Executive Privilege (another flashback)

[deminks]

We may hear more about this term in the next week than we wish, and I am sure that KKKarl will send out his talking points about it tomorrow morning.

So I just wanted to provide some info so we can counter what surely will be the rallying cry for the criminal reich-wing.

From Wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_privilege

Executive privilege is the power held by the President of the United States and other members of the executive branch that allows them to resist certain search warrants and other encroachments. As presidents since George Washington and Thomas Jefferson have argued, the separation of powers embodied in the United States Constitution implies that each branch will be permitted to operate within limits free to some degree from the control or supervision of the other. The Supreme Court re-affirmed this in the case United States v. Nixon.

The concept of executive privilege is a legally murky one, and the Constitution does not mention it, though some consider it to be an element of the separation of powers doctrine. The history of Executive privilege underscores the untested nature of the doctrine, since Presidents have generally sidestepped open confrontations with Congress and the courts over this issue by first asserting the privilege, then producing some of the documents requested on an assertedly voluntary basis.

(snip)

The Supreme Court however DID reject the notion that the President has an "absolute privilege." The Supreme Court stated: "To read the Art.II powers of the President as providing an absolute privilege as against a subpoena essential to enforcement of criminal statutes on no more than a genaralized claim of the public interest in confidentiality of nonmilitary and nondiplomatic discussions would upset the constitutional balance of 'a workable government' and graveley impair the role of the courts under Art. III" 418 U.S. 683, 707. Because Nixon had asserted only a generalized need for confidentiality, the Court held that the larger public interest in obtaining the truth in the context of a criminal prosecution took precedence.

(end snip)

So, executive privilege is not in the constitution, it is not supposed to be used frivolously, it cannot be used as a legal coverup. KKKarl is speaking about the attorney purge openly and in public.

http://www.wsfa.com/global/story.asp?s=6235203

He has been implicated in non classified documents that have been released to the public and congress.

He and other executive employees who are asked to testify or subpoenaed should be made to comply. Invoking executive privilege in this case is very shaky grounds, IMHO.