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

Skip to comments.

Bush to Invoke Executive Privilege
AP ^ | Sept 5, 2001 | John Solomon

Posted on 09/05/2001 1:23:51 PM PDT by jern

By JOHN SOLOMON, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush is prepared to invoke executive privilege if Congress demands to see documents about prosecutors' decisions in three Clinton-era cases, administration officials said Wednesday.

The claim, if made, would be Bush's first known use of executive privilege, a doctrine recognized by the courts to ensure presidents can get candid advice in private without fear of it becoming public.

White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales recommended that Bush make the privilege claim if a Republican-led House committee subpoenas the memos or seeks to question Attorney General John Ashcroft about them, the officials told The Associated Press.

The House Government Reform Committee prepared subpoenas demanding the disputed documents and planned to serve Ashcroft on Thursday, setting up a possible legal showdown.

The officials said the administration has researched at least four other instances in which executive privilege was cited involving similar documents.

Executive privilege is best known for the unsuccessful attempts by former Presidents Nixon and Clinton to keep evidence secret in impeachment investigations.

Rep. Dan Burton (news - bio - voting record), R-Ind., the chairman of the House committee, said the Bush administration's stance threatened Congress' ability to oversee the executive branch.

``While I have a great deal of respect for the attorney general, he has announced a new policy that broadens executive privilege,'' Burton said. ``If this unprecedented policy is permitted to stand, Congress will not be able to exercise meaningful oversight of the executive branch.''

Burton's committee has for months been seeking Justice Department (news - web sites) memos about prosecutors' decisions in cases involving Democratic fund raising, a former Clinton White House official and a former federal drug enforcement agent.

A senior administration official said while the decisions were made during Clinton's presidency, Bush had accepted Gonzales' recommendation and was prepared to invoke the privilege and create a clear policy that prosecutors' discussions should be off-limits from congressional scrutiny.

White House lawyers and the president concluded ``the fair administration of justice requires full and complete deliberations and that most often can best be accomplished when prosecutors think through their options in private,'' the official said, speaking only on condition of anonymity.

The claim would be the latest in a string of efforts by the new administration to restrain the flow of information to Congress about private deliberations.

Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites) has rebuffed requests by the General Accounting Office (news - web sites) and a Democratic congressman to divulge information about people he met with and how he helped develop Bush's energy policy.

And a Senate committee chaired by Sen. Joseph Lieberman (news - bio - voting record) was initially turned down when it demanded several documents detailing the administration's decision to review regulations enacted by Clinton. Eventually, the administration allowed the committee to review the memos, but an aide to Lieberman said officials sent a clear message they would assert their right to withhold documents.

Ashcroft indicated last week the administration intended to reverse the practice of sharing prosecutors' deliberative documents with congressional committees.

Several such memos were shared with Congress during both Republican and Democratic administrations. Most recently in the 1990s such documents were turned over to the Whitewater, fund-raising, pardons and impeachment investigations.

But the concept of extending executive privilege to Justice Department decisions isn't new. During the Reagan years, executive privilege was cited as the reason the department did not tell Congress about some memos in a high-profile environmental case.

And then-Attorney General Janet Reno (news - web sites) advised Clinton in 1999 that he could invoke the privilege to keep from disclosing documents detailing department views on 16 pardon cases.

Legal experts are split on how such a claim might fare in a court challenge.

``Prosecution is a core executive function and from that starting point, a claim of executive privilege is quite a good one,'' said John Barrett, a former Iran-Contra prosecutor who now teaches law at St. John's University.

But Noah Feldman, a constitutional law professor at New York University, said courts would have to balance the president's right to confidential advice against Congress' right to oversight. Feldman said the fact that several prosecutorial decision-making memos have been disclosed to Congress in the past without apparent harm to the presidency could influence the debate.

Clinton's former chief of staff, John Podesta, said most new administrations test the limits of congressional oversight then conclude it is better to reach a negotiated settlement.

``Ultimately the public loses faith in fair administration of justice from over-claims of executive privilege, especially in matters that don't have to do with direct advice to the president,'' Podesta said. ``It appears to me that every administration has to learn that the hard way.''


