It’s hard to say which is more unbelievable — that ex-President George W. Bush is actually trying to perpetuate executive privilege for his cronies after leaving office or that congressional Democrats are going to court to fight Bush’s nonsense.
Four days before his term was up, Bush ordered Karl Rove to not testify before or produce documents for Congress.
Keep in mind, executive privilege has no basis in the Constitution or in statutory law, it’s merely an executive branch custom that for practical reasons has been honored by the legislative branch.
Executive privilege is supposed ensure presidential advisers and staff can speak candidly and privately to the president, free of fear that what they say could later cause them or the president political, legal or possibly diplomatic difficulties if revealed to Congress and/or publicly.
The danger is that such a shield can easily be used to cover up wrongdoing, while at the same time negating Congress’ duty to serve as a watchdog and check on the executive-branch.
Bush’s outlandish executive-privilege demands in office were outrageous enough. If allowed to stand, everything you learned in school about checks and balances goes right out the window.
However, Bush’s brazen attempt to extend his power to invoke executive privilege from beyond the grave of his administration is pure lunacy. It belongs in a “Saturday Night Live” skit, not a courtroom.
What Rep. John Conyers, chairman of the House Committee on the Judiciary, should do is proceed with legal steps to have Rove arrested, if Rove fails to honor the committee’s subpoena on Feb. 2. Conyers should not dignify Bush’s outrageous assertion by going to court to wrangle about it.
In fact, there is no law to wrangle about.
This is getting good! I am hoping Rove respects the law (for once) yet also hoping he refuses forcing Conyers to sack up and toss him in jail. That will send a message loud and clear.
The Democrats loathe Bush, Rove, and Cheney, but I don’t think the public has an appetite for any more of it. With Obama, I think they want to make a clean break from the past 8 years. Going after Rove may please liberals, but turn off the middle and hasten the GOP’s return to power.
DB, a part of me feels the same way. However he gets there, Rove must obey the subpoena and show respect for Congress.
AP, much more is involved than what the public has an appetite for. That said, I’m not as sure as you are about people lacking desire to see Bush and his pack of jackals finally held accountable for what they’ve done.
I urge you and everyone to take a few minutes to read an excellent op ed by Elizabeth Holtzman, Holding Bush Accountable. She makes the case superbly.
“Executive Privilege” even after he isn’t the Executive any more? Only in BushWorld.
I think the Far Right is counting on Democrats being reluctant to prosecute Bush’s abuses, for fear of “appearances” and giving the Right more material for their smear attacks. I don’t want a media circus, but the investigation process has to run its course.
Saying the public has “no appetite” to investigate and prosecute Bush admin crimes is just a Republican talking point to try to defuse much-needed proceedings, just like Republicans are fond of saying the public no longer has an appetite for partisanship and now demand bi-partisanship that, recent votes reveal, merely means doing it the Republican way. They don’t seem to realize yet how irrelevant they are at the moment.
Riffing off of what Jeff said, part of the problem is that in a nation of low-information voters, so much is out-of-sight, out-of-mind. If such shenanigans ARE put front-and-center along with other things – which can be done in a government of thousands, it’s called multitasking – and the crimes both foreign and domestic, are seen for the dangers that they were and are, people will get behind them.
I doubt too many, if any, of the big shots will see jail time, but a very public fumigation at the very least is necessary.
Jeff, I think plenty of moderates and independents perceive a dominant public “let’s move on” attitude. Whether they are right remains to be seen. I agree, though, that Republicans want to play up and benefit from that notion.
Events are proving the truth of your statement about GOP-style bipartanship.
RG, public fumigation is badly needed. So is the potential deterrent effect of having future leaders see Bush-era wrongdoers being grilled, going through lengthy legal hassles and maybe even sweating out the possibility of serious consequences.
I think the ‘lets move on attitude’ was manufactured because there was by early design, no intent to prosecute the ‘Bush House’. Nancy took it ‘off the table’….because the “people’s business was too big and too important to be distracted”…..what a bunch of BS….they will go Scott Free.