Did the President implicate himself by evoking executive privilege for Holder?

[GeoFisher]

I'm thinking he did. By evoking executive privilege, he is stating he knows something at the EXECUTIVE level that is privileged information.

http://www.examiner.com/article/ag-h...from-his-guilt

By doing so, he is stating HE KNOWS..........even though he has already told congress that he doesn't.

HM.

Later,

Geo

[BubbaBass1]

This is the guy that was supposed to be a genius with a high IQ.

He claims to know nothing, but evokes executive privilege.

Teleprompter must have been broken.

BB1

[RoadToad]

You and this Koellhoffer guy need to check your facts, Geo. Specifically, look at what the documents are that he is invoking executive privilege on. They relate to how to respond to Congress about it, and are from after the operation.

From http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/21/opinio...tml?hpt=hp_bn3

The form of executive privilege at stake in the current dispute is "deliberative privilege."

Deliberative privilege aims to protect documents generated anywhere in the executive branch that embody only the executive's internal deliberations, not final policy decisions.

Deliberative privilege is not a legal absolute. The executive branch concedes that when another branch of government demands privileged documents within the executive's control, they sometimes have to be turned over.

...it will be hard for House Republicans to explain exactly what the problem is. Fast and Furious appears to have been a disaster, but the Justice Department has shared documents freely on Fast and Furious.

The Justice Department sent a letter to Congress in February 2011 that mistakenly denied reports about what the Bureau of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives actually did in Fast and Furious. But the department has been forthcoming in sharing information about the events leading up to that letter, which Holder subsequently withdrew.

The fight, then, is not about a botched ATF operation or about a botched letter to Congress. It is about how the attorney general reached his eventual conclusion that Fast and Furious was "fundamentally flawed" and decided how to respond to congressional and other requests for information about a program he now concedes should not have happened.

They have to be turned over when the demanding branch can articulate a compelling need for the information to fulfill one of its own constitutional functions -- a need that outweighs the executive branch's interest in confidentiality.

A key problem now for the House Oversight Committee is thus far it has yet to state in a very concrete way why it needs the particular documents it is demanding.

In contrast, the executive branch has articulated a strong and highly specific reason for withholding the documents at issue: Forced disclosure to Congress of internal deliberations concerning how best to interact with Congress would undermine the executive's capacity to function as a co-equal branch. It would undermine the prospects for future candid deliberations about interactions with the other institutions of government.

The Justice Department has freely shared all documents leading up to Fast & Furious. Now Congress wants to eavesdrop on the process by which they formulate their answers. This is a fishing expedition, nothing more.

[SLP]

I just hope that the Republicans don't focus so much on this that it distracts from focusing on the economy as the key issue for the upcoming election.

[Mean Morone]

It's never about the crime but about the cover up. Even though people died in this little experiment, it will be the cover up that will be their undoing. Nixon tried to protect his personal tape recordings of conversation held in the Oval Office but was forced by congress to give them up. He resigned a few days later. I don't think they ever proved that Nixon had anything to do with the burglary, but they did find that he was in on the cover up. All I know is Holder is stinking up the place and BO has his back and politicians will fight to keep the American people from knowing what really went on while blaming the other side. Lets just have the truth so we can deal with it.

[GeoFisher]

Holder already admitted that he LIED under oath to congress. Therefore he is in CONTEMPT.

I don't understand your issue here. Obama is on record saying he knew nothing about fast and furious. Yet he invokes executive privilege for Holder. If he's lying, then I suspect there may also be a 5th plead coming up in the very near future.........Remember, OBAMA is on camera saying he knows nothing. That is Key.

And using the second method ......deliberative process is ********. Although Bush did it quite a bit too.

This is going to be a mess........and Unlike others that think we should not be looking at this, I think we should COMPLETELY be looking at this.

This directly ties into a drug war on our southern border that is about to explode. Murders are happening in our country due to this drug mess.

And lets not forget, and American border agent is DEAD......from a gun DIRECTLY tied to this garbage.

And lets also not forget that Holder tried to implicate Bush's AG, and admitted that he LIED about that.



Later,

Geo

[RoadToad]

I"m not going to defend lying to Congress, but that is NOT what the contempt charge is about. The contempt charge is about refusing to turn over documents that relate to how the Justice Department decided how they were going to respond to Congress. Now, if they think those documents contain evidence of corruption, then they need to come out and say so, and that would be the "compelling reason" needed to override executive privilege. Or if they need the documents in order to fulfill their Constitutional duties, executive privilege goes out the window, but they won't come out and say that, either, and why is that? Because they are on a FISHING EXPEDITION.

For the record, I think Holder should have resigned long ago over Fast & Furious, and I am not defending him, and if Obama gave approval of it from the beginning, then shame on him, too. But even the Republicans requesting the documents don't say that that's what the documents are about.