grand jury contained evidence necessary
to carrying out the vital function of determining whether probable cause existed that
those indicted had committed crimes.

Karl · Jun 25, 2012

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

ttwtt78640 said:
There were TWO simple questions asked of DOJ about F&F; WHO authorized the guns walking [...]

The strategy of targeting high-level individuals, which was already ATF policy, would be implemented by Bill Newell, special agent in charge of ATF's Phoenix field division. In order to accomplish it, the office decided to use "gunwalking" as laid out in a January 2010 [local] briefing paper. This was said to be allowed under ATF regulations and given legal backing by U.S. Attorney for the District of Arizona Dennis K. Burke. It was additionally approved and funded by a Justice Department task force.[3] [this was an AZ-based task force -- Karl]

ATF gunwalking scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hell, I thought everybody knew that :shrug:

ttwtt78640 said:
and WHY?

To catch the cartel leaders. Hell, I thought everybody knew that :shrug:

ttwtt78640 said:
That should be EASY to do, BUT NO, Holder says that information is not available, which is INSANE. You do not run a multi million dollar program, involving hundreds of people, in many locations, in multiple states and with NOBODY in charge.

As you can see from the info I provided, your outrage is directed at an alternate reality. Do let us know how that works out . . . . . :shrug:

mac · Jun 25, 2012

Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

Karl said:
They do? Would you care to quote the pertinent section of any Supreme Court decision that you think supports that claim?

United States v. Nixon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Less than three weeks later the Court issued its decision; the justices struggled to write an opinion that all eight could agree to. The stakes were so high, in that the tapes most likely contained evidence of criminal wrongdoing by the President and his men, that they wanted no dissent. All contributed to the opinion and Chief Justice Burger delivered the unanimous decision. After ruling that the Court could indeed resolve the matter and that Jaworski had proven a "sufficient likelihood that each of the tapes contains conversations relevant to the offenses charged in the indictment," the Court went to the main issue of executive privilege. The Court rejected Nixon's claim to "an absolute, unqualified Presidential privilege of immunity from judicial process under all circumstances." [US v. Nixon] Nixon resigned 15 days later."

Executive privilege - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The Supreme Court confirmed the legitimacy of this doctrine in United States v. Nixon, but only to the extent of confirming that there is a qualified privilege. Once invoked, a presumption of privilege is established, requiring the Prosecutor to make a "sufficient showing" that the "Presidential material" is "essential to the justice of the case."(418 U.S. at 713-14). Chief Justice Burger further stated that executive privilege would most effectively apply when the oversight of the executive would impair that branch's national security concerns."

Karl · Jun 25, 2012

Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

Samhain said:
http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/104284.pdf

Not Supreme Court cases, but 2 DC Circuit cases have the current set of judicial precedent pretty well set( 1997 & 2004 ). Neither cases support the President's current use of Executive Privilege.

On the point of Watergate, Nixon v. Sirica never went past the DC Circuit.

The basic tenet of debate is to address the topic. In the case of the polemic I was directing at mac, the topic was: "use of executive privilege is only acceptable for national security purposes", according to mac, who claimed SCOTUS concurrence.

Your thoughts on mac's claim(s)?

Karl · Jun 25, 2012

Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

mac said:
United States v. Nixon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Less than three weeks later the Court issued its decision; the justices struggled to write an opinion that all eight could agree to. The stakes were so high, in that the tapes most likely contained evidence of criminal wrongdoing by the President and his men, that they wanted no dissent. All contributed to the opinion and Chief Justice Burger delivered the unanimous decision. After ruling that the Court could indeed resolve the matter and that Jaworski had proven a "sufficient likelihood that each of the tapes contains conversations relevant to the offenses charged in the indictment," the Court went to the main issue of executive privilege. The Court rejected Nixon's claim to "an absolute, unqualified Presidential privilege of immunity from judicial process under all circumstances." [US v. Nixon] Nixon resigned 15 days later."

Executive privilege - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The Supreme Court confirmed the legitimacy of this doctrine in United States v. Nixon, but only to the extent of confirming that there is a qualified privilege. Once invoked, a presumption of privilege is established, requiring the Prosecutor to make a "sufficient showing" that the "Presidential material" is "essential to the justice of the case."(418 U.S. at 713-14). Chief Justice Burger further stated that executive privilege would most effectively apply when the oversight of the executive would impair that branch's national security concerns."

