Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

White House tells GOP not to release e-mails
Sacramento Bee ^ | 4/18/7 | Margaret Talev

Posted on 04/18/2007 1:01:47 PM PDT by SmithL

Bush lawyers want to review messages on firings before Congress gets them.

WASHINGTON -- President Bush's lawyers told the Republican National Committee on Tuesday not to turn over to Congress any e-mails related to the firings last year of eight U.S. attorneys before showing them to the White House.

Democrats and Republican critics of the administration said the move suggests the White House is seeking to develop a strategy to block the release of the nongovernmental e-mails to congressional investigators by arguing that they're covered by executive privilege and not subject to review.

Scott Stanzel, deputy White House press secretary, said the action was reasonable and that any review of the e-mails would "be conducted in a timely fashion, to balance the committee's need for the information with the extreme over-breadth of their requests."

Party officials declined comment, but a GOP aide familiar with the negotiations said the RNC would comply with the White House request.

In a related development, the House Judiciary Committee plans to grant immunity to a former Justice Department liaison to the White House to force her to tell Congress what she knew about the firings. A vote to grant Monica Goodling "use immunity" could come as early as Thursday. Goodling had refused to testify and said she would invoke the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination.

(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: emails; lawyergate; rnc; usattorney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

1 posted on 04/18/2007 1:01:52 PM PDT by SmithL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Why would you need immunity for something that is legal?


2 posted on 04/18/2007 1:03:50 PM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

To: SmithL

There is absolutely no reason for RNC emails to be released to a bunch of DNC congresspeople on a fishing expedition.

Oh, and thanks again, “protest voters.”


4 posted on 04/18/2007 1:04:12 PM PDT by JennysCool ("The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

The President offered to have his advisers meet with Congress and explain what happened. Schmucky Chumer and crew insisted on going the coercive route. The President should keep these e-mails as hostages.


5 posted on 04/18/2007 1:04:24 PM PDT by Dilbert56 (Harry Reid, D-Nev.: "We're going to pick up Senate seats as a result of this war.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Yeah Schumer wants to be be to manipulate selective releases of them w/o the WH having enough to respond with. Nice try.


6 posted on 04/18/2007 1:04:34 PM PDT by the Real fifi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bahbah; Mo1; STARWISE; onyx

YA-HOOTY!!


7 posted on 04/18/2007 1:05:14 PM PDT by Txsleuth (Thompson/Hunter 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Txsleuth

Fred Fielding digs his heels in :)


8 posted on 04/18/2007 1:08:52 PM PDT by Bahbah (Regev, Goldwasser & Shalit, we are praying for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Bahbah

I saw a clip of Schmuckie a little while ago where he says it is not up to them to prove wrongdoing...it is up to Justice to prove they didn’t do anything wrong!!!

What kind of backassward way to go about “justice” is this?


9 posted on 04/18/2007 1:11:36 PM PDT by Txsleuth (Thompson/Hunter 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

FOIA


10 posted on 04/18/2007 1:13:06 PM PDT by Realism (Some believe that the facts-of-life are open to debate.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Well, yeah. I would want to look at what my enemies were slobbering over first too. My question is why, he hasn’t done so before now?
11 posted on 04/18/2007 1:14:25 PM PDT by CindyDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy
Why would you need immunity for something that is legal?

To try to avoid becoming the next Scooter Libby, someone whose less than 100% perfect memory of his perfectly legal actions got him into a perjury trap with the liberal inquisitors.

12 posted on 04/18/2007 1:14:44 PM PDT by JohnBovenmyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Txsleuth
it is up to Justice to prove they didn’t do anything wrong!!!

You cannot prove a negative.

13 posted on 04/18/2007 1:16:40 PM PDT by Bahbah (Regev, Goldwasser & Shalit, we are praying for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy
Why would you need immunity for something that is legal?

Because this is a Dem controlled congress who are out for blood

I'd plead the 5th too if I had to go before them

14 posted on 04/18/2007 1:18:04 PM PDT by Mo1 ( http://www.gohunter08.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Txsleuth; Bahbah

You can’t prove a negative, so it’s up to Chuckie to prove his charges, or fugedaboudid.


15 posted on 04/18/2007 1:19:07 PM PDT by Paperdoll ( Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Realism; SmithL
The e-mails of presidential advisors generally aren't subject to FOIA. This is a Congressional subpoena for e-mails that probably wouldn't be discoverable under FOIA.

Nice misleading headline, by the way. The White House didn't tell anyone NOT to release e-mails to Congress - but to send those e-mails for review by the White House before sending anything to Congress. The presidency has a duty to protect executive privilege.
16 posted on 04/18/2007 1:19:20 PM PDT by conservative in nyc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Bahbah

>You cannot prove a negative.<

Hey, Bahbah! Great minds, eh? :o)


17 posted on 04/18/2007 1:21:03 PM PDT by Paperdoll ( Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Txsleuth
I saw a clip of Schmuckie a little while ago where he says it is not up to them to prove wrongdoing...it is up to Justice to prove they didn’t do anything wrong!!!

Two can play that game

I heard that Chuckie has been sleeping with prostitutes in his Capital Office .. I don't have any proof .. but that doesn't matter .. it's up to him to prove it wrong

18 posted on 04/18/2007 1:21:49 PM PDT by Mo1 ( http://www.gohunter08.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Paperdoll; Bahbah

Okay..I am serious here.

If I were AG Gonzo....I would throw away the opening remarks that have already been released.

I would walk into that hearing tomorrow..and say that he can’t prove a negative...and that unless/until the Senate could show that there has been wrongdoing..he will not testify further.


19 posted on 04/18/2007 1:22:43 PM PDT by Txsleuth (Thompson/Hunter 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Paperdoll

The White House should tell the Dems to gather a very large croud. Once assembled, tell them they can then kiss the White Houses behind.


20 posted on 04/18/2007 1:24:10 PM PDT by unkus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson