Sorry for the massively abbreviated thread title. From The Atlantic:
President Obama has granted Attorney General Eric Holder permission to assert executive privilege to withhold documents related to the failed gun-running operation Fast and Furious, The Associated Press reports, just as the House of Representatives was getting ready to vote on holding Holder in contempt of Congress for not turing the documents over. The House Oversight Committee, led by Rep. Darrell Issa, has been investigating the ATF's 2009 operation Fast and Furious which let guns be trafficked into Mexico on purpose so they could be tracked. But the ATF lost track of most of the 1,700 guns that moved into the hands of drug cartels, and a border agent was killed by one of them. As Rolling Stone's Jillian Rayfield explains, the case has been of particular interest to conservatives, as some House Republicans claim the Obama administration did this on purpose to make the case for tougher gun laws. Issa's committee has subpoenaed thousands of documents related to the case, and Holder has not provided all of them.
Obama has been a total disappointment in the "transparency" department. All the more because it was one of his foremost platforms when he was campaigning.
Frankly, I hate it when ppl promise "transparency." a) it's rarely as possible as we want it to be, and b) it doesn't necessarily do us any good
I am more annoyed that he campaigned about it than the fact that he isn't living up to it.
He always seems to be involved in things that make me go WTF. Whether they were his idea to begin with or he's the fall guy for others' bad ideas, I think I would still just move along.
Possibly something Obama would prefer to keep on the DL until after November? As in, something that could harm his chances worse than claiming executive privilege?
Interesting. My brother just mentioned the issue with Fast and Furious last night...and I was surprised I hadn't read anything about it on this board (probably I just missed it). Apparently, was unable to turn over the documents because that would have been illegal. Is that true? If so, why would there be a need for the EP?
Interesting. My brother just mentioned the issue with Fast and Furious last night...and I was surprised I hadn't read anything about it on this board (probably I just missed it). Apparently, was unable to turn over the documents because that would have been illegal. Is that true? If so, why would there be a need for the EP?
Color me confused.
They've turned over some documents. This is what I've been following - basically, the JD submitted a letter stating they didn't know anything about F&F until after the murder of Border Agent Terry. Supoenas were issued. During the period where the JD was supposed to be gathering the documentation, that letter was retracted, but Holder still wouldnt' admit the JD knew anything and couldn't say who authorized it. Issa wants the documenation specifically from the time period after the letter was retracted (I believe). Some conspiracy theorist-types that have been investigating this claim there is WH involvement and the gun running was done to drum-up support for anti-gun legislation (assault weapon bans), but it went terribly wrong with the murder of Brian Terry. I usually don't bat an eye-lash when it comes to conspiracy theories, but now with Obama asserting prvilege - it makes you wonder. Cleary there is something to hide, and something probably much more significant than Holder misleading Congress. Let's face it, this whole thing is shady as shit. Obama getting involved (which he has tried to stay out of it) makes him look bad. So imo, for him to do this, the consequences of that information getting released must be much more damaging than invoking privilege and looking shady. It's definately not just about Holder's career or he wouldn't have touched this with November around the corner.
I've been following this too. Holder should have just resigned a while back. This crap is going to blow up during the election. Watch. The dealings sounded bad in the beginning. Holder's non-answers and now this will make plenty of people say Wha the WHUT!
So, legal types respond to this please (yes, it's from a Fox resource, but I still want it addressed please):
Executive privilege, in its definition, provides protection over communications with the president himself, according to the judge. The letter sent by Eric Holder requesting executive privilege does not detail a discussion with the president, but Judge Napolitano said, “The implication is there.”
“If the attorney general sat down and discussed it with the president, he probably doesn’t want the Congress and the public to know that,” Napolitano said.
Napolitano also said that executive privilege only pertains to “military, diplomatic and sensitive national security matters.”
So, legal types respond to this please (yes, it's from a Fox resource, but I still want it addressed please):
Executive privilege, in its definition, provides protection over communications with the president himself, according to the judge. The letter sent by Eric Holder requesting executive privilege does not detail a discussion with the president, but Judge Napolitano said, “The implication is there.”
“If the attorney general sat down and discussed it with the president, he probably doesn’t want the Congress and the public to know that,” Napolitano said.
Napolitano also said that executive privilege only pertains to “military, diplomatic and sensitive national security matters.”
The last statement does make sense. The whole F&F Operation was to try and track guns that were being purchased by the cartels. Considering the crazy violence going on and combining it with the US War on Drugs, I can make the leap here.
BUT, I still very, very much dislike it because it reeks of Covering Shit The Fuck Up.
Possibly something Obama would prefer to keep on the DL until after November? As in, something that could harm his chances worse than claiming executive privilege?
This has ick written all over it.
I wonder if this would be a non-issue if Holder had resigned when it happened. I hope the Rs push hard on this one, as I have now moved from "what were they thinking?" to "what are they hiding?"
Possibly something Obama would prefer to keep on the DL until after November? As in, something that could harm his chances worse than claiming executive privilege?
This has ick written all over it.
I wonder if this would be a non-issue if Holder had resigned when it happened. I hope the Rs push hard on this one, as I have now moved from "what were they thinking?" to "what are they hiding?"
If I were a R strategist, I sure in the heck would push the "hiding' question. And I totally agree. When this went down, I thought, just fricking resign Holder. Let them clean up the mess and you need to get the F out. Heads are gonna roll, and yours should be the first on the block. But nope. Holder pulled the non-answer and people are pissed. Now election season is in high gear. Combine this with all the fuss over Exec Orders and the something stinks factor, Obama is going to be on the defensive heading into debates on this.
So, legal types respond to this please (yes, it's from a Fox resource, but I still want it addressed please):
Executive privilege, in its definition, provides protection over communications with the president himself, according to the judge. The letter sent by Eric Holder requesting executive privilege does not detail a discussion with the president, but Judge Napolitano said, “The implication is there.”
“If the attorney general sat down and discussed it with the president, he probably doesn’t want the Congress and the public to know that,” Napolitano said.
Napolitano also said that executive privilege only pertains to “military, diplomatic and sensitive national security matters.”
The last statement does make sense. The whole F&F Operation was to try and track guns that were being purchased by the cartels. Considering the crazy violence going on and combining it with the US War on Drugs, I can make the leap here.
BUT, I still very, very much dislike it because it reeks of Covering Shit The Fuck Up.
"There's been a tendency on the part of this administration to try to hide behind executive privilege every time there's something a little shaky that's taking place...and I think the administration would be best served by coming clean on this. There doesn't seem to be any national security issues involved with the US Attorney."
"There's been a tendency on the part of this administration to try to hide behind executive privilege every time there's something a little shaky that's taking place...and I think the administration would be best served by coming clean on this. There doesn't seem to be any national security issues involved with the US Attorney."
The only bases for the invocation of the privilege are the need to protect secret deliberations and communications intended ultimately for the president that pertain to (a) military, or (b) diplomatic, or (c) sensitive national security matters. Just because two or more people in the White House discussed a matter or reviewed documents does not clothe their discussion or their document review with executive privilege. The conversation or document review must be integral to advising the president on his official duties, and it must fit into one or more of (a) or (b) or (c) above.
The invocation of the privilege can only be made by the president himself. Thus, President Obama will need to articulate and explain into which category--(a) or (b) or (c) above--his claim of privilege falls, and he will need to do so personally, either in person or in writing. The mere request by the attorney general for the president to invoke the privilege does not lawfully invoke it. As of this writing, the president has not yet done this.
The initial article indicates "President Obama has granted Attorney General Eric Holder permission to assert executive privilege..." so perhaps he is pointing out that Obama himself has to do so, and "President Obama will need to articulate and explain into which category--(a) or (b) or (c) above--his claim of privilege falls, and he will need to do so personally, either in person or in writing."
So in essence, Obama pretty much had Holder call an audible, when in fact only Obama can invoke this, and he must do so officially.
So, legal types respond to this please (yes, it's from a Fox resource, but I still want it addressed please):
Executive privilege, in its definition, provides protection over communications with the president himself, according to the judge. The letter sent by Eric Holder requesting executive privilege does not detail a discussion with the president, but Judge Napolitano said, “The implication is there.”
“If the attorney general sat down and discussed it with the president, he probably doesn’t want the Congress and the public to know that,” Napolitano said.
Napolitano also said that executive privilege only pertains to “military, diplomatic and sensitive national security matters.”
And by "sensitive national security" we mean "we f'ed this up big time and are sensitive about that."
"There's been a tendency on the part of this administration to try to hide behind executive privilege every time there's something a little shaky that's taking place...and I think the administration would be best served by coming clean on this. There doesn't seem to be any national security issues involved with the US Attorney."
I wish I had the source, but I read this morning that this was the first time he'd invoked executive privilege, and that it's far later in his term than others? For example, Clinton invoked 16 times, the first being 6 months in, and Bush invoked 11 times, the first being 8 months in. (That's from memory, since I can't find the article now, so the actual numbers may be slightly higher or lower.)
FTR, Agent Terry was shot and killed in my neck of the woods, in an area that we used to frequent for recreation. We knew it stunk from day one for several reasons, but NEVER suspected that we were running guns for the Mexican drug cartels. WTMFF??? We sold Agent Terry's killer the very gun that was used to kill him. Several hundred of those F&F guns were found in the home of the top enforcer for the Sinaloa cartel. I can't even begin to imagine how many lives were taken just from those guns alone. This whole thing makes me absolutely SICK and furious, and I agree that Holder should have resigned a long time ago over this.
WTF can Obama be thinking, letting this blow up so close to elections? It's been dragging on for a while now.
I just think that it's funny that republicans read an attack on 2nd amendment "rights" into this mess. They really think that was Obama's grand plan?
Moxie, you're smarter than this.
I actually agree with her, and I don't think it's a matter of intellect. The fact that there is evidence of similar programs dating back to 2006 should put that conspiracy theory to rest, shouldn't it?
I actually agree with her, and I don't think it's a matter of intellect. The fact that there is evidence of similar programs dating back to 2006 should put that conspiracy theory to rest, shouldn't it?
I think it is a deflecting comment, tbh. Bush did it. Um, so? 2nd amendment? Not so much; more like follow the law and dont do shady shit
I actually agree with her, and I don't think it's a matter of intellect. The fact that there is evidence of similar programs dating back to 2006 should put that conspiracy theory to rest, shouldn't it?
If I am understanding things correctly, there may have been programs in 2006, but the screw ups happened under Obama's watch, no?
2V--you are 100% correct, and I am not in any way pulling the "it's Bush's fault" card. I fundamentally object to the program as a whole on moral grounds alone. I was just stating that I don't see how anyone can say that this program was a ploy by the current administration to rally support for gun control legislation, especially since it pre-dates the Obama administration by at least 2 years. Or are you suggesting that the "screw-up" (murder of a US agent by the Mexican cartel using guns that we provided them) itself was such a ploy? Perhaps I misunderstood the conspiracy theory...