While I sincerely appreciate your efforts (many here don't even try), you have not shown that executive privilege is limited solely to national security issues. I agree that executive privilege is not absolute, but I never claimed it was.

AdamT · Jun 25, 2012

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

ttwtt78640 said:
There were TWO simple questions asked of DOJ about F&F; WHO authorized the guns walking and WHY? That should be EASY to do, BUT NO, Holder says that information is not available, which is INSANE. You do not run a multi million dollar program, involving hundreds of people, in many locations, in multiple states and with NOBODY in charge.

Those are not the questions that are subject to the assertion of privilege.

As Holder has said, it appears that the operation was authorized by someone in ATF, and the Inspector General is investigating that question.

mac · Jun 25, 2012

Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

Karl said:
While I sincerely appreciate your efforts (many here don't even try), you have not shown that executive privilege is limited solely to national security issues. I agree that executive privilege is not absolute, but I never claimed it was.

In every case that Executive Privelege has been invoked due to national securtiy, it has been accepted by the court as valid. In the cases that it has been invoked and not related to national security (as was the case with both Nixon and Clinton) it has been overturned. :shrug:

American · Jun 25, 2012

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

teamosil said:
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.

OPSEC applies to all, so your underlying argument is wrong. If there are leaks, it's not the access but the security process that has failed. Information is disseminated on a need-to-know basis regardless of its classification. Just because you are cleared, does not mean you automatically have access.

Now I don't know about any secrecy oath, but every employee of the US govt (including all elected officials) are require to take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, which by implication and explicitly by obtaining a security clearance level require you to secure the information you are given access to.

AdamT · Jun 25, 2012

Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

mac said:
In every case that Executive Privelege has been invoked due to national securtiy, it has been accepted by the court as valid. In the cases that it has been invoked and not related to national security (as was the case with both Nixon and Clinton) it has been overturned. :shrug:

There are few cases where it's ever been challenged. When it has been challenged the Court has acknowledged that the privilege is not limited to matters of national security.

mac · Jun 25, 2012

Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

AdamT said:
There are few cases where it's ever been challenged. When it has been challenged the Court has acknowledged that the privilege is not limited to matters of national security.

When has it been used in matters not related to national security and been allowed?

ttwtt78640 · Jun 25, 2012

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

AdamT said:
Those are not the questions that are subject to the assertion of privilege.

As Holder has said, it appears that the operation was authorized by someone in ATF, and the Inspector General is investigating that question.

It does NOT take 18 months to figure that out. This IS a cover up.

clownboy · Jun 25, 2012

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

AdamT said:
Usually we require probable cause in order to justify a subpoena. You don't authorize a massive document search on the theory that the production of documents might give you after-the-fact justification for the search.

This is not criminal law, but a function of congressional oversight. Congress has the right to subpoena and to fish as oversight, not the same as a civil or criminal subpeona.

AdamT · Jun 25, 2012

Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

mac said:
When has it been used in matters not related to national security and been allowed?

How about Cheney's successful assertion of the privelege to hide transcripts of his closed door energy policy meetings, for one?

AdamT · Jun 25, 2012

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

clownboy said:
This is not criminal law, but a function of congressional oversight. Congress has the right to subpoena and to fish as oversight, not the same as a civil or criminal subpeona.

They don't have a right to anything they request.

clownboy · Jun 25, 2012

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

AdamT said:
They don't have a right to anything they request.

That's a bit of a dodge. They do have the right to subpeona whatever they want under color of oversight. As to whether what they want is produced, that's up to the agency/individual being subpeonaed to give legal justification as to why they aren't producing. The penalty congress can levy for failure is small, not at all like a criminal subpeona. However, the threat of contempt of congress charges generally holds some political weight.

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

j-mac

AdamT

OpportunityCost

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong

AdamT

AdamT

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong

Karl

upsideguy

Pragmatic Idealist

Samhain

Karl

mac

Karl

Karl

AdamT

mac

American

Trump Grump Whisperer

AdamT

mac

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong

clownboy

AdamT

AdamT

clownboy