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 281-294 next last
To: DoughtyOne
I'm trying to read my way through this poorly copied PDF letter of Burton to Ashcroft here which covers this matter as the specific often shed light on the true course. Anyone with insight on the specifics, please chime in as it wouldd be helpful.
121 posted on 09/05/2001 3:55:40 PM PDT by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: jern
so the 'mystery' continues (shoot, burn and bulldoze). just 'trust' your government, they caaaare about you.
122 posted on 09/05/2001 3:56:03 PM PDT by Anonymous2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
as in a vote for bush is/was a vote for gore?
123 posted on 09/05/2001 4:02:21 PM PDT by IRtorqued
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: jern
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

To h with this compassionate conservatism clap. SOS

124 posted on 09/05/2001 4:03:51 PM PDT by jwh_Denver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChaseR
I should have included sarcasm but thanks for the links.
125 posted on 09/05/2001 4:11:30 PM PDT by Patrick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: The Old Hoosier
"Problem is, you can't always get what you want in politics, especially not right away. Some people never learned that lesson when they were children."

======================

Well said.

126 posted on 09/05/2001 4:12:13 PM PDT by reformedliberal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
I don't "revel" in anything; these "public servants" may be protecting the civil rights of someone who may be falsely accused

Once again, You have proven the obvious…you don’t know shit from shinola. If you wish to perpetuate your status as an apologist for the gov’t, you should come up with a better rationalization than that.

127 posted on 09/05/2001 4:13:53 PM PDT by Scuttlebutt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

Burton writes to Ashcroft:
The relevant cases make it clear that absent a valid claim for executive privelege, Congress has a right to obtain these materials,...

So, in his own letter disputing the withold of the declinations in question he gave Ashcroft the tool for him to use if he wanted it witheld.

128 posted on 09/05/2001 4:14:51 PM PDT by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: AmishDude
This is going to act like the FBI files did under Clinton. "Don't mess with us, or we will release these documents, when the timing suits us."

============================================================

THAT would be W's MO!!!

How can the Dems complain when the Administration says No to Republicans in order to not rehash the Clinton sh!t all over again?

I was somewhat nervous about W, but he plays poker like a pro.

129 posted on 09/05/2001 4:17:57 PM PDT by reformedliberal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

Comment #130 Removed by Moderator

To: willyone
I don't think that the clintons have all the files, but, I bet you alan greenspan knows who does.
131 posted on 09/05/2001 4:24:30 PM PDT by IRtorqued
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

Items requested:

Conrad Memorandum (Clinton Campaign Task Force Chief Robert Conrad declination originally subpeonaed last year on August 24, 2000)
Two Declination findings:(1)investigation of former DEA Special Agent in Charge Ernest Howard, and (2) investigation(s) of Clinton White House aide Mark Midddleton.

132 posted on 09/05/2001 4:24:49 PM PDT by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: Sandy
Bttt!
133 posted on 09/05/2001 4:29:41 PM PDT by monkeywrench
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
...waved Executive Privilege at least once, explaining that he was doing it on a one time only basis due to the nature of the requests. Why couldn't Bush?

Burton's main gripe in his letter leading up to his subpeona for Ashcroft on the 13th was the failure to reach just such an accomodation, which he expected to recieve. Why did Ashcroft trump Burton and get the ExPriv declaration for the items I note in #128 and 132? We shall see.

134 posted on 09/05/2001 4:30:00 PM PDT by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: KC Burke
I would suspect there's some turf boundaries being fought over here. Either Ashcroft wants to put Burton on notice or he's acting at Bush's direction. Either way Bush is the driving force in the claim for EP. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
135 posted on 09/05/2001 4:34:13 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
Any specifics you can provide about the items listed in #132 would be appreciated.
136 posted on 09/05/2001 4:35:13 PM PDT by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Republican Wildcat
#7: "I can see your point. They are obviously identical."

Not quite.

I doubt Gore would have met with President "open the damn border now" Fox five (5) times already.

Jorge is a freaking joke...

137 posted on 09/05/2001 4:37:31 PM PDT by Jethro Tull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Landru
[badabadabada]

How do you pronounce that?

138 posted on 09/05/2001 4:40:46 PM PDT by Twodees
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: willyone
ROLF!
139 posted on 09/05/2001 4:46:42 PM PDT by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: jern
The Clintons must have a picture of GW Bush molesting a sheep. That's the only explanation for Bush slow-rolling and stonewalling this.
140 posted on 09/05/2001 4:47:19 PM PDT by Hillary 666
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 281-294 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